Telecommunications tower assessments, delivered as a digital twin.
Towers and other communications structures are tall, repetitive, and costly to climb. We are exploring autonomous capture of the structure, mounts, and equipment, delivered as a 3D model with condition findings located on it.
What a tower assessment would look like
An outline of the workflow we are designing. The details depend on what owners tell us matters.
- 01
Scope
You tell us which structures, what triggered the request (a lease event, a structural review cycle, storm damage, an equipment change), and what you need to decide. We confirm what is feasible and agree the deliverable and price.
- 02
Capture
Autonomous drone capture of the structure, mounts, antennas, and ground equipment from the angles a reviewer needs, subject to site access and airspace constraints.
- 03
Model and analyze
Imagery and, where useful, LiDAR become a measurable 3D representation. AI-assisted analysis flags visible condition issues and equipment changes for review.
- 04
Deliver
You receive the model, findings located on it with their evidence, and the other items agreed in scope. Each assessment is a record you can compare against later visits.
The tower deliverable, in plain terms
Not every assessment includes every item. Scope is agreed before work starts.
3D model of the structure
A measurable representation you can rotate and inspect remotely.
Component-level imagery
Close views of mounts, antennas, hardware, and connections, organized by location on the tower.
Condition findings with evidence
Visible corrosion, damage, loose or missing hardware, each located on the model.
As-found equipment snapshot
What is on the structure on the day of capture, useful for lease and mount reviews.
Comparison with a prior visit
Highlights what changed. Depends on repeat assessments.
What it can and cannot tell you
Published tower standards, such as TIA-222, define structural inspection and analysis requirements. Argis Labs findings are visual and measurement-based decision support. They do not replace a structural engineer's analysis, a climbing inspection where one is required, or a determination of compliance.
What we still need to learn from owners
We are speaking with tower owners and operators in the Phoenix area. These are the questions we would most like help with.
- What triggers a tower inspection for you today, and how often does it happen?
- Who receives the findings: operations, engineering, real estate, or a landlord?
- Which components and conditions matter most, and which are rarely worth looking at?
- How do you track equipment changes between visits?
- What would make you trust a remotely produced finding enough to act on it?
Tell us about your assets.
Tell us what you manage and what you need to assess. If it isn't something we can do yet, we would still like to learn what it should take.
Start a Conversation