ORNL Utility Survey

/0 Comments/in , /by

Subject: UFTO Note — ORNL Utility Survey
Date: Wed, 09 Jul 1997 11:49:03 -0700
From: Ed Beardsworth

The Engineering Technology Division at Oak Ridge sent out a survey to a list of utilities recently, with a cover letter from Ed Fox, the division director. Some of you have already seen it, and I have the names of who it was sent to in your companies if you want them.

The stated purpose is to increase utility awareness of ORNL R&D, to obtain feedback on the relevance to utilities of that work, and on priorities for additional R&D. Also, they want stronger ties to utilities and potential users of ORNL work…a goal certainly congruent with UFTO!

Ed Fox can be reached at 423-574-0355, ecf@ornl.gov

The survey is being administered by:
Scott R. Penfield, Jr., Technology Insights
P.O. Box 205, Signal Mountain, TN 37377-0205
423-842-8078 Tel 500-346-9500 Alt. Tel
423-886-3225 FAX penfield@ti-sd.com

The text of the survey is attached below, and includes a number of technologies previously reported by UFTO.
—
————————————————————–
| ** UFTO ** Edward Beardsworth ** Consultant
| 951 Lincoln Ave. tel 415-328-5670
| Palo Alto CA 94301-3041 fax 415-328-5675
| http://www.ufto.com edbeards@ufto.com
————————————————————–

ORNL SURVEY OF UTILITIES

Part I: Current ORNL R&D Programs

The following topics briefly summarize ongoing R&D programs at ORNL. For each, please indicate whether you were previously aware of the work and provide a rating (on a scale of 1-10) as to how relevant the work is to your current needs. (If you were not previously aware of an individual R&D item, please base your rating on the summary.) If you wish further information on any topic, please so indicate.
WWW ADDRESS FOR THE ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY DIVISION
HOME PAGE: http://www.ornl.gov/etd/etdfctsh.htm

—————————–
1.0 PLANT/EQUIPMENT DIAGNOSTICS AND CONDITION MONITORING
The following technologies provide for monitoring the condition of machinery in service, on-line diagnostics for evaluating faults, plus R&D into effects of machinery aging. The objective is to relate appropriate maintenance or replacement actions to the actual condition of the machine.

1.1 Electrical Signature Analysis (ESA)
Data characterizing electrical currents and voltage waveforms to/from motors, generators and similar devices are obtained and recorded, using non-invasive probes. ORNL-developed analysis techniques are applied to the resulting data, leading to powerful insights into the health and performance of the electrical machine and the system and/or facility in which it is installed. A typical utility application involved the evaluation of transient loads in motor operated valves at a Carolina Power & Light nuclear plant. More recent developments include improved data analysis techniques and methods for the integrated monitoring of complete systems.

Status: Early forms of ESA are being used in a range of industrial applications, including utility power plants. Licensees include B&W/Framatome and ITT Movats/Westinghouse and Public Service Electric and Gas of New Jersey. More recent developments are available for licensing and/or joint development.

Previously aware of this research: _ Yes _ No
Request additional information: _
Relevance to current needs (please circle):
(Low) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (High)

1.2 Non-Intrusive Voltage and Power Factor Monitoring
ORNL is evaluating a series of new technologies for obtaining high voltage (>480V) waveforms and power factors, without contact and without the need for potential transformers. These technologies have significant potential in power quality monitoring applications.

Status: These technologies are in an early stage of development and evaluation. They are available for licensing and/or joint development.

1.3 Check Valve Monitoring
The function and health of check valves are evaluated, using a combination of magnetic and vibration sensors. Lack of adequate function and deterioration can be detected, without the need for removal or disassembly of the component.

Status: This technology has been licensed to several service vendors, including B&W/Fram- atome and ITT Movats/Westinghouse. Consolidated Edison is also a licensee.

1.4 Improved Eddy-Current Material Defect Detection
ORNL is developing a new technology for improved defect detection and imaging in non-magnetic materials. In laboratory tests, cracks in a perforated aluminum plate, located behind a 60 mil solid aluminum plate, are clearly imaged. In addition to aircraft inspection (the initial target for this innovation), steam generator tube inspection is a potential application of this new eddy-current based technique.

Status: This technology is in the early stages of development.

1.5 Effects of Aging in Machinery
ORNL has developed a vast database and associated reports on the effects of machinery aging. Information and expertise are available on the general principles of machinery aging as well as the specific effects of aging on individual components, machines and systems.

Status: The database was developed in support of NRC investigations into the effects of aging on nuclear power stations. It is available in the form of reports at the present time. Work is ongoing to develop methodologies to support condition based maintenance decisions.

—————————–
2.0 PLANT INSTRUMENTATION & CONTROL
ORNL’s capability for conceiving, prototyping and implementing advanced instrumentation and control (I&C) capabilities extends from the I&C support of experimental work throughout the laboratory and from supplying innovative sensor and control technologies to federal agencies, utilities and private industry. The following are examples of related utility applications.

