Nathan Charles, head of customer experience at managed IT and cyber security partner OryxAlign, explores why traditional defences are losing ground as attackers adopt AI-enabled methods, and how engineering and manufacturing organisations can adapt their security strategies to stay resilient.

Legacy tools under strain

Traditional tools built on signature updates or static rules were never designed to match the pace or instability of modern attacks. AI alters code constantly and reshapes its own signals in ways that unsettle tools which depend on stable, recognisable patterns.

Automated scripts test weak points at high frequency and generate rapid chains of intrusion attempts that leave teams sifting through alerts. This creates a landscape where familiar tools still have value yet struggle to provide the confidence that many organisations need when adversaries no longer work at human speed. In engineering and manufacturing environments, this pressure is often intensified by a mix of legacy systems, specialist equipment and networks that were never designed for constant exposure.

Recent analysis from security researchers reports “78 per cent of CISOs now admit AI-powered cyber-threats are having a significant impact on their organisation”, which reinforces the growing limitations of traditional controls.

Rising impact in Britain

Across the UK the impact is already visible. The Cyber Security Breaches Survey 2025 shows that organisations reporting a breach face a mean cost of £3,550 for their most disruptive incident, while a government-commissioned study places the wider economic impact of cyber attacks at around £14.7 billion each year. These figures show that routine incidents still carry weight for organisations across the UK. They also reveal a shift in how attacks unfold.

Automated probing shortens the gap between an initial scan and a serious attempt to breach a system, which forces incidents to gather pace and draws heavily on operational teams. As this tempo increases, older tools struggle to keep their footing and leave practitioners working with less room to anticipate the next stage of an intrusion. For manufacturing and engineering teams, this compression of response time can sit alongside production demands and safety considerations, adding further strain during active incidents.

AI reshapes monitoring

A further challenge appears once AI begins to influence how organisations monitor their environments. Automated tools now scan networks and endpoints for unusual activity, although their outputs often need human context before teams can trust what they see. These systems can present signals that sit close to normal operational patterns, which makes it harder for practitioners to judge whether a change in behaviour deserves closer attention. 

Attackers also use AI to produce misleading indicators that mimic trusted activity or disguise a malicious sequence inside ordinary network traffic, which makes early recognition far harder for automated systems. Without oversight, teams risk either ignoring subtle signals or chasing false leads that drain resources during busy periods.

Building stronger visibility

Security therefore rests on a blend of clear visibility and confident human judgement, supported by processes that help teams act without hesitation. UK engineering and manufacturing organisations benefit from monitoring that builds a steady picture of system behaviour under routine conditions.

Lifecycle planning also supports this picture by keeping endpoints current and reducing the presence of devices that sit outside managed oversight. These adjustments give teams a steadier view of network activity, even as automated tooling produces a heavy flow of alerts. With a clearer picture in front of them, practitioners can step into developing incidents earlier and guide responses with more confidence.

Sharper social threats

Another pressure on security teams comes from the steady rise in social-engineering attempts. Recent global research notes that in 2024 “there was a sharp increase in phishing and social engineering attacks” and that “Generative AI is augmenting cybercriminal capabilities”. These messages often pass through standard filtering and reach staff who may not expect them.

Automated tools can support the screening process, although their outputs need human review to avoid misjudging messages that share traits with legitimate correspondence. As these attempts grow more polished, organisations benefit from awareness training and monitoring practices that keep pace with the evolving character of these attacks.

AI-driven intrusion methods continue to advance, yet organisations can adjust their thinking to meet this change. Traditional tools still hold value, although their protective strength relies on how they sit alongside real-time monitoring and the routine maintenance that keeps systems predictable enough for practitioners to read them with confidence. For engineering-led organisations, maintaining this balance is increasingly part of operational resilience rather than a standalone IT concern.

Further information on approaches that support stronger cyber resilience is available at:

www.oryxalign.com/cyber

Founded in 2011, adi Lean Manufacturing & Design specialises in designing and building bespoke engineering solutions. This ranges from robot cells and full assembly lines to manual workstations and trackside equipment.

The first partnership with Schneider Electric builds on a 10-year relationship and formally recognises the division as a Registered Alliance Partner system integrator within Schneider Electric’s Global Alliance Partner Programme.

Sam Curson, BDM at adi Lean Manufacturing & Design, said: “Achieving partner accreditation reflects our team’s focus on delivering tailored automation systems that cut production costs and unlock new capabilities, as well as improve product quality for our customers.

“Working even more closely with Schneider Electric enhances our technical competency with Schneider products and allows us to meet our client’s needs with more advanced technical solutions.

