Plant Engineering May June 2026

Versatility + Efficiency

Hardware Versatility

PLCs starting at ONLY $123.00

The Productivity family of PLCs offers three distinct series with rack-based and stackable hardware style choices. Each series offers different I/O capacities but all use the same programming software, allowing you to easily scale your control up or down depending on the application or machine build.

• NEW! Productivity1000 Mini series PLCs are the first-ever standalone models for the Productivity family. These models combine a powerful CPU with analog or discrete I/O in a single unit, and with a $123.00 starting price, they provide significant cost saving for smaller projects

• NEW! More relay and temperature I/O modules, including:

- P1-04TEPS / P2-08TEPS modules provide solid state relay options and are ideal for extensive or extremely fast load switching.

- P1-04THMS / P2-08THMS thermocouple modules with input isolation for better accuracy in noisy environments.

- P1-12CDRS discrete/relay combo module with dual-purpose I/O for cost and space savings.

Software Efficiencies

Productivity Suite is the FREE user-friendly programming software for the Productivity family of controllers. It is packed with tools designed to reduce development time and headaches. The NEW User-Defined Instructions (UDIs) simplify programming, boost efficiency, and standardize logic. This powerful feature lets you package complex logic into a reusable block, making your code:

• Easier to Read: Your main program becomes cleaner and easier to follow.

• Faster to Develop: Drag and drop your custom instructions instead of copying and pasting code.

• Simpler to Maintain: Update your logic in one place, and the changes apply everywhere.

Dangerous Machinery?

Safeguard unsafe areas with affordable safety components from AutomationDirect

Common Sense is Great, but Sure-Fire Protection is Better

AutomationDirect has a comprehensive portfolio of certified machine safety components to guarantee your equipment is protected and your personnel are safe. A wide assortment of safety components from trusted brands in the industry is available including cable pull safety switches, hazardous area safety devices, safety relays and much more. All are in stock at everyday low prices, so you can keep your system safe without breaking the bank.

NEW! Schmersal PROTECT PS1 Safety Controller

Starting at $777.00

The Schmersal PROTECT PSC1 safety control system is a compact, programmable safety control system with scalable I/O. E-Stops, light grids, and almost any safety device can be monitored with ease. The universal interface ensures instant connection to every standard fieldbus. All of this from a well-known brand in safety equipment.

The PSC1 Safety Controllers include the following features:

• Safety functionalities up to SIL 3 according to IEC 61508 / IEC 62061, PL e and Cat. 4 according to EN ISO 13849-1

• 14 safe inputs up to PL e or SIL 3, 4 safety semiconductor outputs, 2 relay outputs, and 2 pulse outputs

• Modular expansion with up to 216 inputs/outputs, using one part number for each expansion

• Built-in fieldbus connectivity without the need to purchase communications modules

• The PSC1-C-10 has 2 built-in signaling outputs, and the PSC1-C-100 adds 20 configurable I/O points that can be set as inputs or outputs, and 6 signaling outputs

When the pressure’s on to get the job done, our lubricants keep your operation running strong. Mystik® Greases contain shear-stable thickeners and a proprietary combination of high-performance additives that provide superior protection for pump and motor bearings.

YOU UNDERSTAND SMALL PARTS CAN LEAD TO BIG PROBLEMS. MADE TO MAKE IT LAST.

VIEWPOINT

5 | Stop planning and start executing on digital maintenance

Leaders need to act on two things immediately.

INSIGHTS

8 | Get can’t-miss asset management advice from our expert panel

O N T HE COVER:

Battery energy storage system considerations

Precision

As automation and artificial intelligence advance, asset management is rapidly evolving. Our panel of experts offer can’t-miss advice.

SOLUTIONS

10 | Back to basics: A technical guide to BESS implementation

BESS has evolved from a sustainability asset into critical stabilizers for industrial uptime.

14 | Considering a BESS? Know design and risk mitigation

Understanding how a BESS works and the risks it poses is a critical step in safely and effectively incorporating a BESS into an electrical system.

