PROACTIVE BATTERY MAINTENANCE

BEFORE PROACTIVE BATTERY MAINTENANCE

AFTER PROACTIVE BATTERY MAINTENANCE

Phase 1 (1995 - 1997)

)

Performed a complete UPS and Battery

System audit. 105 battery related sites were
identified.
Reviewed each battery site installation and
corrected faults as required.
Audited and corrected all UPS and Battery
electrical installation drawings.
Formulated safe maintenance bypass and
isolation procedures for each site.
Received battery PM training from a local
battery vendor and with a nationally
recognized battery test equipment company.

Phase 1 (1995 - 1997)

)

Entered the equipment data into our

electronic Maintenance Management
System (MMS).
Formulated battery PM guidelines using
O.E.M. and IEEE guidelines as a basis.
Embedded the custom PM guidelines into
our MMS.
The MMS populates our crew worklist and
we schedule PM and testing activities.
Purchased and employed AlberCorp
CellCorders with software.

Phase 2 (1997 - 2001)

)

Purchased and employed an AlberCorp

BCT-2000 load tester with software.
Used the Ohmic Tester prior to the load
tests and saw there was correlation between
high internal resistance and low capacity.
Went to other Chevron sites and assisted in
starting a battery maintenance process.
Worked with the Chevron Electrical
Reliability Group to form a standard
Maintenance Practice for UPS and Battery
systems
Set standards on UPS/Battery system design
and equipment types / manufacturers used.

Phase 2 (1997 - 2002)

)

)
)
)

Purchased and installed 22 AlberCorp

remote battery monitors.
The monitors sit on the Chevron Intranet.
We access them through any licensed PC.
We are currently analyzing data to improve
our failure detection activities.
The goal is to refine our method of using
internal resistance values as an indicator of
failure probability.
Used high resistance values to trigger a load
test before scheduled frequency.

BECOMING RELIABILITY FOCUSED

)

Get the basics, such as equipment data bases,

Automated work lists, drawings and
specifications up to par.
Train the Technicians to effectively work on
the equipment.
Change your paradigm about Preventive
Maintenance!
Go from My job is to repair to My job is to
avert failure.
Employ technologies that can detect failure
modes at the beginning of a failure event.

Proactive testing at Chevron Hawaii Refinery

PROACTIVE TESTING
On Table 1 I have listed the test data from battery systems we tested at our Hawaii
Refinery. I will explain each of the fields and how we gathered the data for
analysis. The yellow shaded cells had failed.

S ite
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3

C ell
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

F lo at
V o lts
1 3 .6 2 4
1 3 .7 5 6
1 3 .7 4 4
1 3 .3 6
1 3 .4 1 6
1 3 .4 6 4
1 3 .4 6 4
1 3 .5 3 6
1 3 .4 4 8
1 3 .1 8 4
1 3 .7
1 3 .9 0 4
1 3 .9
1 3 .7 5 2
1 3 .4 1 6
1 2 .2 3 2
1 3 .4
1 3 .3 8 8
1 3 .8 4 8
1 3 .8 1 2

S tart
V o lts
1 2 .3 5 9
1 2 .3 3 2
1 2 .3 1 8
1 2 .3
1 2 .2 9 8
1 2 .2 4 4
1 2 .5 8 7
1 2 .6 5 2
1 2 .5 3 6
1 2 .6 6
1 2 .1 3 5
1 2 .1 9 1
1 2 .1 9 3
1 2 .6 5 6
1 2 .5 6 2
1 1 .5 7 6
1 2 .5 3 5
1 2 .6 0 3
1 2 .5 1 1
1 2 .5 0 8

E nd
V o lts
1 1 .3 3 9
1 1 .0 2
1 1 .0 3 4
1 1 .3 0 2
1 1 .2 6 3
1 1 .2 7 7
< 1 0 .5
1 1 .3
1 1 .3 4
< 1 0 .5
1 1 .6 4
< 1 0 .5
1 1 .3 5 8
1 1 .6 7 6
1 1 .6 8 3
< 1 0 .5
1 1 .6 9 4
1 1 .7 2
1 1 .6 4 5
1 1 .6 8 8

A ge
In t R es. (yrs)
4453
7
4964
7
4964
7
4745
7
4453
7
4672
7
5620
7
4891
7
4599
7
45854
7
4453
7
6277
7
5912
7
4659
7
4672
7
30691
7
4599
7
4516
7
4672
7
4891
7

A vg R es.o f
T em p . p assed cells
70
4 7 1 7 .6
70
4 7 1 7 .6
70
4 7 1 7 .6
70
4 7 1 7 .6
70
4 7 1 7 .6
70
4 7 1 7 .6
70
4 7 1 7 .6
70
4 7 1 7 .6
70
4 7 1 7 .6
70
4 7 1 7 .6
70
4 7 9 6 .7
70
4 7 9 6 .7
70
4 7 9 6 .7
70
4 7 9 6 .7
70
4 7 9 6 .7
70
4 7 9 6 .7
70
4 7 9 6 .7
70
4 7 9 6 .7
70
4 7 9 6 .7
70
4 7 9 6 .7

% C ap .
> 80
> 80
> 80
> 80
> 80
> 80
73
> 80
> 80
0 .3
> 80
66
> 80
> 80
> 80
0 .1
> 80
> 80
> 80
> 80

