Industry and manufacturing
Your plant's knowledge.
Agents read sources such as specifications, standards libraries, service cases or evidence archives and present a requirements list, an answer, a service job or a dossier as a draft. Nothing is written until your team agrees.
neuland.ai HUB · Service
- and more systems
Night shift, the KT-800 cartoner at Nordhain Dairy is down, error E 217, vacuum at the suction gripper too low. What is the cause, and what do we need for the job?
Tools chosen automatically
- Service case database · Fault report SM-2026-1184read
- SharePoint · KT-800 operating manual, error codesread
- Service case database · Machine history 80-1127read
- Service case database · Cases with error E 217read
- ERP · Stock ET 4471-20read
- ERP · Service job with spare partDraft
E 217 signals insufficient vacuum in the gripper circuit [1]. The same pattern occurred in 2021 on the sister machine 80-0964 after about 9,000 operating hours; the cause was the seal on the rotary distributor [2]. Machine 80-1127 is at 9,240 hours [3]. Spare part ET 4471-20 is in stock at Plant 2, six units [4]. Suggestion: replace the seal, then check the vacuum per chapter 9.3. Anything settled by phone and never reported, I do not know about.
- [1]KT-800 operating manual Rev. 4 · Ch. 9.3 Error codes
- [2]SB-2021-0388 · Serial no. 80-0964
- [3]Machine history 80-1127 · 9,240 operating hours
- [4]Stock ET 4471-20 · Plant 2, 6 units
Draft the service job for tonight.
- SharePoint · Night service scheduleread
- ERP · Service job SE-2026-2207Draft
The draft is ready: job SE-2026-2207 with seal ET 4471-20 from Plant 2 and the test steps from chapter 9.3 [1]. The service order in the ERP and the message to the dairy only go out after the team lead's OK. Every hands-on step is done by the technician on site.
- [1]Night service schedule · On call
Service job SE-2026-2207
Draft- Machine
- KT-800 · Serial no. 80-1127
- Part
- ET 4471-20 · Plant 2
- Check
- Chapter 9.3
Nordhain Dairy sent the specification for a second KT-800 cartoner, 340 requirements with attachments. Which ones require evidence, and where does the specification go beyond our portfolio?
- Requirements management · Nordhain specification Rev. B
- Requirements management · 340 requirements by chapter
- Standards library · Referenced standards in the specification
- PLM · Portfolio data KT-800 cartoner
- SharePoint · Quoting guide for special requirements
- Requirements management · Requirements list with flags
The specification contains 340 requirements, each filed with chapter and page [1]. 26 require evidence, usually a test certificate, a manufacturer's declaration or a sample approval [1]. In 9 places the text goes beyond the portfolio data, for example on cleanability in chapter 7 [3]. Chapter 9 refers to an in-house standard of the dairy that is not attached [2]. This requirement is marked open, with a reference to the missing attachment.
- Requirements management · Nordhain specification Rev. B · 340 requirements, 26 with evidence
- Standards library · Referenced standards · Chapter 9, in-house standard missing
- PLM · Portfolio data KT-800 · 9 deviations from the text
- SharePoint · Quoting guide for special requirements · Section 4
Please classify each requirement by effort, with the source.
- PLM · Standard scope KT-800
- Requirements management · Classification per requirement
My suggestion: 301 requirements are standard scope, 25 need adaptation, 14 are custom development or open [1]. Each classification shows the passage in the specification next to the portfolio data. Your engineering team sets the costing basis together with quoting; whether a requirement is technically feasible is for the specialist department to judge.
- PLM · Standard scope KT-800 · As of Rev. 4
- Requirements list Nordhain Rev. B · Excel
- Classification · Count
- Standard scope · 301
- Adaptation needed · 25
- Custom development or open · 14
- of which require evidence · 26 in 340
- Engineering sets the costing basis
The design engineer asks: which standards apply to the emergency stop on the KT-800 cartoner, and what do they require for the control panel?
- Standards library · Emergency stop regulations
- Standards library · Current versions
- Technical documentation · Risk assessment KT-800
- SharePoint · Control panel design guideline
For the emergency stop, two sets of rules from your standards library work together: one for the function [1], one for the electrical equipment covering actuator, color and arrangement [2]. Your risk assessment lists three operator stations on the KT-800 [3]. The design for the machine is signed off by your engineering team.
