Build
Argue about the layout with throughput numbers instead of opinions.
For: Industrial engineers, plant projects, lean teams
Moving a cell is a six-figure decision argued from a 2D AutoCAD plan and a strongly held belief. The throughput consequence is discovered after the concrete is cut.
Drag cells in the twin, re-run the discrete-event model and watch the bottleneck move — in the same scene that shows the actual as-built clearances, so 'it will fit' is verified, not assumed.
The scanned floor, not the drawing. Columns, drains and roof steel are where they are, not where the plan says.
Cycle times, changeovers, MTBF and buffer sizes taken from the last six months of real telemetry.
Compare layouts on throughput, WIP, walking distance and forklift traffic — not on how tidy the drawing looks.
The chosen layout ships with the model that justified it, which is what makes the capex case survive review.
The objection we hear most
“We have a simulation team already.”
Then we feed them a calibrated as-built model instead of a hand-built abstraction, and put their results somewhere the plant manager will actually look.
Proof
Tell us the option count, the CAD you already have and the frame budget you need to hit. An engineer reads it and replies with a straight answer — including when the answer is that good photography would serve you better.
We reply to every enquiry within one business day, in your timezone — with a frame budget, not a brochure.