RetailCold storage Q-SmartDeployed
Case study · Iqbal Foods

The fourteen hours
between two
readings.

A completed Q-Smart deployment: wireless temperature sensors installed across the site's cooler and freezer equipment, paired with our cloud monitoring platform. The problem it solved was not the accuracy of the manual temperature log. It was everything that happened between entries.

Rendering of a retail food store's cooler, freezer and dairy display line with wireless temperature sensors marked on each unit
Where the sensors go. Cooler, freezer and display-case equipment across the sales floor and the back of house.
The situation

A blind spot
every retail
operator has.

Iqbal Foods is a retail food operator. Before this project, temperature readings for the site's cooler and freezer units were taken by hand, by staff, for compliance purposes. The readings themselves were fine.

What the process could not do was see overnight, or catch a unit drifting between checks. Overcooling that quietly costs money every night; an intermittent failure that recovers before the morning round; a door seal degrading over weeks. None of it appears in a log of discrete readings. It surfaces as a compliance gap or a spoiled-product loss, which is to say after it has already cost something.

This is not an Iqbal Foods problem. Any retail or cold-chain operator running manual temperature logging carries the same gap, and most of them have never seen what is in it.

What we deployed

Sensors, a floor
plan, and a
threshold.

Wireless temperature sensors across the coolers, freezers and display cases, each mapped to its position on the site's own floor plan so a reading has a location rather than a device ID. Data lands continuously on the Q-Smart platform, with thresholds set per zone and alarms routed to a person rather than into a log.

The hardware carries a fifteen-year battery, which matters more than it sounds. The usual failure mode of a sensor programme is not the sensors — it is that eighteen months in, a third of them are flat, the data has holes in it, and nobody trusts the dashboard any more.

01 · Site assessment
A walk of the site against the floor plan, establishing which equipment mattered, what the existing controls already reported, and where a sensor would earn its place.
02 · Sensor deployment
Wireless units placed and commissioned across cooler, freezer and display-case zones.
03 · Platform integration
Devices mapped onto the floor plan in Q-Smart, so the operator reads locations rather than identifiers.
04 · Data analytics
Per-zone thresholds and alarms configured. The first weeks are where a site learns what its own normal actually looks like — and usually where the first surprise turns up.
05 · Ongoing monitoring
Continuous visibility with the compliance record generated as a byproduct rather than as a task somebody has to remember.
Reported outcome

What the operator
reports since
deployment.

20%
Energy
15%
Greenhouse gas emissions
20%
Cost
How to read those three numbers

They are the operator's own post-deployment reporting. They are not IPMVP-verified savings: there is no stated measurement boundary, no fitted baseline and no confidence interval behind them, so they indicate a direction rather than underwrite a business case.

We are stating that plainly because the rest of this site holds a different standard. Where we publish measured savings on audit and optimization work, the method and the uncertainty are published with them — see why we adjust the baseline, not the results. A monitoring deployment establishes the instrumentation that would make a properly verified measurement possible; on this site that verification has not been run.

The change that is not in dispute is the operational one. Compliance temperature records are now generated continuously rather than collected by hand, the overnight window is no longer blind, and an equipment problem reaches somebody while it is still a problem rather than after it has become a loss.

The platform

What the site
looks like now.

Every deployed sensor is mapped onto the store's floor plan, and live device data is surfaced through the platform's Insights view. Both are shown below as they appear for this deployment.

Q-Smart floor plan of the Iqbal Foods store, with temperature sensor markers on the dairy, meat and chicken coolers, the storage freezer, the produce cooler, the display cases and the bunkers
Sensor layout. Zone-level placement across coolers, freezers, display cases and bunkers, on the store's own floor plan. Grey markers are sensors reporting no current reading.
Q-Smart Insights dashboard showing live temperature trend charts for the meat, produce and dairy coolers over a date range
Live temperature monitoring. Continuous trend per unit, which is what makes an overnight excursion visible at all — a manual log records the two moments either side of it and nothing in between.
Wireless temperature sensor mounted inside a dairy cooler
Dairy cooler. Sensor in place.
Wireless temperature sensor mounted in a meat display case
Meat display. Sensor in place.
Wireless temperature sensor mounted in a second meat display case
Meat display 2. Sensor in place.
Wireless temperature sensor mounted on a refrigerated shelf unit
Shelf unit. Sensor in place.
Diagram of the Q-Smart data path: wireless sensors to a site gateway, to the cloud platform, to the operator's dashboard and alerts
How the data gets out. Sensor to site gateway to platform to the person who has to do something about it. The last step is the one that matters — a reading nobody is told about is the same as no reading.

Hardware is unobtrusive and battery-powered, so installation needed no cabling, no electrical work and no interruption to trading.

One capability of six

Cold storage is where
Q-Smart started.

Cold storage monitoring is one of six capabilities under Q-Smart, alongside space occupancy, energy optimization, water leak detection, environmental monitoring and critical equipment monitoring — deployed across office, multi-residential, retail, industrial and hospitality buildings.

Next step

Thirty minutes, with the engineer who would run the work.

No cost and no obligation. Bring twelve months of utility bills if you have them — that alone is usually enough to say whether a building has a capital problem or a controls problem.