Why Offshore is Struggling With Structuring Technical Systems
Offshore wind projects depend on collaboration across multiple companies and engineering disciplines, and often several countries. However, the industry currently lacks an important element: a shared and unambiguous way of describing systems, a common language. Every supplier, EPC, OEM, and operator brings their own naming conventions and internal structuring guides. Even departments inside the same organization often tag the same system differently. This is not a minor issue, as it is one of the most common sources of error in offshore wind projects.
Miscommunication leads to multiple common problems often seen in big projects, such as mismatched or lost interfaces, unclear responsibilities, and missed requirements. This results in data that cannot be trusted. When multiple stakeholders describe the same system differently, the operator inherits a system that is inconsistent from day one. Clarity is important because offshore projects do not consist of a single system. Multiple systems must be integrated: turbines, foundations, array cables, offshore substations, control and protection systems, and marine operations. When each of these is described differently by its respective supplier, the project ends with structures that do not fit together. Therefore, they all need to be described using the same principles for the project to become coherent.
Managing offshore projects is getting more complex because of the rise of digitalization in recent years. Digital twins, SCADA platforms, and asset management systems need a clear structure and consistent naming conventions to work effectively. When every supplier provides data using different naming conventions and with different boundaries, it becomes challenging to integrate everything. This can lead to mistakes that may not support successful long-term operations.
Image by <a href="https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/3d-white-wind-mill-power-turbine-sky-background_40344419.htm">Image by upklyak on Freepik</a>
For years, different organizations have tried to establish a consistent way to name and structure systems. The ISO/IEC 81346 series was created to provide exactly that: a common, discipline-independent foundation for system classification and structuring. It introduced clear principles and a systematic approach that could be applied across industries.Later, RDS-PP was introduced with the intention of using parts of ISO/IEC 81346 to bring more order to power system documentation. However, only some of the ISO/IEC 81346 classification rules were standardized, while others were left open for interpretation. This allowed companies to create their own codes and adapt the system to their internal habits, making the structure inconsistent from one organization to another.
Because of these limitations, a more complete solution was needed. This led to the development of ISO/IEC 81346 10:2022 (RDS PS), which extends the ISO/IEC 81346 framework specifically for power systems. Unlike RDS-PP, it applies the full structuring logic of 81346 and provides standardized, unambiguous classification codes. By replacing vendor-specific and company-specific naming with a common language, RDS PS finally delivers the clarity and consistency that earlier attempts could not achieve.
RDS PS gives digital twins a robust structural framework to rely on. The reference designations remain consistent throughout the entire lifecycle, they are machine-readable, and they follow the same logic from the early lifecycle stages through procurement, construction, commissioning, and later operation. Instead of relying on digital tools to correct inconsistencies later on, RDS‑PS shapes the data from the beginning in a way that keeps it coherent across the entire lifecycle.
A common language is the only way to ensure that systems built by different companies in different countries can operate as one. RDS PS provides that common language by removing the ambiguity that previously depended on individual interpretation and by replacing it with a clear method of classification. This gives offshore projects a dependable basis for building digital twins and long-term operational models that remain accurate, scalable, and maintainable as the system evolves.
Offshore wind projects depend on collaboration across multiple companies and engineering disciplines, and often several countries. However, the industry currently lacks an important element: a shared and unambiguous way of describing systems, a common language. Every supplier, EPC, OEM, and operator brings their own naming conventions and internal structuring guides. Even departments inside the same organization often tag the same system differently. This is not a minor issue, as it is one of the most common sources of error in offshore wind projects.
Miscommunication leads to multiple common problems often seen in big projects, such as mismatched or lost interfaces, unclear responsibilities, and missed requirements. This results in data that cannot be trusted. When multiple stakeholders describe the same system differently, the operator inherits a system that is inconsistent from day one. Clarity is important because offshore projects do not consist of a single system. Multiple systems must be integrated: turbines, foundations, array cables, offshore substations, control and protection systems, and marine operations. When each of these is described differently by its respective supplier, the project ends with structures that do not fit together. Therefore, they all need to be described using the same principles for the project to become coherent.
Managing offshore projects is getting more complex because of the rise of digitalization in recent years. Digital twins, SCADA platforms, and asset management systems need a clear structure and consistent naming conventions to work effectively. When every supplier provides data using different naming conventions and with different boundaries, it becomes challenging to integrate everything. This can lead to mistakes that may not support successful long-term operations.
For years, different organizations have tried to establish a consistent way to name and structure systems. The ISO/IEC 81346 series was created to provide exactly that: a common, discipline-independent foundation for system classification and structuring. It introduced clear principles and a systematic approach that could be applied across industries.
Later, RDS-PP was introduced with the intention of using parts of ISO/IEC 81346 to bring more order to power system documentation. However, only some of the ISO/IEC 81346 classification rules were standardized, while others were left open for interpretation. This allowed companies to create their own codes and adapt the system to their internal habits, making the structure inconsistent from one organization to another.
Because of these limitations, a more complete solution was needed. This led to the development of ISO/IEC 81346 10:2022 (RDS PS), which extends the ISO/IEC 81346 framework specifically for power systems. Unlike RDS-PP, it applies the full structuring logic of 81346 and provides standardized, unambiguous classification codes. By replacing vendor-specific and company-specific naming with a common language, RDS PS finally delivers the clarity and consistency that earlier attempts could not achieve.
RDS PS gives digital twins a robust structural framework to rely on. The reference designations remain consistent throughout the entire lifecycle, they are machine-readable, and they follow the same logic from the early lifecycle stages through procurement, construction, commissioning, and later operation. Instead of relying on digital tools to correct inconsistencies later on, RDS‑PS shapes the data from the beginning in a way that keeps it coherent across the entire lifecycle.
A common language is the only way to ensure that systems built by different companies in different countries can operate as one. RDS PS provides that common language by removing the ambiguity that previously depended on individual interpretation and by replacing it with a clear method of classification. This gives offshore projects a dependable basis for building digital twins and long-term operational models that remain accurate, scalable, and maintainable as the system evolves.