Since the beginning of the year, I’ve been with a new employer, working as a Product Owner for goods receiving. My new company has grown significantly over the last two years. But rapid growth also brings challenges that need solutions.

That’s why I immediately put my hand up when a visit to LogiMAT in Stuttgart was mentioned. LogiMAT is a trade fair focused on intralogistics, which is the movement of goods within a warehouse. And where do goods movements in a warehouse begin? Exactly, in goods receiving. My hopes were high that one or two manufacturers at the fair would present innovative ideas and solutions.

We decided that for a trade fair of this size, it would make more sense to plan for two days. My colleagues opted to stay overnight, but I wanted to commute the 190km. That was definitely a mistake. I had completely underestimated the traffic in the greater Stuttgart area. So instead of arriving at the meeting point at 10:00 AM as planned, I didn’t get there until well after 11:00 AM. I spent 40 minutes just looking for a parking spot in the parking garage—despite the guidance system. They definitely don’t have a handle on traffic planning and management.

Once inside the hall, I was initially overwhelmed. Thanks to Corona, it’s been a long time since I’ve seen crowds like that. But the masses quickly spread out across the halls of the huge exhibition grounds, and we went with them. Logically, we started in Hall 1. Both well-known and unfamiliar companies were presenting their solutions for transporting goods within a warehouse.

Disenchantment quickly set in. Exciting innovations were rare. Most exhibitors were only showing familiar things like conveyor belts, automated small parts storage systems, or similar items. Nothing that hasn’t been on the market for over a decade. Some booths struggled to highlight the strengths of their product or even its intended use. Other booths, on the other hand, were extremely uninteresting. Who goes to an intralogistics fair to look at barrier tape?

Every now and then, however, there was an interesting product that, while not surprising, was still quite new to the market. But I also quickly realized that while these products have potential, they aren’t mature yet. I found robotic arms with suction cups that can pick individual items to be exciting. But even here, there was always something missing for my needs. Either not enough lifting power, no partial picking from the container, or simply so slow that you’d need five robots to replace one employee.

At the end of the first day, my feet were really hurting. We had made it through about half of the fair and had walked over 10km. And I still had 190km of motorway ahead of me. I really should have booked the hotel.

Day 2 started better; the traffic wasn’t as bad (I also left earlier) and I was on time. A presentation on innovations had piqued our interest, and then quickly lost it. It wasn’t about specific developments, but very generally about the necessity and planning of innovation projects. I felt like I was back at university.

If there were no robots for handling items, then at least there should be autonomous solutions for transporting pallets from the unloading area to the booking-in station. These were in a hall we hadn’t visited yet. This was much more exciting for me. There were several robots on offer that could pick up pallets and move them from A to B. Many were unable to do this directly from the floor. But there were also some with proper forks. Just not as autonomous as they were advertised. Most models require intensive training by the manufacturer and only travel on fixed, defined routes. An obstacle? The device stops, clueless. Changes in the warehouse layout? The manufacturer has to come on-site to retrain everything. That’s not what I call flexible and autonomous.

But the software hall disappointed me the most. Pictures of software, mostly just another warehouse management system among many, with little of interest. I had hoped for item recognition with cameras combined with machine learning or AI. In vain. Here, too, the products shown were either conservative or far from being ready for production use.

Somewhat disappointed and exhausted, it was time for lunch. No chance at the fair. Every food stand had queues like at Europa-Park. Who could have expected so many visitors? It’s not like the tickets are sold in advance. Oh, wait, they are. So for us, it was McDonald’s for the second day in a row, and for me, the realization: I don’t like McDonald’s anymore.

Conclusion

An Interesting Overview of the Market

Even though my text has been rather negative so far, the two days at LogiMAT were interesting. You get a good overview of the market and current developments. You see what’s possible, and also, what’s not yet possible.

However, it also shows that companies are less innovative than I had expected. Autonomous vehicles that follow fixed routes on taped lines are not high-tech to me. A reasonably talented YouTuber can build that with a Raspberry Pi these days. Sure, without the integration and scalability, but still not a leap into the future.

For my projects, it’s still helpful to know what solutions are currently available. And which ones aren’t. So I know the framework within which I can operate.

I can definitely recommend a visit to LogiMAT to anyone working in logistics. For an overview, one day is sufficient if you’re focused and don’t have any appointments. But as soon as you have one or two longer stops, one day becomes tight.