Electrical Troubleshooting Quiz — Jan. 4, 2022
The new vice president of manufacturing wants all four manufacturing plants to be “green” and he’s making your plant the pilot project and model. Toward that end, he sold all 25 of your propane-powered lift trucks and replaced them with 25 electric lift trucks to add to the four electric lift trucks you now have.
Near the maintenance shop, there’s a lift truck service area with a charging station that can accommodate six lift trucks similar to the original four. There is no way it can accommodate 29 such trucks, nor is there space in that area for even half of the trucks.
Since this change came a month ago, the plant manager has been complaining about dead, abandoned lift trucks all over the plant. Several were stuck on ramps between elevations. All of the trucks that can run are always in service, and there aren’t enough trucks for the existing truck operators.
The maintenance department can’t even borrow a truck to tow a dead truck back to the service bay, so now an electrician is dispatched with a portable charging unit. Several more had to be purchased to keep up with the demand. It takes time to recharge the batteries, but the ones that have been deep-cycled have lost significant capacity, so battery replacements are made frequently.
Another problem is that the operators, short on lift trucks, run whatever one they have until it quits. This often happens in mid-run with a full load. So, another truck has to be dispatched to get the load from the one that died.
The plant manager wants you to troubleshoot this problem and get back to him with recommendations. He’s thinking of a charging schedule, with charging stations installed strategically through the plant and an upgraded battery monitor for each lift truck. How might you solve this problem?
Two resolution options
Unless the company is willing to completely redesign the process flow so that lift trucks are eliminated, you have two options.
The first option is to make a bad system slightly better by spending additional resources that don’t change the underlying weakness of the system. The plant manager had thought of a charging schedule, but imagine what that would cost in labor hours to actually do it. For example, each operator will have to consume time during the day charging trucks. Considering all the operators, that’s a lot of time consumed each day and it’s all overhead. The best you can do with this option is turn a bad situation into a mediocre one. That’s not exactly a good resume bullet point for your career.
The second option is to convince the VP to put things back the way they were. Since your plant is the pilot plant for this program, you have a good chance of succeeding with this option. Start by writing a short report summarizing this failure and the harm it is doing.
The report needs to be short, but it also needs to be backed up (via attachments or appendices) with reference data such as how many fewer units Line 4 puts out now or how many late orders occurred in Area C in a given week. Ask the production managers to help you. Have them log the delays incurred by the lift truck problem and ask them what else they can do. They have a vested interest in helping you because any one of them can be scapegoated and fired by the VP if the facts aren’t documented. The problem is best solved before the blame game ensues.
That VP is new, so his job is still very much on the line. If this is a rational company, he is being evaluated on how well he gets product out the door. This includes whether he meets production schedules, something that he will fail to do if production flow is regularly stopping because lift trucks are not available. In short, he will have to stop the experiment or start interviewing for another job.
See if the original pre-purchase lift truck evaluations are on file. If not, include in the report some text stating the previous lift truck mix met the plant’s needs. Any large change in that mix should be made only after a new evaluation is conducted by a qualified person. Small changes could be made on a “try-and-see” basis.
State that the plant made a large change on a try-and-see basis and the result was not good. The new VP can spin this as “Not every change works out, which is why I tried this in one plant first. It gave us clarity on what to do next.” This way, he can save face instead of forcing you to go with the mediocre option.
What about the carbon?
The VP’s basic premise is fatally flawed.
While the goal of a greener plant is laudable, attempts to get there often are misguided. For example, the lifetime carbon footprint per megawatt of a wind turbine is about the same as that of a coal-fired plant. Solar isn’t much different.
In this particular example, the carbon footprint of a propane-powered lift truck is far less than that of an electric one. The electricity is generated mostly by burning coal, yet remember what we just said about wind and solar. Burning coal also results in the emission of mercury and sulfur; the former is absent in propane and about two-thirds less of the latter is released with propane (assuming lift trucks of similar capacity). A coal-fired generating station also releases more radiation into the environment than a nuclear-powered generating station.
All of these facts pertain just to the fuel equivalent. A propane-powered truck needs only a small battery, while an electric truck requires a very large battery. That also means more environmental harm rather than getting greener.
Do some research to find authoritative sources and do a one- to two-page write-up on why going totally electric with lift trucks is not environmentally sound. Make this an appendix to your report. Since the plant manager is the one who asked you to troubleshoot this problem, submit your completed report to him.
About the Author
Mark Lamendola
Mark is an expert in maintenance management, having racked up an impressive track record during his time working in the field. He also has extensive knowledge of, and practical expertise with, the National Electrical Code (NEC). Through his consulting business, he provides articles and training materials on electrical topics, specializing in making difficult subjects easy to understand and focusing on the practical aspects of electrical work.
Prior to starting his own business, Mark served as the Technical Editor on EC&M for six years, worked three years in nuclear maintenance, six years as a contract project engineer/project manager, three years as a systems engineer, and three years in plant maintenance management.
Mark earned an AAS degree from Rock Valley College, a BSEET from Columbia Pacific University, and an MBA from Lake Erie College. He’s also completed several related certifications over the years and even was formerly licensed as a Master Electrician. He is a Senior Member of the IEEE and past Chairman of the Kansas City Chapters of both the IEEE and the IEEE Computer Society. Mark also served as the program director for, a board member of, and webmaster of, the Midwest Chapter of the 7x24 Exchange. He has also held memberships with the following organizations: NETA, NFPA, International Association of Webmasters, and Institute of Certified Professional Managers.