Industrial Automation
Practical safety and quality review for industrial systems.
Why we do this
Safety and QA are not paperwork exercises — they are how teams catch hazards and defects before they reach the floor or the field, including gaps in safety circuits, e-stop chains, and interlocks around conveyors or guarded machines.
We help bring a structured, practical eye to industrial builds and control systems so quality and safety stay visible throughout the work.
How we do this
Safety-minded review and quality practices for industrial systems and builds.
Identify hazards and failure modes relevant to the equipment and use case.
Define what “good” looks like for reviews and inspections.
Build repeatable habits instead of relying on last-minute saves.
Records and checklists that people will actually use.
Capture lessons from commissioning and field issues.
What we do
Representative ways we can help. Exact scope is defined with you for each engagement.
Second-set-of-eyes reviews for safety circuits, panel quality, and related concerns.
Practical lists for build, wiring, and functional verification.
Structured bring-up approaches that surface issues early.
Help teams adopt lightweight safety and QA practices that stick.
Standards
Machine safety is a designed property, not a sticker. We help you apply functional-safety and risk-assessment practices — e-stops, interlocks, guarding, and QA checklists — in language your builders and operators can use.
Core functional-safety standards for machinery control systems — Performance Levels (PL) and Safety Integrity Levels (SIL) for safety-related parts of control systems.
How we follow it: We help identify safety functions, estimate required performance, and select architectures (e.g., dual-channel interlocks) that match the risk — documented for your safety file, not claimed as a certified PL calculation unless scoped that way.
The foundation standard for machinery risk assessment and risk reduction — iterative hazard identification and hierarchical protective measures.
How we follow it: We walk hazards systematically (mechanical, electrical, unexpected start) and prefer inherently safer design and guarding before relying on procedures alone.
U.S. machinery safety and OSHA expectations around guarding, lockout/tagout interfaces, and protecting operators from point-of-operation hazards.
How we follow it: We review guard design, access for clearing jams, and LOTO practicality so safety measures survive real production use.
Stop categories, interlock logic, and presence-sensing devices only protect people when timing, placement, and reset behavior are correct.
How we follow it: We specify device placement, stop reactions, and safe restart conditions, and include them in QA checklists used at FAT/SAT.
Verification turns design intent into evidence — torque marks, wire labels, safety-circuit tests, and documented punch lists.
How we follow it: We build practical checklists tied to the hazards and standards above so commissioning catches gaps before operators do.
Tell us about the equipment or process — we can suggest a focused review approach.
Get a quote