Most operations considering automated dimensioning have a working process already, it’s just manual, slow, and prone to error. The hesitation around switching is reasonable: any change to a live workflow carries implementation risk, and the receiving or outbound dock isn’t a place where downtime is acceptable. The good news is that dimensioning transitions are typically phased and low-disruption. Here is how to approach it.
Why phased transitions work for dimensioning
Dimensioning systems are additive, not replacement. A workstation dimensioner doesn’t replace the conveyor, the WMS, or the scanning process, it adds a measurement step that feeds data to those existing systems. The integration points are well-defined, and the system can be installed and tested in parallel with the existing process before it takes over as the primary measurement method.
That parallel-running phase is where most of the transition risk is managed. Run both processes simultaneously for a period, compare results, identify integration issues, and train staff before making the new system the single source of measurement.
Phase 1: Integration design before hardware arrives
The integration design phase defines how the dimensioning system connects to the WMS and what data flows where. The key questions: What identifier connects the measurement to the right WMS record? What happens when a measurement fails or an item is out of range? How are exception records flagged and resolved?
Answering these questions before the hardware arrives prevents integration delays after installation. Cubiscan cubing software provides the data management layer that handles routing to the WMS, and the integration design should specify how that routing works for your specific WMS environment.
Phase 2: Hardware installation and calibration
Physical installation of a workstation dimensioner is typically a day or less. The unit is positioned at the measurement station, connected to power and network, calibrated, and configured for your measurement parameters. The dimensioning system overview covers the installation footprint and requirements for different system types.
Calibration establishes the accuracy baseline. Request documentation of the calibration result, this becomes part of the system’s performance record and is useful if measurement accuracy is ever questioned.
Phase 3: Parallel running and validation
Run the automated system alongside the existing manual process for an agreed period, typically one to two weeks. Measure the same items with both methods and compare results. The comparison serves two purposes: it validates the automated system’s accuracy against your existing baseline, and it identifies any items or packaging types where the automated system needs additional configuration.
Parallel running also gives staff time to get comfortable with the new workflow before the manual process is retired. Adoption problems are rarer when the system has been running visibly alongside the existing process.
Phase 4: Cutover and exception handling
When the parallel validation is complete and the integration is confirmed, retire the manual process and make the automated system the single measurement source. Define the exception handling process clearly: what happens when a package fails measurement, who resolves it, and how the resolution is recorded. A clear exception path is what keeps the automated system from creating a new bottleneck.
To discuss transition planning for your specific workflow, contact Cubiscan.
Frequently asked questions
| How long does it take to transition from manual cubing to automated dimensioning? Total transition time depends on integration complexity and the parallel validation period you choose. For a workstation dimensioner with a standard WMS integration, a total timeline of four to eight weeks from hardware order to full cutover is typical. This includes procurement lead time, integration development, installation, calibration, parallel running, and staff training. |
| What happens to items that fail automated measurement during the transition? During parallel running and after cutover, items that fail automated measurement should follow a defined exception path. This typically means routing the item to a manual measurement fallback or to a supervisor for resolution, flagging the item in the WMS as a measurement exception, and recording the resolution. The exception path should be designed and communicated before the automated system goes live. |
| Do I need to change my WMS configuration to add automated dimensioning? The extent of WMS configuration changes depends on your specific WMS and what data the dimensioning system needs to pass. At minimum, the WMS needs to receive dimensional records from the dimensioning system and associate them with the correct item master records. Some WMS platforms have native integrations with dimensioning systems; others require a middleware or API connection through Cubiscan cubing software. |
| What if my receiving mix includes items the dimensioner can’t handle? Most workstation dimensioners have a defined measurement range and work best with standard cartons and cases. For items outside the measurement range or with irregular packaging, a parallel manual process for those specific item types may be appropriate. Alternatively, a system like the Cubiscan 75 Pro handles irregular items and polybags that standard dimensioners can’t measure reliably. |
