GIS Integrated Analytics for Preventive Maintenance and

Storm Response Presenter:

John Lauletta, CEO/CTO

Based in Columbus, OH

US Strategic Partners:

Int’l Alliance Partners

– Australia, Mexico, Canada

2 US Patents, 7 Int’l Patents

2 million+ Poles Surveyed

3rd Party Validation

– U.S. Dept. of Energy (DOE)

– Nat’l Elec. Testing Lab (NETL)

– The Ohio State University

Exacter, Inc. Provides: Grid Condition Assessment for Improved System Resiliency and Reliability

Initial Research 2004 to 2006 Advanced Research Coninues

Research Facilities The Ohio State University High Voltage Laboratory

Test Fixtures

Two views of the test setup

Surge Arrester Being Studied

Lab Workstation

EXACTER® Sensor

Research Analytics

Faraday Cage

Exacter Acquisition and Analysis Process Data Acquisition &

Discrimination Data Analysis Actionable Information

RF emissions from arcing (deteriorated) electrical components

Exacter sensor in vehicle/aircraft collects the signals and then discriminates and

GPS locates arcing, tracking and leaking electrical components

Data analyzed for severity, persistence and prevalence, enabling: • Exact locating of failing

component • Replacement prioritization

Precise GPS coordinates and relevant condition-

data transmitted to servers for final

statistical geospatial analysis Reports and GIS compatible

information provided to customer

The Need: DOE Smart Grid Project Example

http://www.smartgrid.gov/reports

Condition Assessment: Select Circuits and Design Survey

Following the selection of circuits to be included in the

assessment, Exacter Data Specialists design specific survey routes

using public access roadways. The

EXACTER Sensor is sensitive in a 200

meter radius from the vehicle.

Survey Quality Control Condition Assessment: Monitor Survey Progress

While the survey is underway, the path of the survey vehicle, the

WHITE trace, is monitored to insure

that the circuits being assessed are

completely studied.

Accuracy of results is improved by multiple

passes of the same route over a four week

period.

Condition Assessment: Real-time Failure Signature Analysis

Whenever the EXACTER Sensor

locates a line emission that correlates to a Failure Signature a real-time study is

completed. The 986 RED markers show all

of the studies from the four-week survey

process.

Condition Assessment: EXACTER Condition Assessment Results

The 986 RED Failure Signature Events are studied by EXACTER

Servers to create this result: 25 BLUE

Maintenance Groups where a structure

includes at least one weakened component.

Analytical Process to Locate Deteriorated Equipment

Transmission Equipment Deterioration Aerial Surveys

Prioritized Maintenance Action: Select Equipment to Replace

Specific component(s) that are arcing, leaking

or tracking on those structures that have been prioritized for

repair are identified.

Photographs, Maps, Reports, and GIS Files

are provided.

GIS .SHP File

Example: Project Design

• Projects are designed with utility data to create an optimized price/benefit result

• Utilities: – Set Goals – Perform Maintenance – Measure Results

Vegetation, 32%

Animals and Other, 37%

Selected Priority Feeders to Assess and

Improve Affecting

20% of Outages

Deferred, Less Critical , Low SAIDI Impact Feeders 11%

Equipment, 31%

Outage Causes

Predictive Based

Maintenance

30%

26%

17%

9%8%

5%

2% 2%1% 0%0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

-

5,000,000.00

10,000,000.00

15,000,000.00

20,000,000.00

25,000,000.00

1 11 21 31 41 51 61 71 81 91 101 111 121 131 141 151 161 171 181 191 201 211 221 231 241 251

Eastern DivisionCMI Impact Analysis

Circuit CMI Contribution 5,950 OVHD Miles

Example: Prioritized Worst Performing Circuit (WPC) Improvement Program

73% of Total CMI – 1,904 miles (32%)

CMI Result of Current Programs

Avoid Ineffective Outcomes

0

1

2

3

4

5

Des

ired

Out

com

e

Cost of Program

Cost per Outcome

Its Not the Question that Needs to Change. . .

Sum of All Customer Interruption Durations Total Number of Customers Served

SAIDI

Total # of Customer Interruptions Total Number of Customers Served SAIFI

Sum of All Customer Interruptions Total Number of Customer Interruptions CAIDI

Non Storm-Related Outages on the Electric Distribution System

Trees / Vegetation 32%

Animal Contact 18%

Miscellaneous 19%

Equipment Failure 31%

Source: U.S. DOE

Flat Response = Challenges & Opportunities

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

CAID

I

SAIFI

Flat Response = Challenges & Opportunities

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

CAID

I

SAIFI

Target Performance

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

CAID

I

SAIFI

Top Decile 20 Years of Design Excellence

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

CAID

I

SAIFI

SAIDI Focus O&M – Workforce Deployment

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

CAID

I

SAIFI

SAIFI Focus Capital Intensive Programs

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

CAID

I

SAIFI

Typical Strategies

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

CAID

I

SAIFI

Tree Trimming

Automat ion

60% – 70% Out of ROW

Replace Deteriorated Equipment

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

CAID

I

SAIFI

Tree Trimming

Automat ion

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

CAID

I

SAIFI

What is The Strategy to Improve? How Good Is Good Enough?