18 | Advice for evaluating motor performance and efficiency in pump systems

Pump system inefficiency often develops gradually, driven not by pump failure but by motor selection, load behavior, control strategy and limited performance visibility.

24 | How to manage the intersection of safety and asset management

By beginning with the end in mind and integrating engineering disciplines into the safety framework, leaders can transition from reactive reporting to a state of proactive intelligence and operational resilience.

28 | Designing for automation to make manufacturing operations resilient

As factories integrate advanced automation, AI and connected technologies, operations become faster — but also more fragile.

32 | Safety makes for resilient and productive manufacturing operations

Effective manufacturing starts with safe operations. Learn ways to create workplaces where safety and productivity thrive together.

36 | Why lubricant labels are so important

Misreading labels and lubricant viscosity in realworld applications can lead to costly downtime, potential operational problems and even environment compliance issues.

ELEVATE YOUR PLANT MAINTENANCE PROGRAM...

WITH LUBRIPLATE ® 100% SYNTHETIC ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY LUBRICANTS .

Lubriplate’s ultra-high-performance, 100% synthetic lubricants have been engineered to provide unsurpassed performance in the most demanding plant environments. They provide a wide range of benefits designed to make your plant run better. Benefits include: extended lubrication intervals, lubrication consolidation through multiple application capability, reduced friction, extended machinery life and reduced downtime. Products include...

HIGH-PERFORMANCE SYNTHETIC GEAR OILS

SYNTHETIC AIR COMPRESSOR FLUIDS

SYNTHETIC HYDRAULIC FLUIDS

HIGH-PERFORMANCE SYNTHETIC GREASES

NSF H1 REGISTERED FOOD GRADE LUBRICANTS

ECO-FRIENDLY SYNTHETIC LUBRICANTS

SPECIALTY LUBRICANTS

CONTENT SPECIALISTS/EDITORIAL

AMARA ROZGUS, Editor-in-Chief ARozgus@WTWHMedia.com

SHERI KASPRZAK , Executive Editor SKasprzak@WTWHMedia.com

MICHAEL SMITH, Art Director MSmith@WTWHMedia.com

AMANDA PELLICCIONE, Marketing Research Manager A Pelliccione@WTWHMedia.com

EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD

H. LANDIS “LANNY” FLOYD, IEEE Life Fellow

JOHN GLENSKI, Principal, Automation & Digital Strategy, Plus Group, A Salas O'Brien Company

MATTHEW GOSS , PE, PMP, CEM, CEA, CDSM, LEED AP, Senior Vice President, CDM Smith

CONTRIBUTORS WANTED

Are you a subject matter expert in one of these topics? Would you like to write an article on one of the topics below? If so, please submit an idea to: www.plantengineering.com/contribute-to-plant-engineering

• Circuit protection

• Compressed air systems

• Environmental health

• Expert Q&A: Plant automation

• Expert Q&A: VFDs and VSDs

• Fall protection guidelines

• Lean maintenance

• Lubrication and grease

• Preventive maintenance

• Remote monitoring

• Safety and PPE

WTWH Media Contributor Guidelines Overview

Content For Engineers. WTWH Media focuses on engineers sharing with their peers. We welcome content submissions for all interested parties in engineering. We will use those materials online, on our website, in print and in newsletters to keep engineers informed about the products, solutions and industry trends.

The link below gives an overview of how to submit press releases, products, images and graphics, bylined feature articles, case studies, white papers and other media.

* Content should focus on helping engineers solve problems. Articles that are commercial in nature or that are critical of other products or organizations will be rejected. (Technology discussions and comparative tables may be accepted if nonpromotional and if contributor corroborates information with sources cited.)

* If the content meets criteria noted in guidelines, expect to see it first on the website. Content for enewsletters comes from content already available on the website. All content for print also will be online. All content that appears in the print magazine will appear as space permits, and we will indicate in print if more content from that article is available online.

* Deadlines for feature articles vary based on where it appears. Print-related content is due at least three months in advance of the publication date. Again, it is best to discuss all feature articles with the content manager prior to submission.