Samira El Kassimi, robotics and automation business development manager at Schneider Electric, welcomed the strengthened collaboration. She said: “Through the Alliance System Integrator Partner Programme, we work with integrators who share our ambition to deliver more efficient and more sustainable automation. adi Lean Manufacturing & Design brings strong expertise in lean production and turnkey assembly lines.

“Adding them to our UK Alliance network means more manufacturers can access that capability, backed by Schneider Electric’s global technologies and support.”

adiltd.co.uk

Recent major venture capital (VC) reports from KPMG and PitchBook confirm that AI remains in the lead, accounting for more than half of all investments this year. Data from CB Insights shows that investors’ attention inside the AI market is shifting rapidly toward industrial humanoid robotics. As a result, investors argue the flood of AI capital is pushing robotics toward a speculative zone, with too many startups promising breakthroughs without commercial evidence.

Last quarter, industrial humanoid robotics captured 17 deals – the most of any category. AI was still the primary destination for investors, split into several categories, such as coding AI agents and copilots (14 deals), end-to-end software development AI agents (12), and others.

Rapid growth of the sector has already sparked fears of a bubble from the Chinese leading economic planning industry, which said that the humanoid robotics industry needs to “balance the speed against the risks of bubbles,” Bloomberg reported.

Investors' appetite for humanoid robots is largely driven by AI, because AI gives humanoids a commercial potential that was previously not possible.

According to Daiva Rakauskaitė, the partner and manager of Aneli Capital, a company that manages a €35 million fund for early-stage Central and Eastern European startups, there are strong similarities between today's AI-driven investment boom and the dotcom bubble in the early 2000s, leaving many startups exposed. She expects an AI bubble burst in 2-3 years.

“Many AI startups that can’t yet generate revenue will fail, but we’re reaching a consensus on that in the market. While the same risks persist in humanoid robotics, many investors tend to overlook this,” says Rakauskaitė. “However, it is important to distinguish robotics from humanoid robotics; industrial and logistics robots already generate revenue and can deliver measurable results, while humanoids can’t yet prove their commercial value.”

Currently, companies around the world demonstrate prototypes of robots performing actions from running to boxing, sparking interest from users and investors. However, in the real world, they have few practical commercial applications.

Similar challenges also persist for industrial humanoid robotics. These companies face challenges with inference (ability to make decisions in real time), dexterity (how well the robot can physically handle things), reliability, and cost, which limit the initial use cases to factories and warehouses with predictable sets of tasks, CB Insights report claims.

According to Rakauskaitė, especially now, when investments are driven by hype, VCs should not forget the fundamentals and prioritize revenue-first philosophy, where real money matters more than growth at all costs. 

“Investments in robotics and AI are crucial for the future development of humanity. But investors should remain disciplined and back companies that have realistic goals based on economics, not hype. From day one, startups should aim for early revenue streams through licensing, partnerships and have a clear model of monetization in the near future. The same revenue-first philosophy can be applied to any field,” Rakauskaitė says.

Despite early signs of a bubble in humanoid robotics, she remains confident in the broader robotics sector, where cheaper hardware and rapid advances in AI are accelerating real-world deployment.

According to Rakauskaitė, robotics is an especially promising field for the CEE startups. The region is located close to Germany, the largest industrial robotics market in Europe, which provides a major strategic advancement to scaling.

“The region also has lots of hidden talent. That’s why we dedicated our new fund for this region, aiming to support the talented founders with hands-on guidance and quick decision-making. Many hype-driven investors pull back once the hype fades. Yet to create real innovators, VCs must support them through their full journey. That’s exactly what we are going to do,” Rakauskaitė concludes.

anelicapital.com

Matta’s AI is reported to give factories the ability to see, understand, and improve themselves in real time, understanding any production line within days. It spots defects, traces root causes, and helps teams fix problems before they become costly.

The technology is highly adaptable, capable of working across everything from electronics and automotive to defence and apparel, whether on manual inspection stations, conveyor lines, or robot arms to redefine how products are conceived and created. This flexibility is driving strong demand, with 300+ factories in the pipeline and a new installation every two weeks.

Doug Brion, co-founder and CEO of Matta, said: “Everyone talks about the glamorous side of manufacturing: generative design, material discovery, digital twins, but few spend time on the factory floor. The hard part isn’t dreaming things up inside a computer; it’s making them work at scale. Manufacturing still runs on human know-how, the kind that lets someone on the line kick a machine just right, or run a finger over a scratch, and say, ‘that’s thirty-four microns wide.’ We’re using AI to capture and scale that tacit knowledge, so engineers can design things that actually work in the real world."

Manufacturing at an inflection point

Manufacturing underpins a third of global economic output yet remains plagued by inefficiencies that waste up to 20 percent of production value and raise emissions. After decades of deindustrialisation, factories are exposed to external geopolitical shocks and must do more with less. Matta provides a practical route to productivity, quality and resilience on today’s shop floor.

