Extension · when the audit report recommends it
For most entries the audit report is enough as a concept foundation. When a larger investment or multi-year modernisation is on the table, we produce the fuller concept that lets management, production and IT talk about the same plan.
Request an audit firstThe trigger is usually clear: a line from the nineties, a bottleneck at the end of it, a controller nobody can get spare parts for any more. What comes next is not.
What normally happens is that three quotations get collected. Each supplier scopes the work so that their own product fits, and the quotations become impossible to compare. The decision ends up being made on price — about a plant that is meant to run for fifteen years.
A concept reverses that order. First it is settled what the plant should achieve and how success will be measured. Only then comes the question of which technology, and from whom.
Four parts, none of which can be missing if a decision is supposed to come out at the end.
01 · Target state
The intended state in quantities that can be checked rather than in slogans: cycle time, availability, labour tied up, energy per unit, data quality. If it cannot be measured, it does not go in.
02 · Options
Usually two or three viable options — from retrofitting the existing plant to a new investment — each with effort, risk and limits. The option of building nothing for now is assessed as well.
03 · Economics
Investment, running costs and benefit per option, with the assumptions on the table. You see not just the result but what it was calculated from — and can substitute your own figures.
04 · Sequence
A delivery order in which every step is worth something on its own and the next one builds on it. The plan still makes sense if next year's budget turns out smaller.
A concept is rarely worth it for a single machine. It is worth it when several things are due at once and the order of them decides the cost. These are the triggers customers come to us with most often.
Describe your situationThe audit delivers the written report: current state, what pays off, what does not, and the order — that is already the concept foundation for most entries. The fuller concept only picks up where the report points to a larger investment or multi-year modernisation: with options, economics and target state in depth. We always start with the audit.
No, and it matters more here than anywhere else. We sell no controllers and no third-party licences. If a concept recommends a particular make, it recommends it because it fits — not because we earn on it. In robotics we work with DOBOT Germany; that is stated in the concept wherever it is relevant.
Usually yes. A concept with a target state, assessed options, disclosed assumptions and a delivery order contains the substance funding programmes and banks look for. We do not file funding applications and do not advise on funding law — please check your programme's formal requirements with your funding adviser.
No. The concept is yours and is written so a third party can work from it, including the interfaces and standards it builds on. If you want to continue with us, the Road to Automation picks it up; if not, you still hold a solid basis for a tender.
A few weeks, depending on scope. The effort is quoted up front and billed on value like everything else, not against timesheets. A reliable figure needs a short preliminary conversation about the scope of the plant, the time horizon and who on your side decides.
An e-mail address is enough. We come back once with a short read on it — no newsletter.
Describe the situation and the time horizon. For most entries the audit with report is enough — a fuller concept only if the report recommends it.
Request an audit