LEARN MORE AT: www.plantengineering.com/contributeto-plant-engineering

Stop planning and start executing on digital maintenance

According to the 2026 Plant Engineering State of Manufacturing Operations & Maintenance report, leaders need to act on two things immediately.

The 2026 Plant Engineering State of Manufacturing Operations & Maintenance report makes one point clear: manufacturers are no longer debating whether to modernize maintenance and operations. They are moving ahead with digital tools, outside partners and smarter infrastructure to improve reliability, efficiency and resiliency.

For plant engineers and managers, that shift should feel less like a trend and more like an edict.

the market is heading. Mobile applications, real-time performance monitoring and AI-enabled tools are becoming the operating standard. That means investing not only in software, but also in the plant-floor basics that support it, including connectivity, device access and workflow design.

Amara Rozgus, Editor-in-Chief

For years, the industry has treated digital transformation as a future-state ambition. That time may have already passed us. The percentage of facilities planning to implement artificial intelligence (AI) within the next year jumped to 39%, up from 28% a year earlier. Mobile applications for maintenance tracking posted the largest year-over-year gain in perceived importance, rising 16%.

That matters because competitive risk now belongs to industrial plants that continue to wait.

Plant leaders should act on two findings immediately.

1. First, prioritize mobile and realtime visibility. If your maintenance team still depends heavily on paper, clipboards or disconnected systems, the report suggests you are behind where

2. Second, redefine what you expect from suppliers. The report shows a 14% increase in respondents who want greater collaboration in implementation, along with rising demand for flexible and scalable solutions. In other words, plants do not just need vendors that ship parts — they need partners that help deploy, integrate and sustain solutions. Contract discussions should reflect that change.

The broader message is encouraging. Manufacturers are becoming more confident, more strategic and more willing to fund technology. An 11% increase in facilities allocating 21% to 30% of operating budgets to technology shows that maintenance modernization is no longer a side conversation.

Plant engineers and managers should use this information to make the case internally. The industry has moved from planning to execution. The question is whether your team will move with it. PE

TO BE READY FOR WHAT’S NEXT.

The market evolves. Capabilities must evolve with it.

Weldbend continues to invest in new, updated equipment to expand its already extensive capabilities.

As the market demand increases, we are working to scale with it to keep our valued distributors supplied with domestic carbon steel butt-weld fittings and carbon steel flanges.

Not just for today’s demand –for tomorrow’s challenges.

Get can’t-miss asset management advice from our expert panel

As automation and artificial intelligence advance, asset management is rapidly evolving. Our panel of experts offer can’t-miss advice.

Learningu

Objectives

• Identify the ways in which asset management are changing as artificial intelligence and automation advance.

• Learn how technological advances are changing the way workers gather data and use it to predict maintenance needs.

• Understand how asset management roles are changing as the engineering skills gap continues.

FIGURE 1: Three jars representing three key components of a rust-removal station for restoring assets. (Left to right) biobased rust removal fluid, water and alkaline cleaner with flash corrosion protection. Courtesy: Cortec

Question: How is artificial intelligence (AI) transforming asset management decision-making?

Brian Fortney: Artificial intelligence (AI) is changing how organizations manage and optimize production assets by enabling better, faster and more confident decision-making across the entire asset life cycle. Instead of reacting to failures or relying on fixed maintenance schedules, AI helps anticipate issues, prioritize the right actions and extract greater value from assets every day.

Ben Swisher: One of the biggest challenges of the digital transformation revolution has been trying to make good use of the mountains of data coming in from the sensing devices that are now ubiquitous in the field. Teams have more access to data than they’ve ever had before, but with a shifting workforce, the expert personnel necessary to

decode that data and turn it into actionable insights are becoming increasingly scarce.

