The pilot line today
One coating line, one lamination press, one shift of 18
- Good modules shipped, last 12 months
- About 180
- Capacity for good modules
- About 1,200 a year
- Cost per good module
- $2,850
Case study · Sample site assessment
Why a pilot line that worked at 200 units would break at 5,000
A Series B water-technology startup had its first commercial order and a $4.2M plan to scale. Only 42% of the modules its pilot line started passed final test. Our site assessment laid out a yield-first path to 5,000 modules a year, seven months sooner and with $1.6M of capital deferred.
Sample deliverable. This case study and report are a composite. Company names, people, locations, and figures have been changed to protect client confidentiality.
Show data
| Category | Modules |
|---|---|
| Passed final test | 42 |
| Lost at lamination | 35 |
| Lost at the other five steps | 23 |
- Modules passing final test
- 42%to68%
- Today, and the month-12 target
- 5,000 modules a year
- Month 11
- With yield first, against month 18 on the current plan
- Capital deferred
- $1.6M
- Of a $4.2M plan, about two months of runway
The situation
A first big order and a line built for pilots
Tessaline makes spiral-wound membrane modules for industrial water reuse. Its pilot line proved the product. Its first commercial order needs ten times the output, from the same line and the same small team.
What has to scale with it
- Lamination62% first-pass yield; settings held by two people
- TraceabilityNo module traced to its material lots
- Change controlA spacer change cut lamination yield by 12 points
- CapitalA $4.2M plan built around a second coating line
What the order needs
An anchor customer for industrial water reuse, with a pipeline behind it
- Modules for delivery in 2027
- 1,800
- Run rate by the end of 2027
- 5,000 a year
- First qualification lot due
- In 4 months
The brief
Can our pilot line get to 5,000 modules a year, and is our capital plan the right way there?
Asked by the CEO and co-founder, with two follow-on questions:
- What should stay in-house, and what could a contract manufacturer take?
- What should the board see before each spend?
Company profile
- Stage
- Series B, about 70 people
- Product
- Spiral-wound membrane modules
- Process
- 11 steps, coating to test
- Capital plan
- $4.2M
- Our time on site
- 2 days
What we found
Yield sets the pace of the ramp
Four views of the same pilot line, from the yield numbers to the capital plan.
1 of 4
Fewer than half pass
Five of six inspected steps run at 90% or better. Lamination runs at 62%, and because losses compound, only 42% of modules started pass final test. At the anchor order's volume that means scrapping about $1.5M of material a year.
Fewer than half of the modules started pass final test
Module travelers and test records, March to May 2026. Values adjusted for confidentiality.
2 of 4
A material change nobody caught
Lamination yield held near 76% until February, when a new spacer supplier cut material cost by 22%. The press settings were never adjusted for its wider thickness tolerance. The change saves about $15 a module and costs about $270 per good module in scrap.
Lamination yield fell 12 points after an unqualified material change
Lamination yield records. Values adjusted for confidentiality.
3 of 4
Readiness, area by area
We scored eight areas against what a 5,000-module operation needs. The average is 2.1 of 5. Equipment and planning are closest. Traceability and yield are furthest away, and three steps run on settings two people hold from memory.
Two of eight readiness areas are near where volume needs them
Webineering scale-up readiness assessment, June 2026.
4 of 4
Two ways to 5,000
The current plan waits about 15 months for a second coating line to come on and scales a process that scraps more than half of what it starts. Fixing yield first reaches 5,000 good modules a year at month 11 on the existing line.
Fixing yield first reaches 5,000 modules a year about seven months sooner
Webineering ramp model from line rates, yields, and equipment lead times.
Fewer than half of the modules started pass final test
First-pass yield by step, and the share of started modules still good after it
Module travelers and test records, March to May 2026. Values adjusted for confidentiality.
Try the ramp
Spend on yield or on capacity, and see what each buys
A simplified version of the ramp model in the report. Start from today, then compare the current capital-first plan with the yield-first plan.
62% today, down from 76% before the spacer change.
Coating, edge seal, casing, leak test, and performance test combined.
Each new crew needs trained technicians and written settings.
$2.6M: two presses, winding automation, casing epoxy dispense, and test stands.
$1.6M with a nine-month lead time.
Good modules a year
Annualized capacity for modules that pass final test.
1,210against a need of 5,000
Short of the anchor order's 1,800 modules a year.
Where every 100 modules started end up
- Passed final test
- 42
- Lost at lamination
- 35
- Lost at other steps
- 23
- Cost per good module
- $2,860
- Capital spent
- $0
Assumes one coating line starts about 2,860 modules per shift a year, one lamination press handles up to 6,000 starts a year, $620 of material per start, and measured shift costs. Your model is built from your own line rates, yields, and quotes.
The plan
Capital moves when the gate before it is met
Each phase ends in a gate the board and investors can check before the next spend.
- Lamination trials on the old and new spacer; requalify or switch back
- A designed experiment on press temperature, pressure, and dwell
- Settings windows written for coating, lamination, and casing, recorded on every traveler
- Membrane roll, spacer lot, and epoxy lot on every traveler
- Change control: no material or process change reaches the line without a qualification run
- A daily yield review by step, and second-shift hiring against a qualification record
Gate 1 · month 3
Lamination yield 80%, 55% of starts passing final test, 11 of 11 steps defined, and every new build traceable. Releases the second shift and the press orders.
The deliverable
What the 10-page report covers
A readiness scorecard, the ramp model, a build-or-outsource recommendation, and a stage-gated 12-month plan, written for the founders and the board.
- Executive summaryThe finding, the capital decision, and what to do first.
- Context and methodThe company, the order, the pilot line, and how we traced yield.
- FindingsYield by step, the material change, process windows, traceability, readiness, and the two ramp plans.
- 90-day action planEvery action with an owner, a timeline, and an expected outcome.
- Stage-gated planFour gates over 12 months, and what each one releases.
- AppendicesData sources, terms, and financial impact.
How a site assessment runs
About three weeks, start to finish
These are the Study and Outline stages of our S.O.L.V.E. framework.
- Step 1 · 1 week
Before the visit
You send travelers, test records, yield history, the capital plan, and any vendor or contract manufacturer quotes. We trace yield through every step.
- Step 2 · 2 days
On site
We watch every step of the line in operation, time line rates, review settings and records, and interview the team from the founders to the technicians.
- Step 3 · 2 weeks
After the visit
We score readiness, build the ramp model, and deliver the report with a 90-day plan and a stage-gated 12-month plan.
Next step
Find out what your line needs before it scales
Sample deliverable. A composite, with names and figures changed to protect client confidentiality.