Integration is no longer an option in modern feed mills, it’s expected. Operators want full visibility, centralized control, and reliable performance across all equipment. One objection continues to surface in the debate: islands of automation.
We agree that these isolated islands can be problematic in feed mill automation, but the assumptions about how and why they occur are often flawed. Machine-level control doesn’t create islands of automation; poor integration does.
What Is an Island of Automation?
Automation is a growing trend in feed mills. Those that don’t automate are likely to fall behind, but it’s not always a smooth process.
First coined in the 1980s, islands of automation in a feed mill is a machine or system that does not effectively integrate into the plant’s control architecture. What does it look like?
- No communication with the plant’s PLC/SCADA
- Limited visibility into machine status or alarms
- Manual or standalone operation
- No support of machine level code
Where the Problem Actually Begins
Many mills try to eliminate or prevent islands by pushing all control into a single, centralized automation provider. The unintended result is that machine-level intelligence is lost. It also means your machine features are rebuilt externally from scratch opening the system up to bugs and potential failures in edge case states.
This flawed approach leads to several issues:
- Longer startup times
- Higher engineering costs
- Missed edge cases and bugs
- Reduced machine performance
The Right Approach: Integrated Levels of Control
RMS’s Integrated Control Architecture includes:
- Machine-Level Control (OEM). This provides real-time control, protection, and performance algorithms.
- Plant-Level Control (OT/SCADA). Plant-level control means coordination between systems, recipes, scheduling, and operator interface.
- Customer Network (IT/Internet). This network typically separated from the plant level control offers internet connection typically for remote support and data transfers to the cloud.
- Integration Layer. This is standardized communication that ties everything together.
Avoiding automation islands isn’t about removing machine control. It’s about making it fully accessible and integrated.
The RMS Approach: Integrated, Proven, and Supported
Our machine-level systems (Roll Gap Automation, AccuGap®, VersaMill®) were designed to plug directly into a plant-level automated feed mill control system using Ethernet I/P or Modbus TCP/IP.
Full Integration, Not Isolation
Our complete integration library includes:
- Remote start/stop and mode control
- Remote status, states, and alarm mapping
- Remote setpoints and machine state feedback
- Remote machine performance data
These allow the plant’s PLC or SCADA to maintain full control and visibility with seamless operations.
Machine Intelligence Where It Belongs
Critical functions, like roll gap control, load balancing, protection logic, algorithms, and maintenance level controls, remain local to each machine.
These low-latency, equipment-specific functions shouldn’t be replicated at the plant level because it isn’t practical.
Proven Code, Not One-Off Engineering
One of the most important hidden risks of centralized-only control is the need to rebuild machine logic from scratch. For fewer bugs, reducing start ups to a day not a week, and less time chasing unknown issues, we treat our control code as a product, not a project.
It’s deployed across over 250 installations, tested under real-world conditions, and hardened against edge cases.
Continuous Support & Future-Ready Design
We have a dedicated controls support team for handling commissioning and troubleshooting, continuously improving machine algorithms, and releasing regular updates and enhancements.
Feed mill technology is always moving forward. We also design with the future in mind. Our architecture is scalable, and our systems are upgrade-ready. When new capabilities are ready, you can implement them faster, at a lower cost, and with minimal risks.
Lower Lifetime Costs
We leverage proven, supported, and upgradable systems, so you’re not reinventing logic and any bugs that come with it. Compare this to externally built controls, which have higher up-front costs, commissioning delays, and long-term maintenance challenges.
Reframing the Automation Conversation
Instead of worrying about how to avoid islands of automation, it’s more helpful to ask this question: “How do we fully integrate systems while keeping control where it performs best?”
A high-performing automated feed mill is not a monolithic control system. It’s a well-integrated ecosystem:
- Machine-level systems deliver precision, protection, and innovation.
- Plant-level systems, delivery coordination, and visibility.
- Integration connects everything seamlessly.
At RMS, we deliver fully integrated, proven systems that perform, not islands of automation. Learn more about our controls and get in touch to talk about how we can automate your system.
FAQs
What is the most common issue when it comes to integration of machine level and plant level systems?
Not having clear hand shakes and defined processes clearly outlined between the machine builder and plant level controls provider.
It is becoming more common for machine builders to design, build, and support their own control system. This allows advantages in being able to make mass updates on new features and provide a better relationship between the machine builder and the end user.
An island of automation often exists some pieces of legacy equipment such as distributors that must be selected for bin routing from distributor control keypad or control station vs controlled through integration between the plant system and machine system.
RMS integrates with Allen Bradley (Rockwell) system through Ethernet I/P or using Modbus TCP/IP. We send commands back and forth over this single network cable.
RMS supports over 250 machines remotely from just a few miles away from our shop to across the world with machines in Australia and many other countries.