2.1 Plug-in Compatible Instrumentation and Control Upgrades
ORNL has developed and prototyped a concept in which application-specific integrated circuits (ASIC’s) mounted on a motherboard replace corresponding analog modules originally installed in utility power plants. The simplicity of the individual ASIC’s reduces concern with common mode failures, a current issue with complex software driven systems. The resulting plug-in compatible replacement modules simplify installation and operation, because rewiring is not required and because changes to operating procedures are minimized.

Status: ORNL is supporting EPRI and the Westinghouse Owner’s Group in the advancement of this technology. A prototype safety system module has been fabricated and is currently undergoing testing.

2.2 Accurate On-Line Measurement of High Temperatures
ORNL has developed a technique for continuous in-situ calibration of resistance temperature detectors. The goal is to maintain an accuracy of 0.5% (°F) under actual operating conditions and to extend the range of useful measurement from about 900°K (1200°F), at present, to 1300°K (1800°F). A typical application would be measuring steam temperatures for on-line determination of plant efficiency.

Status: The technology has been developed to a pre-commercial form and feasibility has been established through demonstrations at the Diablo Canyon and Connecticut Yankee nuclear stations, as well as tests in the Kingston Steam Plant (EPRI I&C Facility).

2.3 Solid-State Hydrogen Sensor
ORNL and EPRI are developing a small, solid state hydrogen sensor for nuclear plant containment monitoring. Other utility applications might be in conjunction with hydrogen cooled generators, battery banks, etc.

Status: The sensor is patented and available for licensing. Tests have been conducted in air, nitrogen, argon, steam and transformer oil and for H2 concentrations of 0.5% to 30%.

2.4 Automated Measurement of EMI/RFI
ORNL has developed and used an instrument to monitor and record ambient electromagnetic interference/radio frequency interference (EMI/RFI) in power stations. The system is capable of non-obtrusive, unattended operation over several-month periods.

Status: Available now for licensing or use.

—————————–
3.0 NON-LINEAR TIME-SERIES ANALYSES
The catchy but misleading name “Chaos” has often been associated with a family of advanced non-linear time-series analysis techniques. In reality, these methods allow a degree of order to be
discerned for what otherwise appear to be a series of highly random events. Examples of practical utility applications are provided below.

3.1 Improved Combustion Control
Non-linear analysis can be used to analyze and optimize fossil power plant burners, fluidized bed combustion systems and, potentially, gas turbines for higher efficiency and improved NOx control.
Status: An early application was the characterization of fluid bed combustion systems, where an objective was to avoid unstable operating regimes (e.g., chugging). More recently, the potential of this technology for improving fossil burner control is being developed through a project involving EPRI, ORNL and B&W.

3.2 Failure Prediction
There is a further potential for applying non-linear analysis to advanced machinery diagnostics/ failure prediction (e.g., in turbine-generators). Bearings, in particular, appear to exhibit chaotic behavior in advance of certain failure modes.

Status: Non-linear analysis is being evaluated in conjunction with diagnostics and condition monitoring techniques, such as electrical signature analysis (see above). Westinghouse has expressed an interest in bearing diagnostics.

—————————–
4.0 TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION

ORNL is developing technologies for automating the control of transmission systems, increasing system capacity and providing an improved understanding of the underlying costs of ancillary services.

4.1 Real-Time System Control
ORNL, DOE and EPRI are developing the technology for real-time monitoring and control of widely distributed transmission systems. This compares with current practice in which responses to disturbances are predetermined on the basis of previously completed analyses. The real-time system will employ an array of monitors, with outputs time-synchronized by satellite clocks. Artificial intelligence techniques will be used to recognize and appropriately respond to disturbances.

Status: This work is in the early stages of development.

4.2 High Capacity Transmission
ORNL has participated in R&D for increasing the capacity of high-voltage transmission lines. Included was testing of a high phase order line, which has the potential for transmitting up to three times the power of a standard single circuit AC line.

Status: The potential of this technology has been confirmed through the operation of a 1.5 mile test section, sponsored by EPRI, DOE, NYSERDA, NYSEG and ESEERCO. Given the current transition to independent operation of transmission capacity, no follow-on work has yet been identified.

4.3 Cost of Ancillary Services
One challenge in establishing the pricing basis for open access to electrical transmission systems is placing a value on ancillary services (scheduling and dispatch, load following, system protection, VARs, energy imbalance, and real power losses). Initial estimates developed by ORNL range from $1.5-$6.8/MWh, with an average of $4.1/MWh. By contrast, the FERC pro-forma schedule includes an allocation of $1/MWh for ancillary services.

Status: An initial report, based on an analysis of 12 utilities is now available. Follow-on work is recommended to establish a consistent framework for estimates.

5.0 POWER ELECTRONICS
This area includes research in power electronics, which is finding broad applicability in power quality, energy conversion and storage, adjustable speed drives, transmission, links, etc.

5.1 Resonant Snubber Inverter
The Resonant Snubber Inverter (RSI) is a power electronics innovation that employs a special resonant circuit to reduce losses during switching. Tests at ORNL have shown efficiency to be improved by 15 percentage points at half speed and 5 percentage points at rated speed. Elimination of associated voltage spikes reduces voltage stresses (leading to higher reliability), and essentially eliminates electromagnetic interference. Potential uses include power conversion for energy storage devices (e.g., flywheels, ultracapacitors, etc.) and adjustable speed drives.