At the same time, energy costs are rising, supply chains are fragile, and workforces are ageing. Factories must reshore, decarbonise, and do more with fewer skilled hands. In the UK, vacancies already outnumber qualified engineers, and costs keep climbing. Across Europe and the US, the story is the same.

Matta develops AI that learns the physical rules of production and applies them on the line. Its first product uses unsupervised and self-supervised computer vision to automate quality control and anomaly detection, perform measurements, diagnose root causes, and recommend corrective actions in real time. A central platform lets teams monitor every camera, analyse results and trace parts across the factory for live visibility of issues and bottlenecks.

Matta delivers this as a full plug-and-play system combining hardware, factory integration, AI research, and software. Most deployments are live within hours, with cameras inspecting automatically after a short learning period.

In one polymer manufacturing deployment, Matta achieved over 99% defect-detection accuracy with just ten minutes of data. Recent projects range from inspecting high-speed bottling for defects with a global drinks brand to working with Bowers & Wilkins, where Matta’s AI rapidly measures speaker components to catch issues before assembly.

Beyond detection, Matta partners with OEMs to enable machines to tune themselves. One of these OEMs, Caracol, is integrating Matta’s vision AI for closed-loop control, linking real-time inspection to automatic parameter adjustments on industrial printers and large-format robot additive manufacturing cells.

World-class academic founders

Matta was founded on pioneering research from the University of Cambridge’s Institute for Manufacturing, where co-founders Douglas Brion, who completed a PhD in deep learning-enabled control, and Sebastian Pattinson, Associate Professor of Engineering, first met. Today, Matta is a fast-growing team with experience from MIT, Imperial, BBC R&D, Google X, and Microsoft.

The latest funding will accelerate customer adoption and AI development, expand self-serve deployment, and support Matta’s expansion into key manufacturing regions across Europe and the US, advancing the company’s vision for fully autonomous, end-to-end production.

www.matta.ai

SMEs are the backbone of the UK economy, comprising over 90% of the manufacturing sector. Despite their fundamental role in national economic strength, their experiences and needs are often underrepresented when policy is shaped. The Policy Centre aims to move the conversation about SMEs beyond anecdote, creating a credible, data-driven force to inform government thinking. It wil act as an independent convener for industry, policy organisations, sector collaborators, and government, whose purpose is to ensure that policy solutions address the skills gap and enable productivity and sustainable growth in engineering and manufacturing. 

The Policy Centre will amplify the voice of SMEs by continually gathering evidence and insight from sources such as the SME Advisory Council and the SME Snapshot survey, ensuring their priorities help shape policy. As an independent charity, the Centre will also act as a constructive ally to the Government, offering robust, data-driven intelligence on the sector’s skills challenges and opportunities. In addition, it will strengthen collaboration across the ecosystem by working proactively with membership organisations, trade bodies, sector networks, and large employers, recognising that a unified message carries far greater influence.

Early activity has already focused on key national priorities including: ensuring the Advanced Manufacturing Plan and Industrial Strategy fully reflect the contribution of SMEs; encouraging government to begin exploratory work on the benefits of a skills tax credit to boost employer investment in training; and emphasising the importance of balancing government's commitment to introducing greater flexibility to the Growth and Skills Levy without compromising SME access to levy funds for apprenticeships 

To support this ongoing evidence gathering, the Policy Centre runs the SME Snapshot, a bi-annual survey capturing how SMEs are responding to economic and policy developments.

Ann Watson, CEO of Enginuity, said: “SMEs are the lifeblood of the UK economy yet often fail to be heard by those making policy in key areas at the heart of government – and those honing policy need to listen. Effective government policy depends on meaningful engagement with the people and organisations whose insights and experience are essential to its success. 

“SMEs are huge in number, but that can mean that they can be difficult to identify and engage, and their individual voices lack unification, amplification and clarity. This is where Enginuity’s Policy Centre can really come into its own, creating the epicentre between SMEs, Government and others, ensuring that positive and productive engagement and dialogue take place.” 

Policymakers, partners, and businesses interested in supporting or collaborating with SMEs and the supply chain are encouraged to contact The Policy Centre using the forms on the webpage.

enginuity.org/policy-centre

MACHINE BUILDERS supplying customers in the European Union will already be aware of the Machinery Directive. Its replacement, the Machine Regulation, comes into force in January 2027 and introduces requirements relating to cybersecurity. However, there is another new piece of European legislation that already has implications for machine builders and system integrators. This is Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 on harmonised rules on fair access to and use of data – which can be shortened to the Data Act. Although the Data Act covers a wide range of products, this present article is concerned solely with how the legislation impacts machine builders and system integrators; for simplicity, we will just refer to machine builders.

What is covered?

Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 has been applied since 12 September 2025, though some aspects do not apply until September 2026 or September 2027. It covers ‘connected products’ and, for the avoidance of doubt, this includes products with on-device access, products with wireless connectivity, and products that require a physical connection to be made when needed. ‘Data’ includes data generated by use of the product or related service, metadata necessary to interpret and use the data, and data created when users interact with the product. Even if data is only stored and not processed, then it still falls within the scope if it can be accessed.
Paragraph 14 of the preamble lists various types of connected product, with industrial machinery being one such type. This paragraph also states that prototypes do not fall within the scope of the Data Act, but machine builders should not assume that a one-off special-purpose machine is exempt, even though it could be argued that it is a prototype. Article 31 excludes custom-built data processing, as well as data processing services provided as a non-production version for test/evaluation over a limited time period.

If any data can be accessed by the machine builder, then it is covered by the Data Act. It must therefore be sharable with the end user and, by implication, third parties. On the other hand, information that has been derived from data is excluded from the scope of the Data Act and does not need to be sharable. If data, such as from sensors, is processed but not stored, then it does not need to be sharable. Personal data is covered by other EU legislation, though the Data Act covers personal data that has been anonymised.

Article 7 states that the Data Act does not apply to products manufactured or designed by microenterprises and small enterprises provided they do not have a partner enterprise or linked enterprise and the enterprise is not subcontracted to design or manufacture the product. The same applies to an enterprise that has qualified as a medium-sized enterprise for less than one year, and to connected products for one year after the date on which they were placed on the market by a medium-sized enterprise.

Why is the Data Act needed?

The Data Act recognises the value of data for businesses, consumers and society, largely as a result of the ‘Internet of Things’ (IoT). Furthermore, the European Commission believes that high-quality and interoperable data increases competitiveness and innovation and, therefore, ensures sustainable economic growth. Consequently, the Data Act aims to make it easier for users to share data with third parties or use it themselves, rather than having the data restricted to being stored or processed by, for example, a machine builder. The situation is the same, whether the user has purchased, leased or rented the product.
Standardisation

In common with many EU Regulations, the Data Act contains essential requirements that must be met. In this case, the requirements relate to the form of the data and its usability. Data must always be accessible to a user easily, securely, free of charge, and in a comprehensive, structured, commonly used and machine-readable format.

Clauses in the Data Act provide for harmonised standards that, if complied with in full, would provide a presumption of conformity with the essential requirements. In the absence of such standards, ‘common specifications’ can provide a presumption of conformity. At the time of writing, no harmonised standards or common specifications have been published but these may follow in due course.

Contractual arrangements

When a machine is placed on the market in the EU, whether for sale, lease or rent, information about sharable data must be provided before a contract is concluded. This includes the data functions available, how they can be accessed, the type and volume and format of the data, whether data is generated continuously and/or in real time, and the nature, location and retention period of data.

A contract must cover the basis for a manufacturer’s use of product data, and the terms could exclude or limit the user from accessing all or some of the data. Some data might be classified as trade secrets, in which case the data holder can require data users to treat it as trade secrets.

Within the Data Act, there are clauses to prevent product suppliers from imposing unfair contractual terms on customers. The EC has published non-binding model contractual terms in a document ‘Final Report of the Expert Group on B2B data sharing and cloud computing contracts.’ Nevertheless, Article 1, Clause 6 of the Data Act states that it does not apply when voluntary agreements are in place for exchanging data.

Compensation

If a data holder (such as a machine builder) is requested by the user to make data available to a third party, then the data holder can require the third party, not the user, to pay reasonable compensation for the cost of providing the data, but not for the data itself.

The EC has foreseen that levels of compensation might be contentious, so the Data Act sets out arrangements for resolving disputes and lays the foundations for dispute settlement bodies that can decide whether compensation is reasonable.

Initially, providers of data processing services can charge users for switching between different providers. However, these switching charges will be abolished after three years.

Sharing data with authorities

So far, we have focused on situations where, typically, a user wishes to share data with a third party of their choosing. In addition, the Data Act covers the requirement for data holders to make data available to public sector bodies, the Commission, the European Central Bank and Union bodies when there is an exceptional need, such as in the event of a public emergency. Data holders are entitled to compensation for making the data available. Micro and small businesses are exempt from the requirement to share data with authorities.

Legal representation

For machine builders based outside the EU, a key point to note is Article 37, Clause 11: ‘Any entity falling within the scope of this Regulation that makes connected products available or offers services in the Union, and which is not established in the Union, shall designate a legal representative in one of the Member States.’ Clause 12 explains what the legal representative is mandated to do, which is essentially to act on behalf of an entity to cooperate with the relevant authorities and, upon request, demonstrate how connected products and related services are in compliance with the Data Act.

