Plant hierarchy
Installation, system, string or turbine, unit. This is what lets you reason at the group level instead of unit by unit across thousands.
Energy and renewables
The assets are far away, and the goal is that they don't stop
In generation, every hour of downtime is production that doesn't get sold and never comes back. And the team that has to prevent it is spread across installations kilometers apart.
Who it's for
For owners and operators of photovoltaic plants, wind farms, biomass plants, small hydro plants and substations, and for the O&M companies that service them. The common trait is having repeated, dispersed assets with an availability target that someone is measuring.
What makes maintenance hard in generation
It's not the complexity of the equipment. It's the distance and the repetition.
- Thousands of identical units spread across distant installations.
- A trip costs half a day, so every visit has to pay off.
- Downtime isn't measured in technician-hours, it's measured in energy not generated.
- Maintenance is often carried out by a third party, and the owner needs to see it.
- Manufacturer warranty terms require proof that maintenance was actually performed.
What it solves
Well-managed repetition and work grouped by visit.
Preventive maintenance by family
The plan is defined once for the model, and every identical unit inherits it. Without that, maintaining thousands of assets isn't viable.
Campaigns and routes
Grouping everything due at an installation into a single visit, and ordering visits by route. That's where the real savings are.
Work without coverage
A plant often has no signal. The app saves the work on the device and syncs once the connection comes back.
Proof for the warranty
The manufacturer requires proof that maintenance was performed. Per-unit history with completed checklists is that proof.
Availability and reliability
MTBF, MTTR and downtime broken down by installation and by equipment model, to know what actually fails and where.
Repetition is both the problem and the solution
A photovoltaic plant can have tens of thousands of modules, hundreds of inverters and a dozen different models. Managing that unit by unit is impossible, which is why most operations end up maintaining at the installation level instead of the asset level: the detail gets lost exactly where the value was. The way out is inheritance by model and family: the plan, the inspection checklist and the documentation are defined once per type, and every unit inherits them. From there, registering a unit just means identifying it and locating it, and comparing the behavior of two models from the same manufacturer stops being a project and becomes a report.
Shall we look at it with your way of working?
Leave your details and we will get in touch to see whether we fit. No commitment, no lock-in period.
When someone else does the maintenance
In generation it's common for the asset owner and the maintenance provider to be different companies, with an O&M contract in between and written availability commitments. That turns the record into a contractual matter: the operator needs to prove what they did, and the owner needs to be able to check it without relying on a monthly PDF report. With the maintenance provider working inside the system and the owner having their own access, both sides look at the same data. And when the contract changes hands, the history stays where it belongs.
Installations with nobody around
A large share of generation and distribution assets share one trait that shapes everything else: nobody is there. Nobody hears a strange noise, nobody smells something overheating, nobody gives a heads-up before the failure shows itself. That shifts the weight of maintenance to two places. Toward the scheduled routine, because the visit is the only chance to see the real condition, and every one of them needs to count: a properly done checklist with recorded measurements is worth three visual inspection visits. And toward the history, because when a visit is expensive and infrequent, deciding when to go back is a decision with money behind it, and it can only be made well by knowing what was found on previous visits.
The work that can't be improvised
At electrical installations above a certain voltage, at sites with restricted access, or at locations with specific safety requirements, an intervention doesn't start when the technician arrives: it starts days earlier, with contractor coordination, permits, staff qualifications and sometimes a lockout procedure. All of that is information that has to be available beforehand, in the place where the job gets prepared, not just in the head of whoever is organizing it. When each person's qualification documents, site permits and client requirements hang off the asset and the job itself, you avoid the most expensive scenario of all: the trip that ends without being able to get in.
Frequently asked questions
How are staff permits and qualifications managed?
As documentation with a validity period tied to each person, with an alert before it expires. That's what avoids the most expensive scenario at this kind of installation: the trip that ends without being able to get in because someone's qualification had lapsed.
Does it work if installations are maintained by an outside company?
Yes, and that's where it adds the most value if the system belongs to the owner rather than the contractor. The history of what's been done at each installation is what lets you manage the asset over a ten-year horizon, and it's exactly what the incoming company needs the day the contract changes hands.
Can a plant with thousands of units be managed?
Yes, as long as you take advantage of inheritance: the preventive plan, the checklist and the documentation are defined by model or family and inherited by every unit of that type. Registering an asset becomes just identifying and locating it.
Does it work without coverage in the field?
Yes. The technician app saves the work on the device itself and syncs it once the connection is restored, which is the normal scenario at a plant.
Can the owner see what the maintenance provider is doing?
Yes, through their own access, scoped to their installations. Both sides look at the same data instead of arguing over a monthly report.
Does it work for proving maintenance to the manufacturer?
Per-unit history, with completed checklists, dates and signatures, is exactly the kind of record warranty terms require. It can be filtered and exported.
Does it integrate with the plant's monitoring system?
It doesn't replace SCADA or the monitoring portal, which is where real-time generation data lives. There's a public API and integration mechanisms to connect both worlds depending on the case.
Set it up with one of your plants
In the demo we register its hierarchy and a plan by model, to see how it scales to the rest of your installations.