Status: The RSI is currently being developed at ORNL for a number of specific applications.. The technology is available for joint development and/or licensing.

5.2 Multilevel Converter
The Multilevel Converter is another power electronics innovation that allows synthesis of high voltage waveforms, using capacitors as voltage dividers. Potential applications include DC links, static VAR generators and high voltage variable speed drives, as well as power conversion from renewable energy sources (such as photovoltaic arrays) or battery-fed systems. The ORNL technology eliminates the need for transformers, which are a significant source of cost and energy losses in conventional systems. A problem with capacitor based systems is the tendency to develop an imbalance between voltage levels when real power is being transferred (this is not a problem in static VAR generator applications). The unique contribution of ORNL is a new approach for maintaining the desired voltage balance across the capacitors, when real power is being transferred.

Status: An 11-level (21-level phase to phase) multilevel converter, employing insulated gate bipolar transistors (IGBTs) is working in the laboratory at ORNL. This system is prototypical of a 60kV multilevel converter using gate turn-off thyristors (GTOs).

—————————–
6.0 INFORMATION MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
This area comprises R&D on information management and operations analysis methodologies which support the management decision process.

6.1 Integrated Operational and Economic Models
ORNL has developed an extensive capability for operations and economic modeling techniques that support the management decision process. Alternative courses of action can be evaluated on a probabilistic basis, taking into account both the likelihood of various outcomes and their technical and economic consequences. Typical examples in which utilities might apply such techniques include evaluating the business potential of a new energy storage device, or determining the likelihood that a nuclear facility would be profitable over its remaining lifetime.

Status: These modeling techniques have been extensively applied. A recent example is a probabilistic assessment (for DOE) of the economic viability of each of the nuclear plants currently operating in the U.S.

6.2 Real-Time Power Scheduling
ORNL developed a “Power Advisor” to guide the operations of the Paducah, KY uranium enrichment plant in response to real-time electric power pricing inputs. The model provides a basis for deciding whether blocks of power at a given price should be accepted or whether it is more cost effective to curtail plant operations. The model includes consideration of the technical limitations of the facility, as well as the economic impact on the product bottom line.

Status: In place and operating at Paducah, KY.

6.3 Performance Indicators
The performance indicator methodology developed by ORNL is an operations management process for filtering and organizing the vast amounts of data generated in a complex management environment. The key objective is to focus management attention on activities that have the most influence on organizational goals, such as economic return, operational efficiency, safety, etc. The process starts with the selection of key performance indicators. These individual measures of performance are subjected to additional analysis and weighting, resulting in composite indices representative of overall performance, analogous to a stock market index. Feedback mechanisms are included to optimize information flow and to respond to organizational changes over time.

Status: Currently employed by DOE for managing the DOE occupational safety and health program.

—————————–
7.0 UTILITY/CUSTOMER TECHNICAL SUPPORT
The following research areas would potentially support both utility and utility customer technology support needs.

7.1 Electric Machinery Analysis
ORNL has developed an improved motor equivalent circuit model to more accurately estimate the operating characteristics of electric motors. Input to this computer-based tool can start from name plate data and increased accuracy can be obtained with supplemental calibration measurements (e.g, speed and current). Once calibrated for a given machine, the method can be used to accurately predict loads, currents, efficiency, etc. As a result, the need for additional monitoring instrumentation may be reduced in some cases.

Status: The model is complete and available through the DOE Motor Challenge Program

7.2 High Temperature Thermography
Techniques developed by ORNL offer improved capability for accurately measuring high temperatures. Using emissions from thermographic phosphors, temperatures can be measured over a wide range (cryogenic to 1600°C [2900°F]) and without the need for physical contact.

Status: This technology has been applied to several industrial processes. Initial applications have included the first stage vanes of turbine engine gas generators and the surface of steel exiting a molten zinc bath in a galvanizing process.

7.3 Electric Machinery Test Facility
ORNL has developed a flexible and well instrumented Electric Machinery Test Facility. The current capacity is 100 hp, but is now being expanded to 700 hp. During testing, loads can be varied over a wide range. Input voltage and currents can also be varied to simulate various operating demands, as well as a range of power quality situations (e.g., voltage imbalances, harmonics, etc.)

Status: The Electric Machinery Test Facility is a National User Facility available for use by private sector entities for testing and qualification of motors, generators and related components at nominal cost.

7.4 Pump Test Facility
ORNL recently commissioned a Pump Test Facility, with a design capacity of 100 hp. The configuration of the facility is highly flexible in terms of flow configuration, installed components and provisions for instrumentation and monitoring.

Status: The Pump Test Facility is a National User Facility available for use by private sector entities for testing and qualification of pumps and related components at nominal cost.

