One of the most common mistakes in end-of-line automation projects is not the chosen technology, but how the system is sized.
Many companies automate based on:
- The machine’s maximum theoretical capacity
- A specific production peak
Instead of their real production, with its variations, stoppages, format changes, and future growth.
The result is often:
- Oversized lines (unnecessary investment)
- Or systems that quickly fall short
In this article, we explain how to correctly size an automated end-of-line based on real plant production, not ideal figures.
1. Real production vs theoretical production: the key difference
When we talk about production, there are three different figures that should not be confused:
Theoretical production
This is the maximum capacity a machine can reach under ideal conditions:
- No stoppages
- No format changes
- No incidents
It should not be used to size a complete line..
Nominal production
This is the average speed declared by the manufacturer under standard operating conditions.
It is indicative, but not sufficient on its own.
Real production
This is what truly matters. It includes:
- Technical stoppages
- Format changes
- Micro-stoppages
- Product variability
- Actual operator or upstream line pace
An end-of-line must always be sized based on this figure..
2. Analyze the real throughput of the existing line
Before talking about robots, wrappers, or case formers, a basic question must be answered:
How many real units per hour reach the end of the line?
To do this, IHRESS analyzes variables such as:
- Average and peak units/hour
- Work shifts
- Batch variability
- Seasonality (demand peaks)
- Effective production time
Key point: a stable line is not designed the same way as one with frequent peaks or constant format changes.
3. Identify end-of-line bottlenecks
Sizing is not just about “installing faster machines.”
An efficient end-of-line must be balanced.
If one stage is slower than the rest, it becomes a bottleneck.
Common examples:
- An oversized palletizing system with a slow wrapper
- Fast case formers with manual sealing
- Automatic palletizing with irregular feeding
Proper sizing aims to balance speeds, not maximize individual performance.
4. Consider product and format variability
One of the most underestimated factors when sizing an end-of-line is variability.
You must clearly define:
- Number of different formats
- Changeover frequency
- Product weight and stability
- Types of boxes or packaging
- Required palletizing patterns
A line designed only for an “ideal” format loses efficiency as soon as production changes.
That is why well-sized projects:
- Prioritize flexibility over extreme speed
- Include fast or automatic format changes
- Avoid excessive reliance on manual adjustments
5. Size with future growth in mind, not just the present
Another common mistake is sizing the end-of-line only for current production.
A well-designed automation system should:
- Cover current needs
- Allow growth without rebuilding the entire installation
This involves:
- Reserving space in the layout
- Choosing scalable technologies
- Planning future expansions (more shifts, formats, or speed)
It is not about oversizing, but about keeping the door open for growth.
6. Choose the right technology based on real throughput
Not all production environments require the highest level of automation.
Depending on real production, it may be more efficient to:
- Automate only palletizing
- Combine automatic and semi-automatic processes
- Use a cobot instead of a traditional industrial robot
Proper sizing also means not over-automating.
A well-adjusted solution usually delivers:
- Better return on investment
- Lower operational complexity
- Greater team acceptance
7. The role of layout in sizing
Available space directly affects sizing decisions.
Key factors:
- Actual end-of-line surface
- Material flow
- Access and maintenance
- Safety and regulations
A poorly designed layout can:
- Limit real speed
- Complicate future expansions
- Cause unnecessary stoppages
For this reason, sizing must be done together with layout designt, not afterward.
8. Why sizing defines project success
A well-sized end-of-line:
- Operates stably
- Supports company growth
- Maximizes return on investment
- Reduces stoppages and constant adjustments
In contrast, poor sizing leads to:
- Hidden costs
- Operational frustration
- Loss of efficiency
- Early need for modifications
Conclusion
Sizing an automated end-of-line is not about choosing the fastest machine, but about understanding how the plant actually produces.
At IHRESS, every project starts from:
- Real production data
- Process analysis
- Medium- and long-term vision
Because only in this way is it possible to design efficient, scalable end-of-lines adapted to each industry.
Discover our end-of-line solutions
If you are considering automating or resizing your end-of-line, a prior analysis of your real production will make the difference between a profitable investment and a future problem.
