Finding the right architecture for power protection in hospitals

by Emerson Network Power on 3/30/16 8:42 AM

Finding-the-right-architecture-for-power-protection-in-hospitals.jpg

If you’ve read the post about distributed and centralized bypass architectures, you’re probably evaluating the right architecture for a new datacenter, or maybe you’re re-designing the one you’re currently using. The decision is not easy and it will often impact the operation and performance of the power protection system in your datacenter or the connected loads. Unfortunately, in technology there is rarely a simple “yes – no” or black – white” answer, and this holds true for power distribution as well. Yet, in technology and science, there’s a “grey area”, in which the ‘right’ decision is strongly influenced by the specific context and case, and is dependent on many parameters. Luckily, there are paths to find the best solution as a trade-off between the multiple parameters involved.

If you’re considering the use of an Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS), it means you are worried about the possibility of utility power failures and the associated downtime problems that follow. Given this, the selection of the appropriate configuration or architecture for power distribution is one of the first topics of discussion, and the use of a centralized, parallel, distributed, redundant, hot-standby or other configurations available, becomes an important part of it.  While there are numerous architectures to choose from, there are also several internal variables that will require your attention. Fortunately, a few elementary decisions will make the selection easier. Even if not all parameters can be matched, it’s important to at least begin the conversation and explore trade-offs and other considerations. Without trying to be exhaustive (which would require a dedicated white paper), you should consider at least the following:

a) Cost: more complex architectures will increase both your initial investment and your cost, not only at the initial design stage but during the entire life of your power system, especially with regards to efficiency. In other words, we could say that complex architectures will increase your TCO.

b) Availability and reliability: how reliable should your power system be? And what about single or multiple points of failure? Would you need any type of redundancy?

c) Plans for growth: Do you expect your power demand or capacity to increase in the future? Will you re-configure your load distribution?

d) Related to the previous point, but highlighted separately because of its importance for UPS is modularity. Do you need a modular solution for future expansion or redundancy?

e) Bypass architecture; an important point as explained in a separate post.

f) Need for monitoring of the complete UPS power system, also considering any shutdown of loads, and in combination with other systems like thermal management.

g) Service and maintenance: Once the initial investment in power protection has been made, please do not forget to keep it at optimum conditions. This maintenance at regular intervals has to be achieved through service contracts, check for spares availability if multiple types of UPS are used, capability to isolate a subset, or use of remote diagnostic and preventive monitoring services such as Emerson Network Power’s LIFE for maximum availability.

h) Profile of the loads; especially if you’re considering a few large loads or many “small” loads (perhaps distributed across several buildings or in a wide area such as a wind farm), autonomy required for each load, peak power demands, etc.

In addition, the decision is not only related to the internal requirements of the power systems, but it is also linked to the type of load or application to be protected, as requirements and decisions may vary depending on the application being industrial, education, government, banking, healthcare or data center. For example, an application where the loads are servers which manage printers in a bank, compared to a hospital where the power protection systems may manage several surgery rooms, are by no means the same. In fact, in the case of bank printers, in the worst case they can be shut down, while in the case of the surgery rooms, their shutdown is not an option unless for scheduled maintenance. This is because a non-scheduled shutdown of the medical equipment in a surgery room would have a serious impact on the people inside that room for a surgical operation.

Let’s take the hospital example further and consider a particular case. In order to do a quick exercise and simplify, we can use a scenario with several surgery rooms as a reference (for example 5 to 20 rooms, each one with a 5-10 kVA UPS for individual protection), plus a small data center (for example with 30 kVA power consumption) and finally, other critical installations in the facility (let’s assume 300 kVA for offices, laboratories, elevators, etc.).

In this scenario, initially, the architectures that could be envisaged as a first step are:

1. Fully distributed, and for simplicity’s sake, a hospital with 10 surgery rooms is assumed here with 10 kVA for each surgery room plus a centralized UPS (>330 kVA) for the remaining loads.

2. A fully redundant solution based on a centralized UPS protecting all the loads (this UPS being in a parallel redundant configuration). The power for any of these UPS would be 300 kVA + 30 kVA + (10 x 10 kVA).

3. An intermediate solution, referred to as “redundant hot standby”, so that this redundant UPS is sized only for the surgery rooms (10 surgery rooms x 10 kVA), and with a bypass line connected to the large centralized UPS (>430 kVA). This solution shows the advantage of a smaller capacity required for this redundant hot standby UPS.

