Custom software
Systems built for how your business actually runs, replacing the spreadsheets and workarounds holding it together.
How it worksRecipe and batch control, tank and bulk inventory, hazardous handling documentation, and consumption tracking built for variable yield.
Chemical manufacturing breaks discrete software in a specific place: quantities are not counts. Material is held in tanks, dispatched in drums, tankers, and bulk, measured by weight, volume, and concentration, and a batch that yields ninety-four percent one week yields ninety-one the next. On top of that sits a licensing and reporting regime that treats storage limits and effluent as seriously as it treats the product. A system that assumes pieces on a shelf cannot carry any of it. Each of these is a margin problem wearing an administrative disguise.
Built on the same core our products run on, extended with the records and rules this sector is actually judged against. These are scopes we build and integrate, not shelf modules with a licence key.
Versioned recipes with density, concentration, and assay corrections applied by the system, scaling that respects the chemistry rather than multiplying a spreadsheet, and substitution rules for grade changes.
Batch orders with actual against theoretical yield, rework and reprocessing recorded as what it is, and by-product and co-product output costed rather than ignored.
Storage-level stock across tanks, silos, and packed goods, with dip and weighbridge readings reconciled inside the system and multi-unit conversion handled once, centrally.
Safety data sheets held against material, storage compatibility and segregation rules enforced at the location, and licensed quantity limits monitored against what is actually held.
Power, water, steam, and fuel consumption attributed to batches so conversion cost is real, with effluent and emission figures captured for the returns that need them.
Packing, labelling, and transport documentation generated with the dispatch, including the vehicle and driver documentation the consignment is not allowed to leave without.
Compliance fails when it is a parallel activity. These obligations are carried by the system that runs the operation, so the evidence exists because of how work was recorded rather than because someone assembled it afterwards.
Explosives, petroleum, and hazardous storage approvals carry quantity and location limits. The system holds those limits against real stock, so an exceedance is prevented rather than discovered at inspection.
Consent conditions, consumption, and effluent figures assembled from operational records, so periodic returns are compiled rather than estimated the week they are due.
Hazard classification, transport emergency documentation, and statutory invoicing and e-way bill generation driven from the same dispatch record.
The sector layer is built. The operational core underneath it is not a proposal: it is running in production with clients today.
Variance is calculated per batch as it closes, so the cause can still be found on the plant rather than in a month-end report.
Units are converted by the system rather than by the person raising the document, so purchase, production, stock, and sale agree.
Stored quantities are checked against approved limits continuously instead of being reconstructed for an inspection.
Which of these applies depends on how well the constraint is already understood. A review that finds the real one usually turns into a build.
Systems built for how your business actually runs, replacing the spreadsheets and workarounds holding it together.
How it worksRemoving the approvals, handoffs, follow-ups, and reconciliation that quietly consume your team's week.
How it worksIt breaks costing in systems that assume a fixed bill of material, which is most of them. We model theoretical and actual separately, so the variance is a measured figure with a batch attached to it rather than an error to be absorbed. That variance is usually the most useful number the system produces.
Yes, provided conversion is defined once at the material level rather than repeated in every transaction. That is a modelling decision made at the start, and getting it right is the difference between a system that reconciles and one that argues with itself.
Where there is an interface, we read from it directly. Weighbridges, tank gauging, and flow meters are common integrations and they remove the transcription step that causes most stock disputes. Where equipment is genuinely closed, we use a controlled manual capture point instead, with the reading attributed to a person and a time.