Ionworks

What do they actually do

Ionworks makes a cloud battery-simulation platform (Ionworks Studio) that lets engineers run physics‑based cell models and validate lab test protocols before spending cycler time. Teams upload lab data, choose or parameterize a PyBaMM‑based model, run large sweeps in the cloud, and review plots/dashboards for capacity, lifetime, and safety signals; there’s also a battery protocol simulator to debug and verify test recipes ahead of lab runs (product overview, battery protocol simulator, PyBaMM).

Today the company sells this as SaaS to battery and automotive R&D teams and supports pilots, training, and model validation to prove results against customer lab data (YC profile, product). Near‑term work focuses on making PyBaMM‑style modeling usable without coding, scaling distributed simulation/optimization in the cloud, and adding enterprise security/compliance so large companies can adopt it (product, YC profile, PyBaMM).

Who are their target customer(s)

• Battery cell R&D engineers at battery manufacturers: They spend significant time and budget on slow cycler runs and repeated physical prototypes; they need to check designs and failure modes in simulation to cut lab iterations and time (product, protocol simulator).
• Battery test engineers and lab managers: Unvalidated protocols can waste days of cycler time and disrupt schedules; they need a quick way to validate and debug protocols before reserving equipment (protocol simulator).
• Automotive pack and systems engineers: They must compare many cell variants across temperatures, loads, and lifetime scenarios but can’t test every combination physically; they need trustworthy simulations tied to lab data (YC profile, product).
• Materials scientists and cell‑formulation teams (startups and research groups): Running hundreds of material/parameter experiments in the lab is slow and costly; they need scalable simulation to narrow promising options before building cells (PyBaMM, product).
• R&D managers and procurement/security stakeholders at larger companies: They require IP protection, compliance, and supportable workflows; without enterprise controls and traceability they won’t adopt new tools (product/trust signals, YC profile).

How would they acquire their first 10, 50, and 100 customers

• First 10: Run tightly scoped paid pilots with teams already in the PyBaMM and YC network; founders lead onboarding, parameterization, and protocol‑sim checks to achieve one clear lab metric (e.g., catch a bad protocol or cut a test iteration) and produce 2 short case studies (protocol simulator, PyBaMM).
• First 50: Turn pilot wins into referenceable case studies and run targeted outbound to similar R&D and lab teams; host paid workshops and protocol‑debugging clinics to capture test engineers at scale, with a repeatable onboarding playbook and a clear success metric in each contract (product).
• First 100: Add channel partners (cycler/LIMS vendors, test labs, consultancies) and a self‑serve tier for smaller teams while maintaining enterprise sales for OEMs and large cell makers; invest in trust/compliance artifacts and integrations so customers can run large sweeps without founder involvement (product/trust signals).

What is the rough total addressable market

Top-down context:

Published estimates place battery simulation software in the low billions today and growing: Global Market Insights cites about $1.0B in 2024, and MarketsandMarkets projects ~$2.2B in 2025 rising to ~$4.2B by 2030 (GMI, MarketsandMarkets).

Bottom-up calculation:

Bottom‑up SAM view: if 800–1,500 organizations worldwide have meaningful cell R&D and test operations (cell makers, select OEM groups, specialized labs) and spend ~$50k–$150k annually on cell‑level simulation/protocol validation, that implies roughly $40M–$225M in near‑term obtainable spend for products like Ionworks.

Assumptions:

• Count of eligible buyers includes major cell manufacturers, leading OEM R&D groups, and specialized test labs globally.
• Average annual contract value spans small teams (~$50k) to enterprise deployments (~$150k+).
• Adoption is constrained by validation and procurement cycles, so near‑term SAM reflects active buyers, not the full TAM.

Who are some of their notable competitors

• Ansys: Large CAE vendor with electro‑thermal, aging, and pack‑level workflows widely used by OEMs; preferred when teams need deep integration with existing CAE toolchains.
• COMSOL: Multiphysics platform with a Battery Design Module for electrode, thermal, and pack modeling; chosen by teams building bespoke in‑house models instead of a turnkey cloud service.
• Siemens (Simcenter Battery Design Studio): Part of the Simcenter/PLM stack used by automotive customers; competes where buyers want cell/pack simulation integrated with broader Siemens toolchains.
• AVL: Automotive engineering firm offering battery simulation plus test hardware and lab services; competes by bundling software with equipment and validation workflows.
• TWAICE: Software‑first battery analytics and digital‑twin provider (electrical/thermal/aging) for development and operations; closer SaaS alternative to a modeling platform approach (simulation models).