- Standards library · Emergency stop function rules · Requirements
- Standards library · Electrical equipment rules · Actuators
- Technical documentation · Risk assessment KT-800 · 3 operator stations
The dairy wants a different control panel design. Is that possible?
- Standards library · Electrical equipment rules
- Technical documentation · Control panel deviation
The rules are explicit about the design [1]. Whether a deviation is acceptable is not for me to assess: your quality management clarifies that with the certified inspector. The memo shows where the request and the rules diverge.
- Standards library · Electrical equipment rules · Actuators
- Technical documentation · Emergency stop standards answer
- Rules: function and electrical equipment
- Deviation: control panel design
- Quality management clarifies with the certified inspector
- Your engineering team signs off the design.
Nordhain Dairy wants the complete evidence dossier for the GM-12 gripper module assembly. What do we have, and what is still missing?
- PLM · Bill of materials GM-12, 34 parts
- Standards library · Requirement sets by category
- Evidence archive · Quality assurance test certificates
- Document management · Declarations and certificates
- Document management · Evidence dossier GM-12
The 34 parts fall into five categories, each with its own requirement set [1] [2]. 58 documents are required, 47 are on file [3] [4]. Eleven are missing, each listed with part number and supplier in the gap list. One test certificate went to purchasing by email and was never filed, so it is listed as a gap.
- PLM · Bill of materials GM-12 · 34 parts, 5 categories
- Standards library · Requirement sets · Categories A to E
- Evidence archive · Quality assurance · 31 test certificates
- Document management · Declarations · 16 documents
Does the certificate from Mar 12 really cover the requirement for part 120-44?
- Evidence archive · Test certificate part 120-44
- Standards library · Requirement set category C
I put requirement and evidence side by side: the certificate names a different material batch than the bill of materials, so I flag it as a doubtful case [1] [2]. Your quality management handles the interpretation; the quality lead signs off the dossier.
- Evidence archive · Test certificate 120-44 · Mar 12, 2026
- Standards library · Requirement set category C · Section 6
- Evidence dossier GM-12 · PDF
- 47 of 58 documents filed
- 34 parts assigned to categories
- 11 documents missing, listed with supplier
- Part 120-44: certificate does not match the batch
- The quality lead signs off.
In use at manufacturers





Not just at the machine
An inquiry is waiting for costing, a batch for the complaint report (8D), assembly for a rotary distributor. What is missing is always the same: the knowledge already in your systems.
Example · One breakdown, minute by minute
The breakdown from the chat above, on the clock: from fault report SM-2026-1184 to the cartoner running again, without anyone searching the service database and manual by hand.
Your systems stay as they are
The agent works with the permissions your people already have in the ERP, the manufacturing execution system (MES), product lifecycle management (PLM) and other systems. Ready-made connectors exist for SharePoint, Outlook, Teams and SQL databases, for example; everything else connects via API or Model Context Protocol (MCP).
Data from ERP, MES, PLM, Service case database, SharePoint etc. flows through neuland.ai HUB to ERP, Outlook, Microsoft Teams etc.
Ready in the Agent Library
From inquiry to breakdown: eight of dozens of agents for industry and manufacturing.
Figures are based on comparable projects and are not a guarantee.
Protecting know-how in the plant
Admins assign permissions per plant, area and agent; within these permissions, service, quality and sales work freely. The technician agent reads plant history and manuals; it cannot reach calculations.
Deployment
Drawings, bills of materials and service cases stay in EU data centers or in your own infrastructure, your choice.
Training
Design data, costings and customer data are never used to train language models.
Permissions
Plants and subsidiaries kept separate, costing visible only to sales and controlling; granular permissions and tenant isolation.
Documentation
ISMS (information security management system) under ISO 27001, DPA (data processing agreement) under Art. 28 GDPR and documented TOMs (technical and organizational measures); quality management under ISO 9001.
DPA, TOMs and certificates for download:
Open the Trust Center
Before the first deployment in the plant
Your last downtime is the best starting point.
We show live what the HUB makes of it.
We show the neuland.ai HUB on a breakdown, an inquiry or a deviation from your plant, with your own documents under a DPA if you like.
After your request
01
You describe your last downtime
02
We show how the Technician Agent finds the cause and the spare part
03
You see which systems and documents the agent needs for it