Emerson Network Power has done several simulations based on typical scenarios as the one described above for a hospital, and considered the factors for optimization a), b), e) and h). Considering the parameters for optimization, the energy savings (power consumption and heat dissipation), initial investment (CAPEX) as well as the maintenance costs (OPEX), the solution based on the “redundant hot standby” seems to be the most convenient.
Moreover, the difference between architectures 1 and 3 is larger as far as quantity of surgery rooms or period for cost simulation (from 1 year up to 10 years).
This points us in the right direction in selecting the best distribution architecture for this application in hospitals and using these parameters for optimization. Clearly, it can be enriched using the other parameters shown in the sections above, or adapted to the particular case (quantity of surgery rooms, autonomy for each load, power demanded by CPD room, reliability, …) that could lead to a different choice, but globally, this redundant hot standby has resulted in a good trade-off.

As said at the beginning, there is no magic solution for the optimum selection, but we have sought to explore several guidelines and check points that will help drive you towards the best solution for your case. Of course, any additional variables and the reader’s experience are welcome and can only serve to enrich the discussion.

Read More

Topics: Data Center, PUE, energy, UPS, Efficiency, Thermal Management, DCIM, Uptime, sustainability, energy efficiency, preventative maintenance, power system, healthcare, hospitals

Data Center Performance Benchmarks: Cost and Causes of Data Center Outages- Webcast

by Marissa Donatone on 1/21/16 1:20 PM

Join Emerson Network Power for a webcast featuring Dr. Larry Ponemon and Peter Panfil who will review the data collected over the three Ponemon Cost of Data Center Outages Reports published since 2010—including the 2016 Report. They will also uncover the factors contributing to the steady increase in downtime costs, explore trends in the causes of downtime, and explore prevention strategies. 

By tuning in to this webcast, you’ll be better able to:

  • Make sound financial decisions about your data center infrastructure
  • Identify and eliminate vulnerabilities that lead directly to outages

Speakers:

Larry_Ponemon.jpg Peter_A._Panfil.jpg

Larry Ponemon
Chairman and Founder,
Ponemon Institute

Peter A. Panfil
Vice President of Global Power, 
Emerson Network Power

Register TodayTime: 11:00 AM EST
Date: Wednesday, February 3, 2016    

dc_perf.png 

Read More

Topics: Data Center, data center energy, DVL, Uptime

Top 4 Reasons to use DVL Service

by Marissa Donatone on 7/22/15 10:27 AM

DVL_Service_infographic
Read More

Topics: Data Center, energy, service, HVAC, Uptime, Power and Cooling, 7x24

Choosing Between VSDs and EC Fans. Making the right investment when upgrading fan technology.

by Emerson Network Power on 7/15/15 3:23 PM

Blog_VSD

Fans that move air and pressurize the data center’s raised floor are significant components of cooling system energy use. After mechanical cooling, fans are the next largest energy consumer on computer room air condition (CRAC) units. One way many data center managers reduce energy usage and control their costs is by investing in variable speed fan technology. Such improvements can save fan energy consumption by as much as 76 percent.

With the different options on the market, it may not be clear which technology is best. Today, variable speed drives (VSDs)—also referred to as variable frequency drives or VFDs—and electrically commutated (EC) fansare two of the most effective fan improvement technologies available. The advantages of both options are outlined below to help data center managers determine which fan technology is best for achieving energy efficiency goals.

How do different fan technologies work? 
In general, variable speed fan technologies save energy by enabling cooling systems to adjust fan speed to meet the changing demand, which allows them to operate more efficiently. While cooling units are typically sized for peak demand, peak demand conditions are rare in most applications. VSDs and EC fans more effectively match airflow output with load requirements, adjusting speeds based on changing needs. This prevents overcooling and generates significant energy savings.

With VSDs, drives are added to the fixed speed motors that propel the centrifugal fans traditionally used in precision cooling units. The drives enable fan speed to be adjusted based on operating conditions, reducing fan speed and power draw as load decreases. Energy consumption changes dramatically as fan speed is decreased or increased due to the fan laws. For this reason, a 20 percent reduction in fan speed provides nearly 50 percent savings in fan power consumption.

EC fans are direct drive fans that are integrated into the cooling unit by replacing the centrifugal fans and motor assemblies. They are inherently more efficient than traditional centrifugal fans because of their unique design, which uses a brushless EC motor in a backward curved motorized impeller. EC fans achieve speed control by varying the DC voltage delivered to the fan. Independent testing of EC fan energy consumption versus VSDs found that EC fans mounted inside the cooling unit created an 18 percent savings. With new units, EC fans can be located under the floor, further increasing the savings.

How do VSDs and EC fans compare?

Energy Savings
One of the main differences between VSDs and EC fans is that VSDs save energy when the fan speed can be operated below full speed. VSDs do not reduce energy consumption when the airflow demands require the fans to operate at or near peak load. Conversely, EC fans typically require less energy even when the same quantity of air is flowing. This allows them to still save energy when the cooling unit is at full load. EC fans also distribute air more evenly under the floor, resulting in more balanced air distribution. Another benefit of direct-drive EC fans is the elimination of belt losses seen with centrifugal blowers. Ultimately, EC fans are the more efficient fan technology.

