Design and Develop a Modular Autonomous Mobile Robot (AMR) Platform for Smart Warehouse Automation
Autodesk · Robotics and Drones · Hardware
Only pick this if someone on the team genuinely models in Fusion, because it is a CAD craft competition with an explicit ban on AI-generated content — and make the mounting interface the star, since that is what proves the platform is actually universal.
What it actually is
Warehouses use mobile robots to move goods, and each task usually needs a different machine. The ask is a single universal robot chassis that accepts interchangeable attachments for different jobs, designed in Autodesk Fusion and optimised for 3D printing. This is a CAD and mechanical design competition, not a software project.
What to build
Two Fusion concept designs submitted as a public model link plus a slide deck: a universal mobile robot chassis engineered for payload capacity, structural integrity, weight reduction, modularity and maintainability with a standard mounting interface, and one interchangeable attachment mating to that interface — bin handling, pallet lifting, conveyor transfer, robotic picking or inventory scanning — with both developed using Fusion's generative design, topology optimisation, additive build and simulation tools, and the critical components 3D printed at scale for the finale.
Smallest thing that wins the room
Show the topology-optimised chassis with a simulation result proving it carries the rated payload at reduced mass, then swap two different attachments onto the same mounting interface in the Fusion assembly to demonstrate that the modularity claim is real.
How crowded this one gets
A guess, projected from the 2025 statements — the last year where both the submission counts and the winners were published.
Quieter than 99% of the 226 · #3 of 226 by expected field
Few teams are likely to go here. The best odds on the board come from statements like this.
Why: company-sponsored statements drew the smallest fields of all; hardware halves the field a software statement gets.
This is a guess, not a fact
Nobody has published 2026’s numbers yet. This is an analysed estimate from last year’s pattern, so please do not take it as the truth — check the live counter on the SIH portal before you decide anything. The range covers the middle half of likely outcomes, so one statement in two lands outside it. Entry closes at 500 ideas per statement, so no range goes past that — a statement that reaches the cap fills and shuts rather than drawing an unlimited crowd. The model reads only three things a team can see before choosing — software or hardware, the theme, and what kind of body posted it — and those explain about a quarter of the variation in last year’s field sizes (R² 0.25 on held-out statements). Trust the band more than the number, and the ordering more than either. It cannot see how good your idea is, which is the part that actually decides it.
The scores
The number is the shorthand. The line under it is the reason.
Acceptance potential
3/5The specification is unusually clear and Autodesk sponsorship carries prestige, but this is a mechanical design contest judged on CAD craft — a software-led team has no advantage here and will be measured against mechanical and design students on their own ground.
Feasibility
3/5Nothing here needs data or electronics — it is entirely CAD work in a free-for-students tool — but it requires genuine mechanical design and Fusion generative-design proficiency, and a team without a mechanical member will be badly outclassed by one that does this for coursework.
Innovation scope
4/5The attachment is explicitly open-ended and invites any warehouse automation module you can justify, so the functional concept and the mounting-interface design are genuinely yours.
Clarity
5/5The description splits the work into Part A and Part B, names the Fusion features to use, specifies the submission format as a public design link plus a five-to-seven slide deck, and states the finale requires 3D printed components.
Effort
HeavyA full chassis assembly plus a mating attachment, with generative design iterations and simulation runs on top, is substantial modelling work even though there is no code to write.
Demo-ability
MediumRendered assemblies and simulation results present well in a deck, but this is judged on design quality in a presentation rather than on anything running live.
In its favour
- Green flag: No dataset, no hardware purchase and no electronics — Fusion is free for students and the entire deliverable is a model and a deck
- Green flag: The submission format is spelled out exactly, so there is zero ambiguity about what to hand in
- Green flag: Generative design produces visually striking organic geometry that photographs extremely well in a slide deck
- Green flag: Judging is on design merit, which rewards care and iteration rather than access to resources
Against it
- Red flag: Designs must be created only in Autodesk Fusion and AI-generated content is explicitly prohibited, so the usual shortcuts are closed off and a violation is disqualifying
- Red flag: This is a mechanical engineering problem judged by design criteria, and a computer science team is competing outside its strength against students who model daily
- Red flag: The finale requires physically 3D printing scaled components under time pressure, which adds a fabrication dependency beyond the CAD work
- Red flag: Modularity is easy to claim and hard to prove — unless the mounting interface genuinely constrains both designs, the universal-platform claim collapses under questioning
What you will be writing
- Autodesk Fusion (mandatory)
- Generative Design + Topology Optimization
- Fusion Simulation (static stress, modal)
- Additive Build / design for 3D printing
- Parametric assembly with modular mounting interface
- Rendered exploded views
- Mechanical design
- Warehouse automation
- Design for additive manufacturing
Prior art to read before you start
modular robot chassis design · generative design and topology optimisation · CAD-based product concept development
Analysed by Claude Opus. Every score above is a judgment call with its reasoning attached — kindly cross-check this against the official statement on the SIH portal before your team commits to it.