PLC & Control Systems
Deterministic controllers, programmed and commissioned for high-availability lines.
Detail sheet
How we build it
Every deployment is documented to the last terminal, so your team can own it the day we hand it over.
The controller is the machine's nervous system. We specify, program, and commission PLC platforms sized to the process — from compact machine controllers to redundant racks running a whole line — with logic written to be read, not just to run. Every program ships with structured naming, commented routines, and a maintenance handover so your team can own it after we leave.
- Platforms
- Siemens, Allen-Bradley, Mitsubishi, Delta
- Architecture
- Standalone to redundant rack
- Handover
- Commented logic + maintenance manual
In detail
What you should know
How this building block behaves in a working plant, and where it fits.
Sizing the controller to the job
Oversizing a controller is a common and expensive habit. A packaging machine does not need a redundant rack, and a process line running continuously should not depend on a compact unit chosen because it was cheap. We size from the I/O count, the scan-time the process actually requires, and what failure costs you.
Where a site is already standardised on a platform, we work in that platform. Introducing a second brand to save a little on hardware costs far more in spares and training.
Logic written to be read
Programs get inherited. Routines are named for the part of the machine they drive, sequences are commented in plain language, and the structure follows the physical process, so a maintenance engineer can trace a fault by walking the line with the drawing.
Address-based naming and uncommented ladder are how a working machine becomes untouchable within a few years.
Redundancy where it pays
Redundant processors and dual power supplies are worth their cost on a continuous process where a stop means lost product or a long restart. On a discrete line where a stop means a lost cycle, they usually are not.
We would rather spend that budget on better instrumentation, which improves every shift rather than only the rare bad one.
Applied
Where it earns its place
- Replacing controllers that are past end-of-life or scarce on spares
- New machines or lines needing control engineering from the I/O list up
- Consolidating a plant running several incompatible controller brands
- Recovering a line whose original program was never documented
What ships with it
- Commented program and source files, owned by you
- I/O list and written control sequence
- As-built drawings and terminal schedule
- FAT and SAT records
- Maintenance handover and training
Common questions
- Which platform should we choose?
- Whichever your maintenance team already knows, unless there is a technical reason to change. Familiarity at 2 a.m. is worth more than a marginal specification advantage on paper.
- Can you migrate an old program to a new controller?
- Yes. We document the existing sequence first and validate the new logic against it, because a direct conversion carries over old bugs along with old behaviour.
- Do we need redundancy?
- Only if a stop costs you product or a long restart. On discrete lines the money is usually better spent on instrumentation.
Elsewhere in the stack
Other solutions
The layers above and below this one — most projects use three or four together.