Surface roughness plays an important role in machine performance. The scope of the study discusses the parameters that need to be considered when studying gear surface roughness and what their values mean in robotic applications. It also discusses how gears are manufactured and what the most important processes in gear production are, as well as evaluates the labor productivity of each process. The Smartic M device is a surface roughness measuring tool that is used for the purpose of measuring the surface roughness of spur gears. Measurements have been obtained and narrowed down to the most optimal and the least optimal results. The study established a standard that any Ra value greater than 0.8 μm and any Rz value greater than 10 μm is simply unacceptable. These ranges have been determined in regards to robotic applications. An analysis of the ranges of obtained results was further narrowed down so that an assessment could be made of the effectiveness of the mechanism if the quality of its surface finish was either efficient and to optimal levels or inefficient and problematic, as well as how an industrial robotic arm would behave if the said spur gear was utilized in its system. The study then delved deeper into spur gear manufacturing in order to investigate what optimal mass-produced spur gears would look like in a production system. To do this, the Tecnomatix Plant Simulation software was used to set up CNC, drill, hobbing, heat treating, and grinding stations to produce a mass of spur gears similar to the sample gear that constituted the design of this study. The labor productivity statistics of all of these stations was evaluated during the study and the results were satisfactory in terms of similarity to the gear manufacturing analytical system. Another production system was developed on the plant simulation software, however, it was for the purpose of studying the performance of a robotic arm when its level of efficiency is drastically reduced and when it is somewhat efficient. The results of the simulation showcased that it would be quite realistic for a robotic arm to have an availability rate of 89%, but it would be completely unacceptable for the availability rate to be 48% as that would be contingent to a failure rate that exceeds 50%, which is problematic for any manufacturing system to possess such an inefficient tool in its line.