Modern industrial AI can parse tremendous amounts of data in a fraction of the time a human can. That has lowered the bar for entry into a successful predictive maintenance program — if a team implements the right tools. Bolt-on solutions typically add more complexity, both in engineering connections to external systems and in training users to drive value from the systems. Fortunately, today’s most advanced automation suppliers are helping organizations navigate this challenge by engineering industrial AI directly into the tools reliability teams use every day. Edge environments, asset monitors and even wireless vibration monitors use on-board AI and pattern recognition to help cut through the complexity of raw data and instead deliver actionable information to personnel.

In addition, machinery health software at both the plant and enterprise level is incorporating an increasing amount of AI-powered predictive and prescriptive maintenance technology. The AI is built into existing software instead of executed on an external system, making it an intuitive extension of the reliability team’s existing workflows. When done right, AI insights are seamless.

Scott Campbell: Nearly every organization is exploring this question and testing different methods to drive productivity with AI. GenAI chat capabilities using large language models are the most common starting point. It is providing a new way to interact with asset and work order data, get quick answers to previously difficult maintenance questions and operation trends. Ironically, these AI interactions are also helping organizations realize, in many cases, they lack quality data. This inhibits their ability to go beyond inquiry into the higher value insights and automation. It has shifted the

2: Plant technicians are increasingly leveraging enhanced commissioning, diagnostic and troubleshooting technologies available via wireless devices, such as the Endress+Hauser Field Xpert SMT70B, to help conduct daily work and discover valuable instrument and process insights. Courtesy: Endress+Hauser

focus for many to a data first approach for leveraging AI innovations.

The latest innovations tied to agentic AI workflows has the promise to unlock the paths for condition-based, predictive and financially optimized maintenance strategies, which can deliver tremendous value to operations.

Q: What role will autonomous maintenance play in the future of manufacturing?

A: David Tishmack: Autonomous maintenance will increasingly mean automated detection, verification and workflow execution — so routine checks don’t rely on manual rounds. As devices provide self-diagnostics and continuous monitoring indicators, systems can trigger alerts, recommend actions and automatically generate documentation. The near-term impact is fewer unnecessary site visits, improved safety and more consistent compliance. Longer term, plants may move toward self-optimizing maintenance schedules based on actual asset condition.

Brian Fortney: Autonomous maintenance will play a critical role in helping manufacturers achieve more reliable, efficient and resilient operations as assets, processes and workforce models become increasingly complex. Rather than replacing people, autonomous maintenance enables teams to prevent problems earlier, respond faster to emerging issues and focus on higher-value work, while digital intelligence handles routine monitoring and decision-making.

Scott Campbell: Eventually, it will play a major role for of the decision points that require human knowledge in operations today. But there are still many inhibitors to overcome.

Participants

Brian N. Fortney

San Jose, California

Vice President and General Manager of Reliability Solutions Emerson Austin, Texas

Among those inhibitors are things like trust in the underlying data leveraged for triggering work events and auto approvals.

System integration between maintenance and MES systems for example, where plant operations and maintenance must be working in unison. For true autonomous operations, maintenance decisions need the intelligence to understand production impact, safety, inventory levels, supply chain and the full financial risk for stopping a production line to avoid asset failure.

Q: What emerging technologies are most likely to disrupt asset management in the next five years?

Eric Uutala: Drone inspections have made a tremendous impact in the last five years and that will likely continue. It started with drones being able to do external inspections on oil and gas modules and piping systems and we now have robots that can perform floors scans in aboveground storage tanks. This type of technology will grow and spread, allowing for increased efficiency and accuracy in asset management. PE

Global Capability Manager, Production Optimization Rockwell Automation Cleveland, Ohio

Solution Architect

Endress+Hauser Greenwood, Indiana

Eric Uutala Technical Sales Manager Cortec Corporation St. Paul, Minnesota

Scott Campbell Global Leader, Product Success Team IBM

David Tishmack

Ben Swisher

FIGURE

ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS

David Meinholz, ACS, Verona, Wisconsin

Back to basics:

A technical guide to BESS implementation

BESS has evolved from a sustainability asset into critical stabilizers for industrial uptime.

