Watch the work. Keep systems current.

Camera footage is more useful when the team knows what event matters. “A finished assembly is placed on the cart” defines a different event from “a person is near the cart.” The first can be part of a production-completion rule; the second does not establish that the job is complete.

Seneca’s monitoring demonstration uses a simple when-and-then model. When a finished assembly reaches a defined cart, update its work order in MES. When a blue parts bin moves to the replenishment position, create a material pull request in ERP. These are examples of workflows to configure and validate for a site.

Cameras can help detect visible activity, object placement, and movement through defined areas. They cannot establish every material property, hidden feature, measured tolerance, or force applied by a tool. Use operator responses and equipment results where those are the appropriate evidence.

For each check, define what is visible, which camera view supports it, and when the event is ambiguous. An exception should have a review path. Teams need a way to correct a false match or a missed event without losing the history of the update.

Review the camera position, lighting, occlusion, part variations, job identifiers, and normal movement around the station. Test repeated and out-of-order events. A cart may carry several jobs, and moving a bin does not always mean it needs replenishment.

Run the proposed rule against real production examples before enabling automatic system writes. Decide who can configure the rule, who reviews uncertain events, and how footage and event records are retained. This makes the automation easier to assess and maintain as the work changes.