7.5 Buildings Technology Center
ORNL is actively involved in developing technologies to improve the efficiency of buildings and installed equipment. The Buildings Technology Center (BTC), established at ORNL in 1994, includes a large scale climate simulator and a hot box for testing components (walls, windows, etc.), as well as facilities for testing equipment (e.g., heating and air conditioning).

Status: The BTC is a National User Facility available for use by private sector entities for testing and qualification of building components at nominal cost.

Part II: Priorities for Additional R&D
Please indicate below up to three areas of R&D that would most help your organization to meet its objectives.
1.
2.
3.

Part III: Contact for Liaison with ORNL

Please identify one or two individuals that could serve as a liaison with ORNL managers. We will keep them informed of new innovations at ORNL and request their input regarding utility R&D priorities in the future.
1. Name Title Organization
Address
Tel FAX E-Mail

2. Name Title Organization
Address
Tel FAX E-Mail

Next Reliability TF Meeting July 23-4

/0 Comments/in , /by

Subject: UFTO Note — Next Reliability TF Meeting July 23-4
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 1997 13:34:53 -0700
From: Ed Beardsworth

Here is an advance copy of the draft agenda for the next meeting of the DOE Task Force.

————————————————————–
| ** UFTO ** Edward Beardsworth ** Consultant
| 951 Lincoln Ave. tel 415-328-5670
| Palo Alto CA 94301-3041 fax 415-328-5675
| http://www.ufto.com edbeards@ufto.com
————————————————————–

[6450-01-P] DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Secretary of Energy Advisory Board; Notice of Open Meeting
AGENCY: Department of Energy
SUMMARY: Consistent with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Public Law 92-463, 86 Stat. 770), notice is hereby given of the following advisory committee meeting:
Name: Secretary of Energy Advisory Board – Electric System Reliability Task Force

DATES AND TIMES: Wednesday, July 23, 1997, 1:00 PM – 5:00 PM and Thursday, July 24, 1997, 8:30 AM – 11:30 AM
ADDRESS: Bechtel Corporation, Hoteling Suites, Second Floor, 50 Beale Street, San Francisco, California
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard C. Burrow, Secretary of Energy Advisory Board (AB-1), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-1709 or (202) 586-6279 (fax).

Background
The electric power industry is in the midst of a complex transition to competition, which will induce many far-reaching changes in the structure of the industry and the institutions which regulate it. This transition raises many reliability issues, as new entities emerge in the power markets and as generation becomes less integrated with transmission.

Purpose of the Task Force
The purpose of the Electric System Reliability Task Force is to provide advice and recommendations to the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board regarding the critical institutional, technical, and policy issues that need to be addressed in order to maintain the reliability of the nation’s bulk electric system in the context of a more competitive industry.

Tentative Agenda
Wednesday, July 23
1:00 – 1:30 PM Opening Remarks & Introductions;
Philip Sharp, ESR Task Force Chairman
1:30 – 2:45 PM Working Session: Review of the Draft
ESR Task Force Interim Report
2:45 – 3:00 PM Break
3:00 – 4:30 PM Working Session: continued
4:30 – 5:00 PM Public Comment Period
5:00 PM Adjourn

Thursday, July 24
8:30 – 8:45 AM Opening Remarks & Summary of Agreements;
Philip Sharp, ESR Task Force Chairman
8:45 – 10:00 AM Working Session: continued
10:00 – 10:15 AM Break
10:15 – 11:00 AM Discussion: Next Steps — Approach to Addressing
& Resolving the Remaining Task Force Issues
11:00 – 11:30 AM Public Comment Period
11:30 AM Adjourn

This tentative agenda is subject to change. The final agenda will be available at the meeting.

Public Participation: The Chairman of the Task Force is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will, in the Chairman’s judgment, facilitate the orderly conduct of business. During its meeting in San Francisco, California the Task Force welcomes public comment. Members of the public will be heard in the order in which they sign up at the beginning of the meeting. The Task Force will make every effort to hear the views of all interested parties. Written comments may be submitted to Skila Harris, Executive Director, Secretary of Energy Advisory Board, AB-1, US Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20585. This notice is being published less than 15 days before the date of the meeting due to programmatic issues that had to be resolved prior to publication.

Minutes: Minutes and a transcript of the meeting will be available for public review and copying approximately 30 days following the meeting at the Freedom of Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190 Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC, between 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM, Monday through Friday except Federal holidays. Information on the Electric System Reliability Task Force may also be found at the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board’s web site, located at http://vm1.hqadmin.doe.gov:80/seab/.

Issued at Washington, DC, on
Rachel M. Samuel Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer

DOE Utility Restructuring Weekly Update

/0 Comments/in , /by

Subject: UFTO Note – DOE Utility Restructuring Weekly Update
Date: Tue, 01 Jul 1997
From: Ed Beardsworth <edbeards@ufto.com>

CC: Jen_Bergman@Energetics.com, DIANE.PIRKEY@HQ.DOE.GOV

————————————————————–
| ** UFTO ** Edward Beardsworth ** Consultant
| 951 Lincoln Ave. tel 415-328-5670
| Palo Alto CA 94301-3041 fax 415-328-5675
| http://www.ufto.com edbeards@ufto.com
————————————————————–

Attached below is last week’s issue of an email summary of current events in utility industry restructuring, prepared by Energetics, Inc. for the DOE Office of Utility Technologies. The items are summaries of stories found on the internet.

