A warehouse automation project is decided long before anyone pours concrete. It is decided in a spreadsheet, by a person who will have to defend it.
The feasibility study is the most consequential document in this industry and the least examined. It decides whether a site gets automated, which vendor wins, how many machines are bought and what the operator is told to expect. It is usually a spreadsheet, assembled under time pressure, carrying assumptions its own author could not fully reconstruct three months later.
Then the machines arrive and reality files its report. The aisles turn out to be narrower than the drawing suggested. The throughput lands twenty per cent under the promise because the model never accounted for congestion at the dock. Somebody has to explain the gap, and the spreadsheet has long since stopped being able to help.
We think that document deserves better tooling than a blank grid. Not a black box that produces a confident figure from assumptions you cannot inspect — the industry has plenty of those already — but something that reads the actual building, checks the actual clearances, shows you its arithmetic, and then goes back afterwards to tell you whether it was right.
These are the things we believe. They are not aspirations; every one of them is already true of the product, and you can go and check.
Everything else — the drawing, the machine list, the shift pattern — exists to produce one defensible figure and the reasoning behind it. A tool that makes the figure prettier without making it more defensible has done nothing.
So we show the arithmetic on the homepage. If a competitor can read our model and disagree with it, good. That is the conversation the industry should be having.
Our model assumes steady flow and no congestion. That is not a limitation we hide in a footnote; it is printed next to the result. An honest bound gives you somewhere to stand when a client pushes back. A number to three decimal places, derived from assumptions nobody wrote down, gives you nowhere.
A 3.0 metre aisle will not take a truck that needs 3.6. No amount of optimism, vendor enthusiasm or rounding changes that, and it is far cheaper to discover it on a drawing than on a concrete floor.
So the aisle check runs on every aisle you draw, it turns red on the plan, and it appears in the report whether or not anyone wanted it to.
Only the first step of a study is compulsory. If a client asks whether the building can take AMRs and the answer is no, the study is finished — there is nothing to model, no fleet to price, no report to write.
Software that insists you complete its workflow is optimising for its own screens, not your afternoon.
Most feasibility tools stop at the proposal, which is exactly where the accountability starts. Auddomate takes the run data back in and puts measured throughput against modelled throughput.
Sometimes that number is uncomfortable. It is the most valuable one on the platform, because it is the only one that tells you whether your model was any good.
This industry is German, Japanese, Chinese and English, and it does not take turns. Auddomate shipped four complete languages on day one, and nine by launch — not a translation layer bolted on once the English version found traction.
Units are a separate axis from language, because a German engineer may well want imperial and a British one metric, and assuming otherwise is the kind of small arrogance that makes software feel foreign.
Machine profiles come in from a spreadsheet and go back out as CSV. A whole study exports as JSON. Nothing is held hostage to keep you subscribed.
A tool that is hard to leave is not loyalty. It is a hostage situation with an invoice.
The demo needs no signup, no email, no sales call — and no credentials at all. One slide gives you a private sandbox with five complete studies, real plans, a fleet and months of telemetry already in it, and it deletes itself after six hours.
If the product cannot survive being handled by a stranger without a salesperson present, the problem is the product.
The moment we start driving the machines, we stop being able to tell you the truth about them.
A product is defined at least as much by its refusals. These are ours, and they are not temporary.
We do not dispatch tasks, orchestrate fleets or talk to a machine in production. Feasibility and control are different disciplines with different failure modes, and one of them can hurt somebody.
The machine library ships vendor-neutral and every profile is editable. We will not take a position on whose truck is best, and we will not sell one.
No result will ever appear in this product that you cannot trace back to the inputs that produced it. If we cannot show the arithmetic, we will not show the answer.
No form, no email capture, no "book a call to see the product". There is not even a password to copy — you slide a control on the sign-in page and you are in.
What it is
A feasibility platform for warehouse automation. You upload a site plan, mark the racks and aisles, choose machines and shifts, and it returns throughput, clearances and payback with the reasoning attached.
Who it is for
Systems integrators qualifying a site, 3PLs and operators testing a shift pattern against their own building, and OEM resellers showing a buyer where their trucks will and will not fit.
Scope
Assessing a site, modelling a fleet, and measuring what that fleet actually did. It never touches a machine. Dispatch and live control belong to systems built for it, and we will not become one.
Languages
English, Deutsch, Español, Français, हिन्दी, 日本語, 한국어, Polski and 简体中文, complete rather than partial. Units switch independently of language.
Built with
PHP and MySQL on ordinary shared hosting, with no build step and no framework. Nothing to compile, nothing to babysit, and nothing between you and the page you asked for.
Display type
Instrument Serif, self-hosted under the SIL Open Font Licence. Interface type is whatever your system already renders best.
Every claim on this page is something you can open and test in a sandbox of your own, right now, without telling us who you are.