The industrial landscape is currently undergoing a fundamental shift in how electricity is managed within the four walls of the plant. As grid reliability declines and the demand for high-density power increases, driven largely by the rise of AI-driven data centers and complex automation, the battery energy storage system (BESS) has transitioned from a niche sustainability asset to a core requirement for facility uptime.

erator sets (gensets), which require several seconds to reach operating speed and temperature, a BESS uses power electronics to provide an immediate injection of energy.

FIGURE 1: Above, A containerized battery energy storage system (BESS) provides the sub-cycle response times necessary to bridge the gap between utility failure and backup generation.

Courtesy: ACS

For plant engineers and maintenance supervisors, the BESS represents the most versatile tool available for correcting power quality, managing peak demand and bridging the gap between utility failure and backup generation.

Using BESS for grid stabilization

In an industrial environment, the primary value of a BESS lies in its ability to provide instantaneous, sub-cycle response times. Unlike mechanical gen-

This function is vital for maintaining the continuity of processes that cannot tolerate even a millisecond of downtime. By stabilizing the microgrid during the critical window of transition, the BESS ensures that when a secondary source eventually accepts the load, it does so in a synchronized, stable environment.

Beyond simple backup, a BESS acts as a microgrid stabilization solution by maintaining and correcting system voltage and frequency. Sensitive electronic loads, including robotics, high-speed programmable logic controllers and variable frequency drive-controlled motors, are highly susceptible to minor fluctuations in power quality. This “buffering” effect is critical for preventing equipment malfunction and extending the lifespan of

Objectives Learningu

• Analyze the technical role of BESS in microgrid stabilization, specifically its ability to provide sub-cycle response times and maintain frequency/voltage for sensitive electronic loads.

• Evaluate strategic sizing requirements, including the application of diversity factors and the mitigation of inrush currents from large inductive loads like motors and drives.

• Identify actionable maintenance and safety protocols, ranging from artificial intelligence-driven predictive analytics for cell degradation to specialized fire suppression strategies for chemical storage.

sensitive components that would otherwise be degraded by “dirty” power or momentary sags.

Strategic BESS sizing and load characterization

Designing an effective BESS requires more than matching a nameplate capacity to a total facility load; it requires a granular understanding of load diversity and power profiles. Engineers must evaluate diversity factors, the reality that not all systems — such as test equipment, motors and heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) — operate at full capacity simultaneously. By leveraging realtime data and load profiling, facility managers can right-size their battery arrays, allowing for a smaller, more commercially viable BESS that still meets the facility’s demands.

This coordination ensures that the BESS can maintain site stability while the primary backup sources, such as natural gas or diesel generators, are synchronized and brought online to assume the long-term load. By smoothing these transitions, the design maximizes battery life and ensures a seamless handoff between power sources.

Operational optimization and ROI

Beyond simple resilience, the BESS serves as a financial optimizer through advanced energy management strategies like peak shaving. In many jurisdictions, industrial facilities are subject to heavy demand charges based on their highest point of energy consumption. A BESS can be programmed to discharge during these intervals of high demand to offset the facility’s draw from the utility grid. This is vital for facilities operating near the limits of their utility power allotment or those participating in utility-led demand response programs.

In addition, modern manufacturing often

2: Precision coordination of electrical distribution and control logic testing ensures a seamless handoff between the battery energy storage system (BESS) and the plant grid. Courtesy: ACS

involves regenerative processes, particularly in research and development test cells where motors or drives are being tested. Rather than dissipating this energy as waste heat, an integrated BESS can capture and store this power. This “recycled” energy can then be routed back into the plant grid, reducing overall utility costs and improving the facility’s carbon footprint.

‘Designing an effective BESS requires more than matching a nameplate capacity to a total facility load.’

Predictive versus reactive maintenance

The maintenance profile of a BESS differs significantly from traditional mechanical equipment.

FIGURE

ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS

While there are fewer moving parts, the complexity lies in chemical management and digital controls. The shift toward digitalization allows maintenance supervisors to move toward predictive models where real-time data collection forecasts cell degradation and identifies potential complications before they lead to an unplanned outage.