Begun a year ago for DOE’s internal use, it is sent on an ad-hoc basis to an email list of interested parties. If you want to be added to this list, simply send an email note with your request to:

Jennifer Bergman, Energetics, Jen_Bergman@Energetics.com

DOE is considering the possibility of posting this material in a website, however no decision has been reached. I have a few recent back issues on file.
————————————————–

June 27, 1997

Utility Restructuring Weekly Update

This weekly information has been compiled by Energetics, Inc. for the U.S. Department of Energy. Questions or comments should be directed to either Jennifer Bergman, Energetics, Jen_Bergman@Energetics.com, or Diane Pirkey, U.S. Department of Energy, DIANE.PIRKEY@ HQ.DOE.GOV.

National/Federal:

Last week, at the Eighth Annual Energy Efficiency Forum, policy makers debated various utility deregulation issues. Senator Russell Feingold (D-WI) and Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge argued that deregulation is best left . . . . .
.
. (5 pages of text)
.
.

WEBSITES:
NewsPage: http://www.newspage.com
EnergyOnline: http://www.energyonline.com
Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee:
http://www.senate.gov/~energy/competitv.htm

Condition Based Maint. Technology Workshop

/0 Comments/in , /by

Subject: UFTO Note – Condition Based Maint. Technology Workshop
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997
From: Ed Beardsworth

————————————————————–
| ** UFTO ** Edward Beardsworth ** Consultant
| 951 Lincoln Ave. tel 415-328-5670
| Palo Alto CA 94301-3041 fax 415-328-5675
| http://www.ufto.com edbeards@ufto.com
————————————————————–

Condition Based Maint.Technology Workshop
July 29 & 30, 1997
Oak Ridge National Labs
—————————————–
(The notice attached below went out late, so the June 1 deadline is not in effect. However, anyone interested should contact these folks ASAP.)

The Best Manuf. Practices (BMP) program is a major effort by the U.S. Navy. Here is the UFTO database entry about it, from Aug. 1995:
—————————————–
Best Manufacturing Practices (BMP)
Started by the Navy. They’ve taken survey teams into nearly 70 major companies, and prepared a highly detailed assessment of their processes, identifying any “best” practices they find. They just published a report on Sandia National Lab, so we can get another perspective about SNL. They have reports on all of the places they’ve studied, and a program of regional workshops, a free online database, and other kinds of outreach. Something for your industrial reps, or anyone involved in benchmarking or quality. I’d bet BMP would love to survey a utility.
CONTACT: 800-789-4267 http://www.bmpcoe.org

—————————————–
Condition Based Maintenance (CBM) Technology Workshop—

The Best Manufacturing Practices Center of Excellence (BMPCOE) and The Oak Ridge Centers for Manufacturing Technology (ORCMT) proudly announce their plans to hold a workshop on Condition Based Maintenance (CBM) Technology on July 29 & 30, 1997 at the renowned Oak Ridge National Laboratories. The purpose of this workshop is to attract the leading CBM experts in the United States to create a definitive CBM guidelines document outlining the state-of-the-art in CBM technology.

Suggested Topics of Discussion:

* Perceptions of maintenance
* Definition of Predictive Maintenance (PM) and CBM
* Defining the economic advantages of CBM
* Current Best Practices (Military and Industrial)
* Sensor technology and development
* Modeling, identification and prediction of faults and failures
* Signal acquisition and processing technologies
* Integration and packaging (i.e., diagnostics-on-a-chip concepts)
* Establishing objectives and milestones for this CMB effort

The CBM workshop will consist of two full days at the Oak Ridge facility and will begin with a tour of the latest CBM technology available at the Centers for Manufacturing Technology. A day and a half will then be dedicated to truly defining CBM and its applicability throughout the U.S. Industrial Base. The proceedings will be made available via the internet, video and in hard copy format. A final guidelines and application strategies document will be published within twelve months of this first workshop meeting.

Attached is a CBM Expert Profile form that could be your entry to participation in this important event. Our objectives dictate that we must request a considerable commitment from the best and brightest CBM experts available for this effort. Therefore, you must be able to:

* meet three to four additional times during the twelve following months;
* write and review abstracts for the CBM Guidelines Document, as required;
* share personal CBM knowlege and experiences with other attendees at the meetings, and electronically over the CBM web site.

In return, you can expect to:
* meet fellow nationally recognized experts in the CBM field;
* have an opportunity to network with others on the latest CBM technology;
* become recognized as a national CBM expert for your contributions to the final CBM Best Practices and Implementation Strategies Guidelines Document;
* be secure in the knowledge that you have helped to advance the capability of the U.S. Industrial Base in the area of Condition Based Maintenance.

Attendance at the CBM workshop is by invitation only, and participation will be limited to 25-30 people. Therefore, please don’t delay. Fill out the attached CBM Expert Profile form and respond immediately for consideration. You don’t want to miss an event that may well be hailed as one of the defining moments in CBM technology.