Hold Tech Files is based in the Republic of Ireland and is therefore established in the EU. Hold Tech Files performs numerous roles for non-EU machine builders in accordance with various EU legislation, including acting as a legal representative in line with the requirements of the Data Act.

Summary

From the perspective of a non-EU machine builder exporting to the EU, complying with the Data Act requires the following unless there are relevant exemptions:

- Certain information about the data and its usability must be made available before a sale, lease or rental contract is concluded

- There must be an agreement with the data user regarding which data is sharable, the characteristics of that data and how it would be shared, and this agreement must be fair to both parties

- If harmonised standards or common specifications have been published, then the data should comply with these unless it can be shown to meet the essential requirements (stated in Article 33) another way

- Data and metadata must be suitable for sharing with the data user or, upon request from the user, a third party

- Upon request from the user, the data holder must be ready to share the data with the user or a third party

- A method should be established for calculating the reasonable level of compensation that can be claimed for transferring data to a third party or the authorities

-  Before placing the product on the market, a machine builder outside the EU must appoint a legal representative who is established in the EU.

Derek Coulson is director of Hold Tech Files

www.holdtechfiles.eu

WHEN A robot stops, everything around it tends to stop too. The battery pack isn’t usually the first thing people think about, yet it’s often the part that determines whether the machine performs as it should. When it’s designed around the real duty cycle and tested properly, it works quietly in the background, keeping operations running as planned. When it isn’t, problems appear quickly - shorter run times, heat build-up or premature wear that can halt operations altogether. Consistent performance and reliable operation are the result of design decisions made early, based on how the robot will actually operate day to day.

The first step is to define how the robot will really work in service: how long it runs for, how often it charges and the environment it operates in. A unit working in a clean warehouse faces very different demands to one that spends its days on a loading dock or outdoors. Those early decisions shape everything that follows – from electrical design to how the pack is assembled and validated. Leaving these details open too long is one of the most common causes of redesigns, delivery slips and added cost.

Avoid the freeze

Without clear checkpoints, assumptions multiply and time disappears. To avoid drift and late redesigns, development needs to follow defined stages. The first, Scope Freeze, is where the technical requirements, compliance planning and project timelines are agreed so that everyone is working to the same expectations. The second is working towards Design Freeze, when the detailed design has been reviewed and validated – drawings, test plans and documentation are finalised, so the pack is ready for a prototype build. The final stage is to validate costs, including the bill of materials, 3rd party supplier quotes, tooling, and commercial plan in order to reach Cost Freeze before moving to production. Taking this step-by-step approach keeps teams aligned, prevents scope creep and gives customers confidence that progress is controlled and measurable.

Once the application of the end-product is fully understood, chemistry choice becomes the next key decision. Lithium-iron-phosphate (LFP) cells are stable and long-lasting, making them a reliable option for robots that operate continuously. Nickel-manganese-cobalt (NMC) offers higher energy density where space is limited, which suits compact autonomous mobile robots (AMRs) and drones. Lithium-titanate (LTO) performs well for fleets that need very fast charging or work in colder environments. There’s no universal answer; the right chemistry is the one that balances energy, cost and weight in line with the duty cycle. An experienced battery design and manufacturing partner will help an OEM’s project team to weigh up the pros and cons for different chemistries and will guide the right decision based on each product’s specific requirements.

It’s also worth deciding early how much usable capacity the pack should retain after a shift. Too little and the robot may fail to complete its route; too much adds unnecessary cost and weight. A good rule of thumb is to design for around 80% of original capacity at end-of-life, as this aligns with common industry definitions of usable battery life and keeps performance consistent over time. Having these realistic conversations early prevents costly field issues and builds shared understanding across the project team.

One-off engineering

Developing a custom pack always involves an element of one-off engineering. Drawings, simulations, prototypes, test engineering and certification, together known as non-recurring engineering (NRE), are what turn an idea into a manufacturable product. Planning for this work up front shortens development overall and helps avoid costly redesigns. It also means cost, safety and performance targets can be validated together, rather than discovered late in the project. It’s what turns a one-off prototype into a product that can be built consistently and safely at scale.

Regulation is now an equally important consideration. From 18 February 2027, industrial, EV and light-transport batteries above 2 kWh must carry a digital passport accessible via a QR code. Larger robot packs will fall within scope first, while smaller systems may follow as the rules develop. Building traceability into the design - linking cell batches, process data, firmware versions and serial numbers - means the information needed for the passport already exists, rather than having to be recreated later.

Although it may sound bureaucratic, the benefit goes beyond compliance. A clear data record allows maintenance teams to trace faults quickly, gives customers the evidence they need during audits and simplifies recycling at the end of service life. It also protects OEMs if safety or performance questions arise years down the line, because the details are already documented.

