Running and waiting
When does equipment run, and when does it wait? Are recurring gaps associated with handling, preparation, or other work?
Running time is not necessarily productive output. Idle time is not automatically waste.
Use case · Machine utilization tracking
Know when your machines run—and where the gaps are.
Which machines sit idle? How does activity change across shifts? Where do changeovers interrupt the flow? Bring camera observations and available machine signals together to review usage without compiling another manual log.
Activity over time
See more than the current machine status.
A single status light tells you what is happening now. An activity history helps you understand patterns over a shift, a day, or a week.
Scope a record of running, idle, and changeover periods for selected machines. Compare like-for-like work periods, then return to the evidence behind a gap that needs a closer look.
Capture observable activity
Identify relevant events from camera views and available machine signals. Some machine states may not be visible from video alone.
Build a reviewable history
Associate events with the machine, timestamps, and agreed state definitions. Keep missing observations distinguishable from idle time.
Compare and investigate
Summarize activity across agreed periods and connect selected events to available footage or source records.
This workflow is evaluated against your operation—not a turnkey detector for every machine. Connections depend on accessible interfaces and permissions.
Explore the BizStack platform →
Operational questions
Find the patterns worth a closer look.
Changeovers
How long do comparable changeovers take? Which events differ from the usual pattern, and what does the supporting footage show?
Agree on observable start and end points, and compare similar event types.
Shift comparisons
How does activity differ across equivalent work periods? Account for schedules, breaks, part types, and planned downtime before drawing conclusions.
A difference in usage does not establish its cause or measure individual worker productivity.
Between successive parts
How much time passes between production events? Where observable, compare machine cycle duration with the full part-to-part interval.
Counts and cycle-time analysis are optional scope. Machine-state tracking alone does not establish completed parts or orders.
Reports for review
A useful review—not another screen to watch.
“Which machines had the most idle time last week, and which gaps should we review?”
A report could bring the measured patterns together, highlight comparable events, and point your team to the supporting records.
Use it to decide where to investigate—not to assume every idle period is a problem or every finding needs an alert or task.
Machine-data queries, recurring execution, and automatic report delivery are evaluated as part of your reporting scope.
At your site
Define what “running” means at your site.
Start with one machine and one operational question. Agree on the events you can observe, the periods you want to compare, and the evidence needed to trust the result.
Check your sources
Review camera placement, lighting, occlusions, recording availability, timestamps, retention, and access. Confirm accessible machine interfaces and what each signal means.
Missing footage or disconnected signals mean unknown periods—not proof of inactivity. No universal equipment compatibility is assumed.
Agree on the measurement
Define running, idle, setup/changeover, planned downtime, and unknown states. Decide whether categories overlap before calculating totals.
Agree on operating schedules, breaks, and the denominator for utilization. A cycle duration, part-to-part interval, and changeover duration are different measures.
Validate a useful baseline
Compare detected events with reviewed observations. Agree on detection reliability, comparable event types, and the criteria that make a history or report useful.
Utilization alone is not OEE: quality and performance need additional validated inputs. Usage patterns alone do not establish a need to buy more machines.
People-related analysis is not the initial scope. If added, prefer job-, station-, or crew-level measures and confirm permissions, privacy, and applicable labor requirements. This application supports review, not autonomous machine control.
MODE demonstration · Parking occupancy
See an activity history become a review.
Our parking example pairs an occupancy history with an AI-generated visual review of a heatmap. Explore the source material, findings, and checks needed before acting.
This supports the observation-and-review approach—not machine-state detection, cycle times, changeover measurement, direct machine-data queries, or automated recurring delivery.
See the MODE parking demonstration →Which machine do you need a clearer picture of?
Tell us what you want to understand, which camera views or machine signals are available, and how your team reviews activity today. We’ll discuss a practical first evaluation and what a useful report should show.