CBM WORKSHOP EXPERT PROFILE
4321 Hartwick Road, #400
College Park, MD 20740
800-789-4267 Fax 301-403-8180

Full Name:_________________________________________

Please tell us about your experience in the areas of condition based, predictive, reactive and preventive maintenance. In particular we are interested in any experience that you may have in technologies addressing the following areas:

* Sensing the condition of systems as a function of time
* Identification of precursors of component failure
* Taking action based upon the resulting information

On a separate piece of paper please outline your experience, giving number of years experience in each area and briefly outlining the various processes and applications in which you were involved.

Please fax your response to Chip Turner @ 301-403-8180, or E-mail to chip@bmpcoe.org before June 1, 1997.

Pena Speech at EEI

/0 Comments/in , /by

Subject: UFTO Note – Pena Speech at EEI
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 14:34:19 -0700
From: Ed Beardsworth <edbeards@ufto.com>

————————————————————–
| ** UFTO ** Edward Beardsworth ** Consultant
| 951 Lincoln Ave. tel 415-328-5670
| Palo Alto CA 94301-3041 fax 415-328-5675
| http://www.ufto.com edbeards@ufto.com
————————————————————–

Prepared Remarks by Federico Peña, Secretary of Energy at the Edison Electric Institute
Philadelphia, PA
Monday, June 9, 1997

This speech, which outlines a number of issues pertaining to restructuring, was just posted to the DOE web site. I have a full copy if anyone would prefer an email copy.

http://www.doe.gov/html/doe/whatsnew/sr970609.html

Business Models

/0 Comments/in , /by

Subject: UFTO Paper — Business Models
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997
From: Ed Beardsworth <edbeards@ufto.com>

This is a new version of an earlier paper. I submitted it to PUF, but they want specific examples. At our meeting in SF next week (details to follow), perhaps we can use these ideas as a springboard for discussion.

In the meantime, comments welcome. (Anyone want to co-author the next attempt to get it into PUF?)

Ed B

————————————————————–
| ** UFTO ** Edward Beardsworth ** Consultant
| 951 Lincoln Ave. tel 415-328-5670
| Palo Alto CA 94301-3041 fax 415-328-5675
| http://www.ufto.com edbeards@ufto.com
————————————————————–

Business Models for New Technology in Utilities (draft)

Edward Beardsworth, Consultant

5/97

Many electric utilities are struggling with how best to conceptualize and implement a “technology strategy” as the industry undergoes major change. How can resources put into R&D and new technology ventures be “driven to the bottom line”?

Too often, utilities suffer from an “action gap” between learning about a new technology and taking steps to do something with it. This gap arises out of lack of resources (time, money and people); lack of clear direction from upper management; risk avoidance (rather than risk management) culture; and perhaps most symptomatic, lack of a framework and process for deciding what’s worth doing and how to do it. There should be an explicit decision process for choosing R&D projects, with criteria that everyone understands. As part of that process, a clear delineation of business models could go a long way towards helping know what to look and plan for.

Company Direction and Strategy
To know what projects to do, and what kinds of information and opportunities to seek, one has to know “what business you’re in”, and thereby what kinds of projects are interesting. (A word of caution — too often the absence of an explicit statement of corporate strategic direction is used as an excuse not to do anything. Strategic planning is a never ending iterative process, and new technology endeavors play two roles. They provide input to the strategy, and they help implement it. The advice, therefore, is to go ahead and “do something” and see where it takes you, while at the same time you work on formalizing and refining the plan.)

It’s important to keep in mind that any new venture is a learning process. At each stage, you learn a little bit more, and decide how and whether to continue. At the outset, you simply won’t know how things will work out. This is often a major barrier to pursuit of new technology in utilities, which tend to want guarantees for each endeavor, rather than taking a portfolio risk approach.

Business Models
Most companies have at least an implicit feel for what kinds of technologies to look for, and how to start getting involved. But how is a new opportunity to be handled? What are the ways it could be organized and funded? What are the desired outcomes? How will anyone know when or if it succeeded?

It may help for companies to examine past and present experience–case studies of projects, deals and undertakings that illustrate the “business models” they’ve already used. (Note that a model may not have been explicitly formulated, nonetheless it’s always there implicitly.)

The business model is a brief generic “story” about how an initiative might develop over time, from idea and inception, to full implementation, to the “bottom line.” How will it contribute to the company’s objectives? How will it be funded? How will it be positioned and managed? And most important, what are the points when decisions will be made to kill it or continue it? (This is at the heart of risk management, as distinct from risk avoidance.) Any proposal needs to tell a “story”, and life will be easier if there’s a shared understanding of what kinds of stories make sense for the company.

Here is a set of generic “business models” for the different kinds of situations that arise. Of course, any particular project is likely to involve aspects of more than one of these models.

“#2 Pencil” — This is the conservative extreme. The company has no strategic interest in the technology, except to buy a mature product from a supplier, and therefore no role in the development beyond telling the vendor about preferences. This category is too easy to use as an excuse for inaction, for there are many gray areas where incremental changes and improvements could lead to benefits and business opportunities.