D elta
0 .9 4 3 9 1 2 1 5 9
1 .0 5 2 2 2 9 9 4 7
1 .0 5 2 2 2 9 9 4 7
1 .0 0 5 8 0 8 0 3 8
0 .9 4 3 9 1 2 1 5 9
0 .9 9 0 3 3 4 0 6 8
1 .1 9 1 2 8 3 7 0 4
1 .0 3 6 7 5 5 9 7 8
0 .9 7 4 8 6 0 0 9 8
9 .7 1 9 7 7 2 7 6 6
0 .9 2 8 3 4 6 5 7 2
1 .3 0 8 6 0 8 0 0 1
1 .2 3 2 5 1 4 0 2
0 .9 7 1 2 9 2 7 6 4
0 .9 7 4 0 0 2 9 6
6 .3 9 8 3 5 7 2 0 4
0 .9 5 8 7 8 4 1 6 4
0 .9 4 1 4 8 0 6 0 1
0 .9 7 4 0 0 2 9 6
1 .0 1 9 6 5 9 3 4 9

PROACTIVE TESTING
On Table 2 I have listed the failed batteries. The top three batteries failed
catastrophically only seconds after the load bank was turned on. In the DELTA
column you can see that all of the failed batteries were above the average As
Found resistance baseline of the battery. Failure values ranged from 5% to over a
thousand percent above the As Found baseline average..

F loat
Site C ell V olts
4
9
13.08
2
10 13.184
3
6
12.232
3
2
13.904
5
6
13.244
2
7
13.464
5
7
13.248
4
2
13.348
5
1
13.272
4
5
13.012

Start
V olts
11.065
12.66
11.576
12.191
12.1
12.587
12.69
12.929
12.86
11.909

E nd
V olts
< 10.5
< 10.5
< 10.5
< 10.5
< 10.5
< 10.5
< 10.5
< 10.5
< 10.5
< 10.5

A ge
Int R es. (yrs)
65000 7
45854 7
30691 7
6277 7
5682 2
5620 7
5119 2
5065 7
5065 2
5056 7

A vg R es.of
T em p. passed cells
70
4677
70
4717.6
70
4796.7
70
4796.7
64
4803
70
4717.6
64
4803
70
4677
64
4803
70
4677

% C ap.
0.1
0.3
0.1
66
41
73
53
61.5
71
25.3

D elta of actual
R es.to passed avg.
13.89779773
9.719772766
6.398357204
1.308608001
1.183010618
1.191283704
1.065792213
1.082959162
1.05454924
1.081034851

PROACTIVE TESTING
On Table 3 I have listed batteries higher than the average As Found resistance
values. Below is the portion of the table that shows the results within the failed
battery group. There were 4 batteries that had higher than normal resistance
values but still passed.
F loat
Site C ell V olts
4
9
13.08
2
10
13.184
3
6
12.232
3
2
13.904
3
3
13.9
2
7
13.464
5
6
13.244
1
6
13.38
4
2
13.348
4
5
13.012
1
5
13.652
6
6
13.54
5
7
13.248
5
1
13.272

Start
V olts
11.065
12.66
11.576
12.191
12.193
12.587
12.1
12.37
12.929
11.909
12.72
12.83
12.69
12.86

E nd
V olts
< 10.5
< 10.5
< 10.5
< 10.5
11.358
< 10.5
< 10.5
10.52
< 10.5
< 10.5
11.01
11.15
< 10.5
< 10.5

Internal
R es.
65000
45854
30691
6277
5912
5620
5682
4981
5065
5056
4924
4924
5119
5065

A ge
(years)
7
7
7
7
7
7
2
7
7
7
7
5
2
2

A vg. R es. of
T em p. passed cells
70
4677
70
4717.6
70
4796.7
70
4796.7
70
4796.7
70
4717.6
64
4803
70
4577.8
70
4677
70
4677
70
4577.8
64
4620
64
4803
64
4803

% C ap.
0.1
0.3
0.1
66
> 80
73
41
> 80
61.5
25.3
> 80
> 80
53
71

D elta
13.89779773
9.719772766
6.398357204
1.308608001
1.23251402
1.191283704
1.183010618
1.088077242
1.082959162
1.081034851
1.075625846
1.065800866
1.065792213
1.05454924

Conclusions regarding the testing

)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Only batteries above the average of the As Found baseline failed.

There were no battery failures with resistance values below baseline.
From 0% to 5% above baseline there were no failures.
From 5% to 9% above baseline there was a 57% failure rate.
From 9% to 23% there was a 66% failure rate.
Above 23% there was a 100% failure rate.
The higher the internal resistance was above the average baseline the
greater the increase in failure rate %.
Monitoring Internal resistance values within a system seems to be a more
accurate way of detecting weak cells than using a generic battery baseline
resistance value.

Proactive Battery Maintenance Conclusions

)

)
)

By establishing a Proactive Battery Maintenance Process

you can detect a failure early enough to avert a Failure
Event.
In this proactive posture failures can be detected and
managed offline.
Equipment Reliability equals Equipment Availability.
Equipment Availability is vital to safe and successful
business.
The end

WE ARE ON THE CUTTING EDGE AT

CHEVRON EL SEGUNDO REFINERY !