• SAIDI (CMI)

• SAIFI (Number of outages)

• CAIDI (CMI)

• CEMI (Number of outages)

• Targeted Performance: 1st Quartile or Decile

• Stay Ahead of the Bear

What is Urgent and Important?

Informed Maintenance Decisions

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

Circuit A Circuit B Circuit C Circuit D

CMICMI (

100,

000)

Optimized Selection

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

Circuit A Circuit B Circuit C Circuit D

CMICMI / Mile

CMI (

100,

000)

Circuit Connectivity

1,000 Customers

CMI1 = CMI2

120 Customers

Circuit 1

Circuit 2

Circuit Physical Design

9 miles of OH 1 mile of UG

9 miles of UG 1 mile of OH

CMI1 = CMI2

Circuit 1

Circuit 2

Circuit Critical Connectivity

100 Customers

100 Customers

CMI1 = CMI2

Circuit 1

Circuit 2

Grid Operation Importance

Smart Grid Control element

Residential Distribution

CMI1 = CMI2

Circuit 1

Circuit 2

Preventive Maintenance Decision Process

Grid Design Asset Health Critical Load Connectivity

Budget

Circuit Performance Optimized Maintenance

Improved Measurements Effective Results

0

1

2

3

4

5

Des

ired

Out

com

e

Cost of Program

Cost per Outcome

0

1

2

3

4

5

Des

ired

Out

com

e

Cost of Program

Cost per Outcome

Lift

Opportunity To Lower

O&M Expense

Predictive Analytics Effective Preventive maintenance

• Long Term Improvement in Reliability – Measurable – Documented – Repeatable

• Additional Value – GIS Data – OMS Systems – Software

• Complete Solution – Vegetation – Asset Data Collection – Predictive Maintenance

CONFIDENTIAL

CMI Reduction Project

Optimized Maintenance

Equipment

Deterioration

Important Assets

High Connectivity

Urgent &

Important

Goal Targets • Reliability Indices • Customer Experience • Employee/Public Safety • Enhanced Asset Information • Targeted System Hardening • Smart Grid Preparedness • Strategic Line Rebuilds Selection Criteria • System CMI Analysis • Cause Code Analysis • Circuit Operations • Customer Density/Complaints • Circuit Length • Outage Event Analysis

DISCOVERY: Goals & Objectives

Project Planning • Territory Analysis • Route Planning • Survey Schedule • Field Deployment • Prioritize Desired Results Field Data Collection - EVENTS • Mobile Survey • Data Collection & Analysis • Reporting - GROUPS • Information Delivery

CONDITION ASSESSMENT: Data Collection & Reporting

Who • EXACTER and UTILITY

Timeline Target • 2 to 4 weeks

Deliverables • Circuit Data Delivery (Utility)

Who • EXACTER

Timeline Target • 4 weeks

Deliverables • Condition Assessment Report/Information

• GIS, Web, PDF, XLS, CSV

Conditions-Based Criteria MAINTENANCE PRIORITY DECISIONS • Asset Age • Zone/Location • Circuit Operations • Voltage Class • Apply Priority Goals • Locate and photograph equipment matching utility goals Goal-Based Criteria • Map to defined goals during Discovery Strategic Maintenance • Issue Work Orders based on criteria Who • EXACTER and UTILITY

Timeline Target • 1 to 3 weeks

Deliverables • Selected field information for Work Order Creation

ANALYZE ASSET DATA: Target Maintenance Priorities

Strategic Maintenance • Issue Work Orders based on priority criteria Measure Select Metrics • Circuit CMI • Cause Code Events • Circuit Operations • Customer Complaints • Indices • Utility Chosen Criteria

Who • UTILITY

Timeline Target • Up to 6 months

Deliverables • Reporting

MEASURE PERFORMANCE:

Project Roadmap

It’s the Answers that Change • Create the Objective • Understand the Reliability

Status in Detail, Along with the Influencing Issues

• Create a Top-Down Strategy • Let the Engineers Do Their

Work • Build a Compelling Story –

Great Engineering Does Not Speak For Itself

• Mitigate Outages and Avoid Disappointing Customers

Questions?

JLauletta@exacterinc.com @EXACTERINC