Cooling Unit Type
VSDs are particularly well-suited for larger systems with ducted upflow cooling units that require higher static pressures, while EC fans are better suited for downflow units.

Maintenance 
In terms of maintenance, EC fans offer an advantage. EC fans also reduce maintenance because they have no fan belts that wear and their integrated motors virtually eliminate fan dust.

Installation 
Both VSDs and EC fans can be installed on existing cooling units or specified in new units. When installing on existing units, factory-grade installation is a must.

Payback
In many cases, the choice between VSDs and EC fans comes down to payback. If rapid payback is a priority, then VSDs are likely the better choice. These devices can offer payback in fewer than 10 months when operated at 75 percent.

However, EC fans will deliver greater, long-term energy savings and a better return on investment (ROI). While EC fans can cost up to 50 percent more than VSDs, they generate greater energy savings and reduce overall maintenance costs, ultimately resulting in the lowest total cost of ownership.

Have the experts weigh in. 
Service professionals can be an asset in helping choose the best fan technology for a data center. Service professionals can calculate the ROI from both options, and they can recommend the best fan technologies for specific equipment.

Service professionals trained in optimizing precision cooling system performance can also ensure factory-grade installations, complete set point adjustment to meet room requirements, and properly maintain equipment, helping businesses achieve maximum cooling unit efficiency today and in the future.

Whether you ultimately decide to go with VSDs or EC fans, either way, you’ll be rewarded with a greener data center, more efficient cooling, and significant energy savings that translate into a better bottom line.


Original Emerson Network Power Blog Post

Read More

Topics: data center energy, PUE, Battery, Efficiency, Thermal Management, DCIM, Uptime, the green grid, AHRI, availability, education, KVM, Data Center efficiency, preventative maintenance

Battery Monitoring with Remote Services: Right Information + Right Expertise= Right Protection

by Emerson Network Power on 7/1/15 11:20 AM

monitoring
Written By: Milind Paranjape, Emerson Network Power

IT managers and facility managers make promises to their businesses and their customers to maintain critical system availability. One key way they can keep their word and deliver on those promises is by properly monitoring and maintaining the batteries that back up the UPS. After all, a UPS is only as reliable as the batteries that support it, and all too often, battery failure is the cause of unplanned, costly downtime in data centers.

Monitoring alone may not be enough. 
Maintaining and continuously monitoring critical battery parameters to detect early signs of battery degradation can go a long way toward reducing battery failure and thus preventing downtime. However, evidence suggests that stationary battery monitoring and data collection might not be enough.

In our 2007 white paper, “The Effect of Regular, Skilled Preventive Maintenance and Remote Monitoring on Critical Power System Reliability,” Emerson Network Power demonstrated that while data centers with on-site battery monitoring systems had a reduced rate of outages due to bad batteries, outages did still happen. Such outages occur when customers do not properly monitor the system, or when they do not know how to properly analyze the data provided by the monitor. Simply put, having the right information, and knowing what to do with it, are two very different things.

Remote monitoring ensures added protection. 
Monitoring that enables remote services is a solution to address these issues. Remote services allow a third party service partner—preferably a partner with full knowledge of critical infrastructure and battery maintenance best practices—to monitor data collected by battery monitoring technology and properly maintain the system based on the data analysis.

The latest technologies, as seen with Albér battery monitoring solutions, monitor parameters such as cell voltage, overall string voltage, current, and temperature. The technology also enables automatic periodic tests of the battery’s internal resistance. Such monitoring and testing verifies the operating integrity of the battery and identifies potential problems early on.

When this technology is supplemented with remote services, skilled battery experts support battery monitoring efforts around the clock. When the monitoring technology detects issues, the remote service technicians receive alerts. They can then put into action a pre-defined escalation plan to address the alarm. As a result, the appropriate steps are taken to correct minor battery problems before they evolve into major system issues, thus protecting other batteries in the string, preventing major system damage, and improving overall system availability.

As an added benefit, remote service providers can analyze the comprehensive data collected by a battery monitoring system and provide data center managers with essential information for making battery maintenance and replacement decisions.

Outside help can improve performance within. 
battery monitoring solution that enables remote services allows data center managers to augment their staffs with around-the-clock, expert support for maintaining battery health and preventing costly downtime. This allows IT and facility staff to focus on more strategic data center infrastructure management initiatives that support core business objectives. Ultimately, battery monitoring with remote services allows IT and facility managers to do their jobs more effectively, dramatically reduce downtime risks, and ensure system availability for the businesses and the customers they serve.

Read More

Topics: data center infrastructure, Data Center, 7x24 exchange, Battery, Uptime, monitoring, the green grid, availability, batteries

Subscribe to Our Blog

Recent Posts

Posts by Tag

see all