Battery design rarely gets the spotlight, but it’s what underpins reliability. Getting the fundamentals agreed early, planning the engineering work properly and thinking ahead to new regulations makes the difference between a programme that runs smoothly and one that constantly needs attention. Reliability isn’t luck, it’s the result of disciplined design. With that groundwork in place, the battery becomes the most dependable part of the robot - the one nobody has to think about at all.

Will your next robot battery be built that way from the start?

Mark Rutherford is CEO of Alexand Battery Technologies

www.alexandertechnologies.com

FOR DECADES, Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs) have been the go-to solution for safety systems across refineries, chemical plants, and power facilities. Reliable, flexible, and widely understood, PLCs became the default choice for monitoring, controlling, and responding to critical process conditions. Yet, default doesn’t always mean optimal.

As operating budgets tighten and cybersecurity threats intensify, more facilities are reevaluating whether software-based PLCs are the best fit for safety alarms, interlocks, and Safety Instrumented Systems (SIS). This is particularly true in applications with lower input/output (I/O) requirements. Increasingly, many are turning to simpler, hardware-based alternatives, such as dedicated trip amplifiers and relay-based safety systems, which can offer equivalent protection with fewer drawbacks.

“There’s a perception that PLCs are the only option,” says Tom Crumlish, an instrumentation systems expert at SOR Controls Group. “But in many cases, they’re overkill.”

SOR designs and manufactures a broad range of industrial process instrumentation, much of which has traditionally been integrated with PLCs. Lately, however, the company has observed a growing shift as facilities explore alternatives to software-based control.

“When you're designing safety systems, you want as few variables as possible,” explains Crumlish. “Every layer of software introduces a new set of unknowns.”

Hardwired for safety

With hardware-based systems, you eliminate many of the variables introduced by programmable logic. Since these systems operate without software, they are inherently immune to cyber threats. They also require less infrastructure, can be mounted directly in the field, and continue to function reliably under extreme environmental conditions.

“These systems are designed to be simple,” adds Crumlish. “In safety, simplicity is a strength. Every time you remove a layer of complexity, you reduce the chance of failure.”

While PLCs excel in managing complex logic and multi-variable conditions, they come with several notable drawbacks:

- High Cost: PLC systems require a substantial upfront investment. Beyond the controllers themselves, costs include I/O modules, Human-Machine Interfaces (HMIs), and ongoing software licensing fees.

- Environmental Constraints: PLCs must be installed in climate-controlled environments, which can increase capital and maintenance costs.

- Complex Infrastructure: PLC-based systems typically require extensive cabling and integration, leading to longer project timelines and higher installation costs.

- Remote Limitations: PLCs are not ideal for remote or standalone locations due to their power requirements and network dependencies.

By contrast, hardware-based systems are “rightsized” for the majority of safety applications, delivering equivalent functionality at a fraction of the cost, often up to 85% less than a traditional PLC. Most hardware systems are field-mountable, allowing installation directly adjacent to the equipment they protect. This eliminates many environmental constraints and reduces infrastructure complexity.

These systems are well-suited for both new construction and retrofit projects (brownfield sites) and can also be configured to supplement existing non-certified PLC-based architectures. Common applications include interlocks, permissives, automated overfill prevention, burner management, high-integrity pressure protection systems (HIPPS), and protection for pumps or wellheads.

Rethinking safety and reliability

With constant pressure to maintain uptime, protect assets, and ensure worker safety, reliability is a non-negotiable factor in these industrial environments. Hardware-based safety systems, built on discrete components like relays and trip amplifiers, have been field-proven over decades of real-world use.

As an example, the Diamond-SIS is a field-mounted safety system built around a de-energised or fail-safe trip principle which has operated for more than 20 years without a single recorded failure – spurious or dangerous. When predefined process parameters are exceeded, the system initiates an automatic shutdown, ensuring a fail-safe response without requiring human intervention or network connectivity. 

For safety trips, hardware-based systems, such as the Diamond-SIS developed by SIS-TECH, are certified to IEC 61508 Safety Integrity Level (SIL) 3 and can be integrated with plant-wide Distributed Control Systems (DCS). This type of configuration enables real-time monitoring while maintaining the inherent reliability of a hardware-based design.

Industrial safety rewired

Many hardware-based safety systems also excel in environments where space, power, and communications infrastructure are limited. These systems can be deployed in remote areas or satellite facilities that lack climate control or stable power sources.

“They draw very little current, so they can run on solar power without the need for a network connection,” says Crumlish. “We’ve seen these systems operate in extreme heat, high vibration, and electrically noisy environments without issue. That kind of dependability is exactly what safety systems need.”

