About
There is a line in every industrial project, and nobody stands on both sides of it
That line is the reason this company exists. It is the point where the automation work ends and the software work begins — and in most projects it is where responsibility quietly disappears.
Why we exist
The gap
Walk into almost any factory in India and you will find machines, PLCs, drives, meters and sensors that all work, all produce information, and none of which talk to each other. The plant is fully instrumented and completely invisible. Everyone knows time is being lost; nobody can say where.
The obvious response is to hire someone to connect it all up. And here the buyer runs into a market that is split cleanly in two. On one side are automation companies and system integrators — genuinely good at panels, PLC code, SCADA and commissioning, and almost universally weak at software. They will deliver a control system that works and tells nobody anything. On the other side are software companies and IoT platform startups — good at cloud, dashboards and applications, and completely unequipped to stand in a live panel. They have never heard of Profinet, they do not know why reading that particular tag on a running line is a bad idea, and they will not find out until they do it.
So the buyer hires both. And then spends the project managing an interface between two vendors who each believe the problem is on the other side of it. The automation firm says the data is on the PLC. The software firm says it never arrived. Both are telling the truth, and nobody owns the gap between them.
We started FerruleTech to be one team standing on both sides of that line. The same people who write the PLC logic design the tag model, build the API and ship the application. Not because it is a nicer way to work, but because it removes the specific place where these projects go wrong.
The position
One team on both sides of a line most companies never cross
There is a boundary in every industrial project where the automation ends and the software begins. It is where projects fail, and it is where two vendors point at each other.
Automation companies
Know the panel, the protocol and the plant. Deliver control systems that work. Then hand you a closed box that reports nothing, because software was never the discipline.
Stops at the panel
Software companies
Build good applications and clean dashboards. Have never opened a control panel, do not know what Profinet is, and cannot tell you why reading that tag is a bad idea on a running line.
Never reaches the machine
We work in the overlap
The same team that writes the PLC logic designs the tag model, builds the API and ships the mobile app. There is no handoff, so there is no interface to blame. That is not a slogan — it is the specific reason we can quote a project from sensor to dashboard and be accountable for all of it.
How we operate
Four commitments, including two that cost us money
- 01
We say what we do not know
There are platforms we have not worked on and disciplines — functional safety certification, for one — where we are not the right party. Saying so before a contract is signed costs us occasional work and saves everybody a great deal of pain.
- 02
We publish the engineering, not the adjectives
This site contains architectures, protocol tables and constraints instead of a logo wall. That is partly because we have no logos to show yet, and mostly because an engineer evaluating a vendor learns nothing from a logo wall.
- 03
We build so you can leave
Source code, schema, credentials and documentation, on infrastructure you own, using mainstream technologies. Lock-in is a way of keeping customers who want to go. We would rather not need it.
- 04
We start small on purpose
A first project on one line, with a fixed scope and a fixed price. It limits your risk when you have no reason yet to trust us, and it means the second project is scoped from measurement rather than assumption.
The team
Who you will actually be talking to
On a project this size you deal with the engineers, not an account manager.
To be completed
Mohammad Afwan Anjum
Founder & CEO
This section is intentionally left as a placeholder. It should carry a real biography: actual years of experience, the platforms genuinely worked on, the sectors genuinely delivered into, and any qualifications actually held. For a new company, founder credibility is the strongest asset available — and it only works if every line of it is true and checkable.
Edit: src/app/about/page.tsx · names and roles: src/config/site.ts
Judge us on the engineering
Read a service page, look at the architectures, then ask us the question you think we will struggle with. That is a better test than any credential we could put on this page.