“First User” — The company needs something that isn’t on the market. Works on ad-hoc basis with developers to push it along, helping to shape it to the company’s specific needs. Recognizes that the company won’t be the only user/buyer. In fact, the product won’t ever be available to the company unless there’s a larger market for a vendor to sell to. Counts on being the first to use it, and first to get it fully implemented on the system, gaining benefits and a time advantage over other utilities. May or may not get royalties or other financial participation.

“Market Competitor” — This one is new to utilities. Companies in competitive industries build competitive advantage for themselves by developing or obtaining proprietary technology that will not become commercially available to other companies. Gone will be the assumption that a vendor will be able to sell it to you, too. Instead, the “energy company” that controls it will use it to take away market share.

“In House Inventor” — Develop an invention by an employee in the company, taking it as far along as it makes sense to do, then put it into one of the other business models. Only a very few utilities have programs to explicitly encourage employee invention.

“Joint Venture” / “Piece of the Action” — A more formal version of “First User”. Structured business deal with another company or companies. Countless variations, i.e. marketing and distribution rights, royalty payments, equity participation, etc. as the quid pro quo for whatever resources the company puts in (anything from time and materials, to use of a facility, to intellectual property, to cash).

“New Line of Business” — A group in the company to develop a product or service, generating a new and different source of revenue.

“Spin Off” — Start up a new company to do whatever it is–manufacturer, deliver a service, etc. On the regulated or unregulated side.

“Seat at the Table” — for more advanced concepts that could wreak major change, it pays to pay for an inside look, and to be able to monitor progress, to know when and if to get more deeply involved. Equity investment or development cofunding is often a good way to “choose a horse and place a bet”.

“Good Citizen/Nice Guy” — Supporting economic development and industrial (and commercial) competitiveness in the sales territory, by finding and brokering solutions to the needs and problems of local firms. Enlightened self-interest, and sometimes can result in a business opportunity, and often but not always increased sales (e.g. electrotechnology).

Other models for involvement in new technology might include:
– Using them to transform the way we do business, e.g. best practices, TQM, RCM, life-cycle management, etc. The tools and techniques for these new approaches are “technologies” in their own right, and often involve the use of technology (e.g. information systems, sensors, analysis software, etc.)
– Contributing to the global common good, e.g. climate. A few utilities have gone public with significant commitments to the environment, and technology fixes are a going to play a major part in the implementation of those strategies.
– Watchful waiting– a less vigorous version of “seat at the table”, involves actively keeping an eye on the literature, attending conferences, etc. Joining a user’s or industry group or advisory committee is often a cost effective way to keep informed. (Designate subject-area experts?)

There is an extensive body of knowledge for managing portfolios of new technology ventures. Usually, measures of “way-out-ness” (risk) and potential impact (reward) are central to such analyses, but that doesn’t show how to position a project in business terms, so it can move forward after the development phase is completed. It’s an issue that must be addressed at the start.

The taxonomy of Business Models offered here may serve as a tool that can help utilities explore how they want to handle various kinds of projects, perhaps as part of their overall corporate game plan for new technology.

Space Solar Power, A Fresh Look

/0 Comments/in , /by

Subject: UFTO Note – Space Solar Power, A Fresh Look
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 21:58:39 -0700
From: Ed Beardsworth <edbeards@ufto.com>

————————————————————–
| ** UFTO ** Edward Beardsworth ** Consultant
| 951 Lincoln Ave. tel 415-328-5670
| Palo Alto CA 94301-3041 fax 415-328-5675
| http://www.ufto.com edbeards@ufto.com
————————————————————–

Space Solar Power, A Fresh Look

In 1968, Peter Glaser of AD Little put forth a concept to put solar power stations in earth orbit and beam power to ground stations using microwaves. After extensive study in the 1970’s by NASA and DOE, the idea was found infeasible for many reasons, especially the costs to put payloads into orbit and the a design approach that involved massive amounts of equipment and people in space, i.e. many large geostationary space stations. Even if the approach could could have claimed overall cost effectiveness, the huge upfront capital investment (with no incremental revenues along the way) would have prevented it from going forward.

NASA has just completed a new review entitled “Space Solar Power, A Fresh Look at the Feasibility of Generating Solar Power in Space for Use on Earth”. April 4, 1997. SAIC-97/1005. The NASA/HQ Advanced Concepts Office directed the 18 month study, which assessed newer concepts that might have the potential to enable affordable production of energy in space for use on Earth.

The NASA team characterizes the work as *very preliminary*, but is optimistic that technologies and systems approaches have emerged in the last 20 years that make the potential for space solar power far more feasible than traditionally believed, perhaps as soon as 10-15 years from now.

**They want involvement and participation by the utility industry in the next phases.**

For more information, or to request a copy of the report, contact:

John Mankins, Advanced Projects Office, NASA Headquarters.
202-358-4659 jmankins@hq.nasa.gov

A good summary also appears in the May 1997 issue of Aerospace America, published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA). http://www.aiaa.org. (I have a copy.)