Unlike software-based platforms, hardware systems are physically wired to execute specific safety functions. Voting logic, for instance – two-out-of-three (2oo3) sensors – can be implemented using wiring and trip amplifiers, mounted in a rack room or local panel.  While this approach may appear less flexible, it delivers a higher level of reliability, particularly in safety applications that don’t require frequent reconfiguration.

“Some facilities like to know they can reprogram their systems with a PLC,” explains Pete Fuller, an engineer and application manager at SIS-Tech who supports the deployment of hardware-based safety systems. “Our integrated Diamond-SIS is scalable and can be upgraded by simply rewiring or adding components. Modifications to large systems can usually be done in a single day.” 

However, Fuller adds that for most applications, when a hardware-based system is installed to mitigate a particular hazard, it becomes the foundation for the process’s safe operation and will remain in place, unchanged, for decades.  

Cyber-proof systems

Cybersecurity concerns are becoming a central factor in the move away from PLC-based safety systems. As critical infrastructure faces increasingly sophisticated cyber threats, many operators are reassessing just how much connectivity is truly necessary for safety applications.

“Hardware doesn’t need a firewall,” says Fuller. “There’s no login, no remote access, no software patch updates. It just works. That’s incredibly valuable in safety applications.”

By contrast, even well-secured PLCs are part of a broader network architecture and therefore remain potential targets for intrusion. The 2021 ransomware attack on Colonial Pipeline, which disrupted nearly half of the East Coast’s fuel supply, served as a stark reminder: even systems with advanced protections can be compromised if they’re connected.

Hardware-based systems may not be ideal for every situation, however. In applications that require hundreds of sensor inputs, complex sequencing, or advanced data analytics, PLCs offer unparalleled flexibility and scalability. But for many refinery and industrial processes, where the safety logic is straightforward and the I/O count is limited, hardware-based systems present a more targeted, cost-effective, and resilient solution.

Greg Rankin is a freelance writer

www.sorinc.com

sis-tech.com

The Digital Supply Chain Hub Defence Testbed Accelerator will address secure data sharing challenges to support faster, more agile additive (3D printing) manufacturing across the UK’s defence supply chain and enable participating companies to scale.  

The accelerator programme is delivered by Digital Catapult as part of the Made Smarter | Digital Supply Chain Hub alongside the Ministry of Defence (MOD), other major defence manufacturers, and cutting-edge UK-based small businesses. The programme will convene capabilities, with support from the National Composites Centre (NCC) and the Manufacturing Technology Centre (MTC), to unlock new opportunities for the MOD and its partners to securely manage and share manufacturing design data.  

As it stands, the UK defence sector faces increasingly long lead times to secure military and defence assets, and fragmented data systems which constrain equipment availability, disrupt supply chains and threaten the UK’s defence and security capabilities. To solve these challenges, the MOD is looking to identify innovative ways to create a federated digital inventory of manufacturing information which will give authorised partners a single and secure view of essential technical data, enabling distributed 3D printing of defence components.

The five participating startups will work on two separate challenges to validate and trial new solutions that explore the applications of deep tech to achieve secure, connected, and responsive defence manufacturing.  Dataline Labs, CamyPro and TECHNIA will work to address the Technical Data Packs (TDP)-Digital Inventory Connectors challenge, developing software solutions to securely extract and standardise metadata from Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) systems. Vistory Group and Quaisr will tackle the Federated Digital Inventory challenge to consider the best way to develop a unified, permissioned platform to view and share technical data across the entire supply chain.

Both challenges will bolster industrial supply chain resilience, building on Digital Catapult’s success in this space to date, which has seen 37 Digital Supply Chain Hub projects delivered, and 135 engagements with manufacturing and technology SMEs, which represents a year-on-year increase of 44. Technology companies on the Digital Supply Chain Hub have also secured over £6million in funding since participating on the programme, reflecting the value of the intervention in enabling companies to commercialise their solutions and scale.  

Annie Iakovaki, head of industrial supply chains at Digital Catapult, said: “One area of defence innovation that requires immediate attention is the supply chain, responsible for the delivery of assets, information and people that underpin the success of the UK defence sector. Interventions like this accelerator programme demonstrate the value of convening capabilities across the sector, and bridging the gap between industry, startups and government to better solve some of the most pressing challenges in the space, and to unlock new opportunities that maintain the UK’s position as a leading player in defence innovation and success.”

Richard Hamber, advanced manufacturing lead in defence support, National Armaments Director Group said: “This is an exciting moment in the evolution of the ideas stated in the MOD’s recently issued Advanced Manufacturing Strategy. The testbed provides the basis to bring to life some of those ideas so we can see the art of the possible and understand the next steps to make them a reality. The Catapults have provided energy, pace and buckets of expertise to get us this far very quickly whilst adding another five Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SME) into the Defence sphere, consistent with wider Governmental objectives, and the Defence Industrial Strategy.”   

www.digicatapult.org.uk

These developments have been fundamentally influential across manufacturing, particularly in demanding industrial applications, including robotics and injection moulding machines.   

