Presented by Matt Phillips Rich Leonardo

 Brief History of OhioHealth’s Infrastructure Upgrades  Current State of Infrastructure  Future Plans  Case Study Dual Bus UPS Project ◦ NXL (transformer) vs. NX (transformerless) UPS ◦ Battery vs. Flywheel  Conclusion / Takeaways

Major Goals Identified: Increase Capacity Larger UPS /Cooling to match Increase Reliability Replace end-of-life equipment Limit Single Points of failure Improve Efficiencies Hot Aisle / Cold Aisle Improve Operations Move operators from Critical Space Improve Monitoring Original Site Assessment performed 2005

2006 – UPS Upgrade Set Up for future dual bus UPS design Replaced existing 300 kVA UPS with New 500 kVA UPS Installed three (3) sets of Paired PDUs & One (1) STS Unplug / Replug Added CRACs Began Hot Aisle / Cold Aisle Migration 2007 – CRAC Replacement & ATS Replacement Continued replacement of end-of-life CRACs Completed Hot Aisle / Cold Aisle Migration Replaced Utility & Emergency Switch gear and end-of-life ATSs Reworked Power Distribution beginning to segregate building from data center Multi fiscal year Phased Approach

2008 – Completed end-of-life CRAC replacement 2009 – 2x New PDUs Breaker / Pole Capacity Increased 2009 – Completed Relocation of Operators from Data Center Best Practice Improved Security of Data Center 2012 – Generator Replacement Replace end-of-life Generator Set-up for Dual Bus Multi fiscal year Phased Approach

Project Drivers Improve Reliability Battery Failure during Generator Project Eliminate Single Points of Failure Prepare for 2 nd Utility &/or Generator Dual UPS Project

UPS 1 Typ.PDU UPSATS Gen. Utility SWBD CRACATS TYP.CRAC Gen. SWBD Typ.PDU OhioHealth Existing Simplified Electrical One-line Prior to 2 nd UPS Project SPOF SPOF SPOF SPOF SPOF SPOF Single Point of Failure

 2N - PDUs  2N – UPS – 1 with Batteries, 1 with Flywheels  2N - ATSs  N+2 - Data Center CRACs ◦ All DC - CRAC receive power from 2 sources  2N UPS Room CRACs  1N Generator  1N Utility

Ex. UPS 1 Typ.PDU Ex. UPS ATS Ex. Gen. Ex. Utility SWBD New ATS Ex. Typ. CRAC Ex. Gen. SWBD Typ.PDU OhioHealth Simplified Electrical One-line After 2nd UPS Project NewUPS New ATS SWBD New CRAC ATS Typ. Ex. CRAC ATS

 Second Redundant Generator (2N)  Second Redundant Utility Source

Ex. UPS 1 Typ.PDU Ex. UPS ATS Ex. Gen. Ex Utility SWBD Ex ATS Ex. Typ. CRAC Ex. Gen. SWBD Typ.PDU OhioHealth Simplified Electrical One-line Ultimate Ex UPS - 2 Ex ATS SWBD Ex. CRAC ATS Typ. Ex. CRAC ATS New Gen. New Utility SWBD New Utility

 General Considerations ◦ Creating Dual UPS Buses ◦ Existing UPS System  500 kVA / 400 kW Liebert Series 610 with  3 VRLA Battery Cabinets includes  Alber Battery Monitoring  Quarterly Preventative Maintenance & Inspections ◦ Wet cell Battery Technology not considered  Footprint for 2 nd UPS & Energy Storage limited  2 nd Floor Installation – potential structural concerns ◦ 1N Generator back-up ◦ Recent Battery Failure during generator project

Liebert NXL UPS (w transformer) 5 00kVA/450kW Pro:  Traditional Approach  In the 225 – 600 kVA sizes ◦ Been in production since 2009 ◦ Over 975 units throughout the country Liebert NX UPS (wo transformer) 500kVA/500kW Pro:  In all sizes ◦ Been in production since 2007 ◦ Over 8,500 units are in use worldwide  Weighs less  Smaller footprint  Higher efficiency (95% at kW, 93% at 125kW)  Transistorized rectifier has high input power factor and less current distortion  Much easier load for generator to handle  No input transformer-low inrush on utility and on generator  Modular component design reduces MTTR  Supports much wider load power factor range: 0.70 leading to 0.70 lagging

Liebert NXL UPS Cons:  Weighs more than NX  Larger Footprint  Lower efficiency (92% at kW, 90% at 125kW) Liebert NX UPS Cons:  In the 225 – 600 KVA sizes ◦ Been in production since 2013 ◦ Only 80 units in US ◦ Field service has less experience than NXL ◦ New User Interface Screen to get familiar with ◦ No isolation transformer, input and output is 3W+G only

Liebert 500kVA/500kW NX UPS (without transformer) chosen as basis of design  Main Reasons: ◦ Smaller Footprint ◦ Less Weight ◦ Higher efficiency ◦ Easier on generator ◦ Lower cost ≈ 6%  Main Concern ◦ Newer US Based Model / Field Service Experience  Mitigation of concerns ◦ Creating Dual UPS Buses ◦ Local Liebert Training and support for Customer Engineers