To ensure longevity and reliability, maintenance teams should focus on several key operational areas:

• Thermal management: Ensuring HVAC or liquid-cooling systems are functioning at peak efficiency to prevent thermal runaway.

• System validation: Regularly checking voltage, frequency and phase sequence to ensure power quality meets operational requirements.

• Control logic testing: Periodically simulating utility failures to ensure the automated handoff between the BESS and other power sources remains seamless.

• Predictive analytics: Using remote access and real-time data to schedule maintenance downtime for cleaning filters or checking connections during planned outages.

BESS safety and hazard management

Integrating high-capacity battery storage into an industrial facility introduces specific fire and life safety requirements that must be addressed during the design and commissioning phases. Standard water-based fire suppression is often insufficient for battery-related fires; therefore, facilities must invest in specialized containment and suppression strategies designed for chemical storage.

Additionally, protective devices and circuit breakers must be set to isolate faults locally, ensuring that a fault within one battery rack does not trigger an upstream shutdown that interrupts power to unrelated manufacturing lines. Clear, durable equipment labeling and up-todate system diagrams also are essential for emergency response. Operations staff must be able to quickly manage disconnect controls during equipment changeovers or safety events. Because battery fires can be intense and difficult to extinguish, the

FIGURE 3: Integrated thermal management skids provide precise cooling to prevent thermal runaway and ensure battery cells operate at peak efficiency. Courtesy: ACS

FIGURE 4: Genset test cells benefit from battery energy storage system (BESS) “buffering,” which maintains system voltage and frequency for sensitive electronic loads during high-stress testing cycles. Courtesy: ACS

strategic layout of the BESS in relation to fuel storage for other gensets is a critical safety consideration for any facility manager.

Futureproofing through BESS

As industrial facilities face increasing pressure to deliver uninterrupted, efficient and scalable power, the BESS has become the cornerstone of modern plant engineering. By focusing on scalability and modular design, facility managers can ensure their power infrastructure grows in lockstep with their production capacity.

The strategic implementation of a BESS, grounded in thorough commissioning, predictive maintenance and intelligent control systems, allows a facility to withstand grid volatility and secure longterm operational certainty. For the modern plant, energy storage is no longer an optional accessory, but the fundamental stabilizer of the production environment. PE

David Meinholz is a Senior Staff Engineer at ACS.

‘Integrating high-capacity battery storage into an industrial facility introduces specific fire and life safety requirements that must be addressed during the design and commissioning phases.’

Insightsu

BESS insights

uThis article explores how plant engineers can leverage BESS to correct power quality, optimize peak demand and ensure seamless transition during utility failures.

uBESS has become a core industrial power asset, providing instant backup, microgrid stabilization, power quality correction and right-sized energy management as facilities contend with declining grid reliability and rising demand.

uBESS also supports peak shaving, regenerative energy capture, predictive maintenance, specialized safety planning and scalable infrastructure design, making it essential for both operational resilience and long-term financial performance.

MANUFACTURER

CUTS ENERGY & OIL USE WITH LE PROGRAM

Seeking to improve its sustainability practices, a manufacturer did a pilot lubrication reliability program with LE. For the rst 2 compressors, results included lower energy use, extended oil drains, and reduced waste oil. Total savings were $20K per year.

ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS

ARC FLASH AND ELECTRICAL SAFETY

Will McGugan, PE; and Aiden Shearin, EIT, CDM Smith, Raleigh, North Carolina

Considering a BESS? Know design and risk mitigation

Understanding

how a BESS works and the risks it poses is a critical step in safely and effectively incorporating a BESS into an electrical system.

Rene wable energy sources continue to penetrate the power distribution industry, offering economically and ecologically sensible installations for new power generation across a wide variety of locations. While renewable energy sources are continually improving and increasingly recognized as foundational to the grid of the future, they present challenges at both individual installation and grid-wide scales. For widely adopted sources such as solar and wind, the nature of how they produce energy — i.e., the sun shining and the wind blowing — means that energy production may be inconsistent or misaligned with electrical system demand.