Nick Stockton, technical manager and Andy Pearce, area sales manager at Sumitomo (SHI) Demag UK explore the evolution and performance characteristics of different drive variants. Including why the move to all-electric drives developed by Japan exclusively for the company’s injection moulding machines offers processors greater moulding precision and higher energy savings. 

Powering the force transmission of the moulding process, there remain many different varieties of drive technologies in plastic manufacturing, highlights Stockton. Despite incremental improvements in the performance of drives over the years, drive technologies can and do vary. Some offer faster speed acceleration and quicker braking. Others are more energy efficient. 

Controlling the injection pressure and process optimisation is essential for mouldability. This precise motion control is what the drive does. Much like a gearbox, a drive transforms the rotational speed into a linear movement. The science is the same for all drives whether it is hybrid, variable frequency, electric servos, electric belt, direct drives or all-electric drives. The drive is quite literally the centrepiece of the injection moulding industry, asserts Stockton.

In injection moulding, the choice of drive was previously application dependent. The requirements for sector and processing applications need to factor in so many varying aspects – including holding patterns, rapid changes in acceleration and deceleration, cooling times and component removal. Yet, the evolution of technologies now means that electric drives are increasingly viable for processing faster applications including caps and closures, as well as heavier loads such as automotive parts.

Pearce expands: “Until recently, matching the motion force of hydraulics in larger tonnage machines was regarded as inconceivable. However, indicative of innovations in drive technology, ‘servo’ variants fusing all-electric direct drives with high-speed servo pumps now caters to the medium and high clamping force range, further enhancing energy-efficiency.”

Sumitomo (SHI) Demag is unique in that the company doesn’t use conventional motors in its injection moulding machines, highlights Pearce. The reason – injection moulding isn’t a standard process. It is high speed with very fast acceleration and braking. Rather than incurring efficiency losses as a result of additional components used in conventional indirect technology, Sumitomo (SHI) Demag machine motors are directly linked to the axis. Resulting in a higher injection power and consequently a much more dynamic response.

Additionally, the in-house-developed electric drives are used in the company’s proprietary robot series SAM-C. This helps to optimise the robotic mechanics to match the fast-cycling dynamics, precision and efficiency of the company’s all-electric IntElect machines notes Pearce.

Making powerful progress

One of the key processing advantages of electric drives is the ability to control the linear axis with velocities in excess of 500mm/s. These are typically managed by a closed loop control system located in either the machine controller (software) or the servo drive itself (hardware). The hardware solution offers a key performance advantage as the position control calculations are performed in real-time in the servo drive hardware. Resulting in the maximum performance. 

Stockton explains: “For industries where precision is paramount, the combination of electric drives and digital control turns injection moulding into a much more predictable and precise operation.”

Compared to hydraulic machines, electric direct drives only consume electricity when operational. In addition, kinetic braking energy can be recovered through recuperation technology.

The enhanced efficiency provided by electric direct drives results in significantly reduced energy consumption compared to hydraulic machines. For example, the IntElect and PAC-E series utilise between 40% and 85% less energy than their hydraulic predecessors.  

Heat transfer is also a factor to consider. Some electrical power is used to heat the barrel for resin melting, while another portion powers the machine drive, inverters, and motors, which also generate heat. All generated heat must be dissipated through thermal convection, or now more typically using an active cooling system.

Thermal imaging of the direct drive can also identify inefficiencies and heat emissions. On IntElect machines, the active air cooling system (fan) operates once the motor temperature reaches 55°C. If there is no heat emission from the drive, no additional energy is being used.

Another important factor when selecting drive size is the duty cycle, which refers to the proportion of operating time during which the motor is active versus idle or recovering. The implementation of active cooling can decrease the required recovery period, potentially enabling users to select a smaller motor.

Finally, replacing a drive system can represent a significant expense. Many moulding machine manufacturers procure their drives from external OEMs, which often complicates the process of sourcing replacement components or obtaining service support. This highlights the advantage of maintaining an in-house R&D centre focused exclusively on drive development for injection moulding applications. 

Given that 95% of all new Sumitomo (SHI) Demag machines are now equipped with an all-electric drive, the company will continue to draw upon its extensive collective expertise and legacy to drive tomorrow’s future.  

“As a part of the Sumitomo Heavy Industries Group, Sumitomo (SHI) Demag benefits from a powerful network of specialist companies, shared expertise, and close cross-company collaborations. This strong alliance allows the company to leverage technologies, innovations, and synergies across the entire group. Giving customers a more reliable and future-ready partner,” adds head of sales, Ashlee Gough.

sumitomo-shi-demag.co.uk