————————————————-
(The following summary was prepared by UFTO, based on material contained in the report)

“Space Solar Power, A Fresh Look at the Feasibility of Generating Solar Power in Space for Use on Earth”. April 4, 1997. SAIC-97/1005.

With the original SSP from the 70’s, as a “reference concept”, the new study looks at new concepts, architectures, and techologies that have been identified or developed since that time. These include modular designs, advanced materials, automated assembly and deployment (in orbit), and new orbital configurations. Most interesting are ideas that produce incremental returns for incremental investment (e.g., small self-deploying launch packages).

Six concept architectures were defined and studied in detail,, based on many ideas identified through exhaustive brainstorming and elicitation of ideas at “Interchange Meetings”

The study’s findings include:
1. Markets — the global need for power will increase dramatically, with advances in the developing countries, and more and more concerns about global climate. SPP could play a significant role.

2. System Architecture — New concepts involving modularity, non-geo stationary configurations, small launch vehicles make a major difference in the cost outlook, and in possible approaches to financing.

3. System Cost — High efficiency PV arrays achieving 500 watts or more per kg could be sufficient for economic viability, but low cost space transportation (less than $200 per pound to low earth orbit) is the most important factor.

4. Public Acceptance — The study is refreshingly forthright in discussing the challenges that safety claims will face, though they are convinced that health and safety risks are negligble.

5. Other Applications — The technology will have a better chance if it can also be applied in other applications. In particular, a lot of work was done under SDI to develop concepts for beaming power to satellites and aircraft. NASA could use the same techniques to power space craft.

***One especially intriguing idea is to use satellites to relay power from place to place on the earth, much as telecommunications are handled. The implications would be truly staggering, with power deliverable from anywhere to anywhere.***

6. Critical Technologies
— Space Transportation: Needto have modular launch packages of 20,000 kg or less, to be able to use general purpose launch systems currently under development for a wide array of projected space industries (NASA Reusable Launch Vehicle and Advanced Space Transportation Program). Payload costs must approach $100-200 per pound.
— Wireless Power Transmission: a new generation of solid state devices might enable the use of a higher microwave frequency. Existing klystron technology may be initially cheaper but would not offer improved packaging and beam steering capabilities. Trade offs need to be carefully examined.
— Energy Storage: Storage (on board or on Earth) was not considered in this study, but might be needed to have the ability to deliver uninterrupted quality power.
— Solar Conversion: Terrestial PV has made dramatic gains in the last 20 years, and their space counterparts must be developed (radiation hardening in particular).
— Guidance, Navigation, and Control: Advanced concepts proposed in the study are potentially less cumbersome than conventional (gyro-thruster) techniques.
— On Board Power Transmission and Thermal control: The ability to use high voltage high temperature superconductors is critical (to move power from the PV array to the RF beam system).
— Telecommunications/Data Processing/Autonomy/Command and Control: Systems must have a high degree of operational autonomy. Staffing levels must be low. New data system architectures may be required, involving a high degree of distributed computing power.
— Structure: Very light weight tension-stabilized structures will be used, instead of the trusses and braces of the original space station approach.

——-Upcoming Events——————

Space Power Systems for Humanity Conference,
August 24-28, 1997, Montreal

Space Technology & Applications International Forum, (Staif-98)
January 25-29, 1998, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

EPRI-DOE-EPA Combined Utility Air Pollutant Control Symposium

/0 Comments/in , /by

Subject: UFTO Note — EPRI-DOE-EPA Combined Utility Air Pollutant Control Symposium
Date: Tue, 03 Jun 1997
From: Ed Beardsworth

————————————————————–
| ** UFTO ** Edward Beardsworth ** Consultant
| 951 Lincoln Ave. tel 415-328-5670
| Palo Alto CA 94301-3041 fax 415-328-5675
| http://www.ufto.com edbeards@ufto.com
————————————————————–

EPRI-DOE-EPA Combined Utility Air Pollutant Control Symposium
August 25-29, 1997
Washington Hilton & Towers, Washington, DC.

Background
This first-ever “Mega” Symposium will combine the SO 2 Control Symposium, the Joint Symposium on Stationary Combustion NO x Control, and the Particulate/Air Toxins Control Symposium into a single, week-long event. Cosponsored by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), with assistance from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), this multi-pollutant conference will continue the tradition of its predecessor meetings of showcasing the latest developments and operational experience with state-of-the-art methods for reducing NO x , SO 2 , and particulate/air toxics emissions from fossil-fueled boilers. Sessions will also be devoted to Continuous Emissions Monitors.

You can get the details on the Internet at
http://www.epa.gov/ORD/conferences/airsymp.pdf.
(This is an Acrobat Reader file,which if you don’t have can be downloaded at
http://www.adobe.com/prodindex/acrobat/readstep.html.)
A text version is reproduced below.

Registration fee for the full symposium is $600 ($650 after 8/3).
For a single topic is $350 ($400 after 8/3).
For information call Lori Adams, EPRI Sr. Conference Coordinator,
415-855-8763