Zero hand-typed weld parameters

The problem

The most critical process in the flow still depends on someone's fingers.

the weld cell is the most critical process in the flow — any parameter error there turns into a rejected part or, worse, one that isn't caught until it reaches the customer.

• The laser weld cell that closes the tube's longitudinal seam before final forming is relatively modern and has an API — but it sits isolated from the ERP.
• Every program change means typing the weld parameter by hand at the cell panel, with the same data already sitting in the ERP. The same number is typed twice, by two people, in two places.
• It is the most critical step in the flow: a parameter error there becomes a rejected tube or, worse, one that is not caught until it reaches the customer.
• Plants log typing errors here every month, and some of them are already tied to rejects or nonconformances. With a high mix of programs, the exposure never goes away.

How it fits the IRIS system

Connect stitches ERP and weld cell together through their APIs.

Connect stitches two modern systems together via API. When the ERP marks a program start, it automatically publishes the qualified weld parameter to the cell.

When the ERP marks a program start, it publishes the qualified weld parameter to the cell, and the cell reports back what it loaded. The parameter nobody types is the parameter nobody can mistype. And no integration project is needed: neither system is replaced and no shutdown window is required. It does not wait in the IT project queue behind everything else.

See the full IRIS architecture →

Before and after

The isolated weld cell versus the stitched weld cell

Aspect	Today	With iLEAN Connect
Source of the weld parameter	Keyed at the cell panel	Published from the active ERP program
Qualified parameter set	In a binder next to the cell	Travels with the program
Human-origin parameter errors	Every month	Zero
What the cell loaded	Assumed	Confirmed back to the ERP
Out-of-spec nonconformance risk	Permanent	Drastically reduced
The cell and the ERP	—	Both stay; neither is replaced

monthly parameter-typing errors (some tied to rejects or nonconformances) → zero human-origin error.

Impact estimate

Estimated impact — to validate with your own numbers.

The block below is an estimate to be validated against your plant's actual data. We put it forward so the committee has an order of magnitude; we refine it during the assessment.

• Estimated payback 3-6 months, fast because there is no equipment to buy and no machine to stop.
• Monthly parameter-typing errors, some tied to rejects or nonconformances, go to zero human-origin error.
• The risk of an out-of-spec nonconformance reaching the OEM drops drastically.
• And every weld parameter used has a traceable origin: the approved program, not someone's memory. That is what an auditor asks to see after any weld-related complaint.

fast payback of 3-6 months, drastically reduced risk of an out-of-spec nonconformance. *Estimate to validate*.

And the fair question from the production manager

“What if the ERP sends the wrong parameter?” — then the error sits in the master data, where it is found and fixed once, instead of being repeated by hand at every changeover. The published set is checked against the qualified set for that program and against the cell's read-back; where iLEAN has to interpret a free-text program note, that is an anchored task, where the best models drop below 1.5% error [1]. Any mismatch blocks the start.

^[1] OpenAI paper "Why Language Models Hallucinate", 2025 — on the reliability of AI in anchored tasks.