Decision Two – Flywheel vs. VRLA

AUTOMATIC STATIC BYPASS Energy Storage RECTIFIER / CHARGER LOAD INVERTER DCSOURCE MAINTENANCE BYPASS Review of Basic UPS System

 Lead Acid Batteries Most Prevalent ◦ Sealed Valve-Regulated (VRLA) ◦ Wet Cell  Emerging Technologies ◦ Flywheels ◦ Superconducting Magnets ◦ Ultra-Capacitors ◦ Other Battery Types (NiCad, Li-Ion, NiMH, etc.) ◦ Fuel Cells ◦ Micro Turbines

Typical 5/10-Year Battery Typical 10-Year Battery Typical VRLA Batteries in a Cabinet

1.Flywheel - Heart of the system providing a 20-year life with no maintenance. 2.Master Controller - Monitors output demand and controls the various subsystems including charging (monitoring) and discharging (generating) of the flywheel. 3.Magnetic Bearing Controller - Controls the position of the flywheel rotor via a 5- axis active magnetic bearing system. 4.Bi-Directional Power Converter - Interface between the DC bus and the variable frequency, variable voltage AC generated by the flywheel. 5.Vacuum Pump - Evacuates air within the flywheel to reduce windage losses resulting in increased electrical efficiency.

 General Considerations ◦ Creating Dual UPS Buses ◦ Existing UPS System  500 kVA / 400 kW Liebert Series 610 with  3 VRLA Battery Cabinets includes  Alber Battery Monitoring  Quarterly Preventative Maintenance & Inspections ◦ Wet cell Battery Technology not considered due to  Footprint for 2 nd UPS & Energy Storage limited  2 nd Floor Installation – potential structural concerns ◦ 1N Generator back-up ◦ Recent Battery Failure during generator project

Liebert NX UPS VRLA Battery Cabinets Pro:  Stored Energy in event of loss of utility & generator is 10 minutes at full UPS Load  OhioHealth is familiar with battery cabinets  Less upfront cost versus flywheel option  Due to batteries being used at more sites and the long history of battery usage, service technicians have more experience servicing batteries  Companies providing UPSs (Liebert, APC) and companies providing batteries (C&D and EnerSys) have long, established track records Liebert NX UPS Flywheels Pro:  Diversity in energy storage reducing likelihood of recent outage re-occurring  ROI of Flywheels vs. Battery is 4 to 5 years or when the 1 st battery replacement costs occur  Flywheel life expectancy is 20 years  Flywheel maintenance is 1 time per year vs. quarterly battery inspections  Less parts using 3 Flywheels vs. using 3 battery cabinets with 40 batteries per cabinet  GREEN solution; efficient  Less annual maintenance costs  Smaller footprint / Less Weight  Faster recharge after discharge  Higher reliability than batteries

Liebert NX UPS VRLA Battery Cabinets Con:  Higher Maintenance Costs  Higher Replacement Cost (need to replace every years)  More Maintenance than flywheel quarterly vs. annual  Larger footprint and weight  Bring in a hazardous material (Lead).  Present a higher fire hazard Liebert NX UPS Flywheels Con:  Most costly upfront ≈ 50% equipment only  Flywheels offer minimum stored energy (20-30 seconds) depending on UPS Load. ◦ On loss of utility & the generator fails to start  Less familiarity for All involved  Communications protocols not as established

UPS Runtime with flywheel unit(s) or batteries string(s) being down for service or repair Individual UPS Load 3 Flywheels2 Flywheels1 Flywheel3 Battery Strings 2 Battery Strings 1 Battery String 250 kW43.5 seconds 28.7 seconds 11.5 seconds 21 minutes10.5 minutes 0 minutes Decision Two – VRLA vs. Flywheel – Additional Information

UPS Runtime with 1 Battery Strings UPS Runtime with 2 Battery Strings UPS Runtime with 3 Battery Strings

Vycon Flywheel chosen as basis of design  Main Reasons for flywheel: ◦ Diversity of energy storage – reducing likelihood of battery failure causing outage ◦ ROI of flywheel vs. batter≈ 5 years or 1st Full Battery replacement ◦ Flywheel life expectancy 20 years ◦ Footprint & Weight ◦ Less yearly maintenance

Vycon Flywheel chosen as basis of design  Concern & Mitigations: 1.Limited stored energy (20-30 seconds) depending on UPS Load a)Dual UPS Bus Design b)Diversity One UPS Bus Battery and other Flywheel c)Generator new and well maintained d)Facility staff isn’t on site 24 / 7 / Upfront cost a)Due to weight reduction compared to VRLA structural upgrades not required – overall budget ≈ 12% higher for flywheels b)ROI of ≈ 4-5 years 3.Field Service Experience a)Flywheels have minimum parts to fail b)Support of Vycon during installation c)Dual Bus UPS Design d)N+1 Flywheel Design 4.Communications protocols a)Understanding that communication issues are not necessarily critical concerns b)Commitment from vendors to work through issues until resolved

 Review all options  Do not ignore concerns – look for mitigation  Open & honest discussions are key

Matt Phillips Rich Leonardo Questions? Thank you