NAGARE is time and motion study software for reviewing configured visible work from station video. Engineers define the elements and validate their timing, then use retained clips with performance ratings, allowances and existing standards to investigate methods across representative cycles and shifts.
A traditional study needs an engineer at the station for hours, then more hours to tidy the results. Operators work differently while being watched, and the study covers one moment of one shift.
Our AI process monitoring software, NAGARE™, works as time and motion study software for configured visible operations. Engineers define and validate the elements and timing criteria, then review representative footage with their existing standards and method-study practice.
Automated studies with NAGARE follow the same logic engineers use by hand: define elements, time them, review the method. The difference is that every cycle is included.
An engineer marks the work elements on a few recorded cycles, and the model learns to recognise them.
Each element is detected and timed on every cycle the camera sees, across shifts and operators.
Results show element times, spread and motion patterns, with clips ready for method improvement.
Send a video of one station and your last study for it. We will show how the automated results compare.
Get In TouchEvery method aims at an accurate standard and a better method. They differ in effort, coverage and how much of the motion they capture.
In a traditional study, an engineer times a few cycles, applies a performance rating to adjust for pace and adds allowances for fatigue and delays. A video time study keeps that logic but records every cycle, so the engineer rates and reviews from footage rather than from memory. The study covers normal work across a shift, and anyone can check the evidence later, which makes standards easier to defend when they are questioned.
Removing a visiting observer may reduce one influence on behavior, but a permanent camera can also affect how people work. The observer effect should therefore be considered rather than assumed to disappear. Use representative shifts and product mixes, explain the study and compare results over a suitable period. An industrial engineer should review whether the footage reflects normal practice, interruptions and variation before using it to revise a standard. No NAGARE-specific reduction in that effect is claimed here.
Systems such as MTM build a standard from coded motions without timing the real job. They are useful when designing a station that does not exist yet. Video measurement is the better check once the station runs, because it shows whether real cycles match the synthetic standard. Many engineers use both, with tables for planning and video for confirming, and the comparison often reveals steps the tables never included.
No. Work sampling estimates the share of time spent on each activity from random observations, which suits long, varied jobs. An automated time study measures every element of every cycle, which suits repetitive manual work. The video can still answer sampling questions, such as how much time goes to waiting, without extra observation rounds or extra people on the floor. Sampling and element timing can even run from the same footage for different questions.
Yes. Because each element is linked to its clip, method study becomes easier: engineers can compare how different operators perform the same job, spot long reaches or awkward turns and test a new layout. The element breakdown makes the comparison specific, showing which element changed and by how much, rather than only a new total for the cycle.
An engineer defines the visible elements and their start and finish criteria using representative recorded cycles. NAGARE's training-data requirement is 120 minutes of footage. Plan that capture around the operations, variants and views in scope rather than treating it as a fixed allowance for every new product. Validate the element definitions and timings before relying on the study. A method change requires review and may need new footage or training, not simply an automatic update from a short clip.
Frederick Taylor developed time study to set standards for tasks, and Frank and Lillian Gilbreth developed motion study to remove unnecessary movement. The two methods were later combined into the discipline engineers use today. Video-based analysis applies the same ideas at a scale and level of detail that clipboards and stopwatches could never reach on a busy line.
Send a video of each station you want studied, the current standards and the last study reports if you have them. Note any planned method or layout changes. With that, we can define the elements, confirm camera positions and show how the time study software results would be presented to your engineering team.
Share a station video, your last study and the stations you most need studied. We will plan video studies for those stations and explain timing and cost. Projects like this usually deliver first studies in 4 weeks.