Objectives

•Understand how a battery energy storage systems (BESS) operates.

• Discover the benefits and drawbacks of using a BESS.

• Explore methods of mitigating the risks associated with a BESS, particularly the fire hazards.

Battery energy storage systems (BESS), along with other forms of energy storage, enable electrical systems to ride through temporary fluctuations in renewable generation and allow energy produced during periods of excess generation to be used when demand is misaligned with production. Although their use is increasingly common in the electrical industry, BESSs remain a relatively new and continuously evolving technology, with ongoing questions surrounding designing practices, implementation strategies and safe operation.

Proper BESS implementation involves understanding how they operate, the associated benefits and drawbacks and the major risks — along with appropriate mitigation strategies (see Figure 1).

How a BESS works

A BESS consists of three major subsystems: storage, power conversion and protection. Each subsystem is necessary for a BESS to be complete.

The storage subsystem is composed of batteries. Each battery contains several cells that use electrochemical reactions to store electricity for later use. The process is then reversed when the stored energy is needed. These cells are grouped into modules to increase system capacity; however, increased capacity also poses additional risks, which will be discussed later.

Several battery technologies exist, each with a different chemical makeup that affects the capacity, physical size, longevity and ideal method of use. For large-scale storage, lithium-ion batteries are most prominently used. Although new battery technologies and chemistries are continuously being developed, tested and prototyped, lithium-ion technologies currently remain the most popular and cost-efficient choice.

Because batteries store energy as direct current (DC), BESSs require a way to convert stored energy into alternating current for use within electrical distribution systems. This is accomplished through inverters, which serve as the primary component of the power conversion subsystem. Bidirectional inverters allow BESSs to transfer energy into the battery for storage (see Figure 2).

To ensure efficient energy use and battery longevity, BESSs require proper maintenance. A battery management system (BMS) accomplishes this by monitoring the voltage, temperature, state of charge and current of the battery’s cells and modules, as well as any imbalances between them. As such, the BMS is the first line of defense in battery protection.

An energy management system (EMS) is the central control platform for the entire BESS. It dictates when to charge or discharge the battery by looking at electricity prices, utility limitations, the

application of the BESS and even the weather forecast. The EMS can be connected to a supervisory control and data acquisition system or other controls systems to have some degree of control over how the BESS operates. The EMS also serves as the link between the other components of the system (the BMS, the inverters and the source to provide/ store energy from), making it a crucial aspect of a successful BESS.

Fire and environmental concerns

A common concern surrounding BESS installations is safety, especially concerning potential fire risks. A cursory review of online search results will return several incidents of large BESSs creating hazardous conditions, leading to understandable questions and pushback from concerned locals. However, as with any relatively nascent technology, it is important to understand how the type of BESS technology — and the way it is installed and operated — affect risks.

Lithium-ion battery technologies may experience thermal runaway if protections against overheating, overcharging or excessive charging rates are not in place. Thermal runaway occurs when an increase in an item’s temperature generates further heat, creating a cascading effect that produces more heat and damages more components. Modern standards require BESSs to monitor battery cell heating, charging and charging/discharging rates to mitigate these risks. Additionally, modern BESSs — especially modular BESSs — are equipped with fire suppression capabilities.

‘A common concern surrounding BESS installations is safety, especially concerning potential fire risks.’

Over the past two decades, the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) has conducted substantial research into BESS failures, including what technologies or components are most linked with fires. According to EPRI’s Battery Energy Storage Systems Failure Incident Database, most verifiable BESS failures originate from operational and construction-related issues, not design or manufacturing flaws. Additionally, the BESS elements that failed the most were in the BESS control systems or in the noncell component equipment, such as switching units, transformers or inverters — not the battery cells themselves.

Of note in EPRI’s research database is the comparison of the number of BESS incidents against the amount of installed BESS capacity. While global BESS capacity has increased at almost exponential rates, the number of BESS failure incidents has remained relatively stagnant. Consequently, the failure rate has decreased from nine incidents per gigawatt of installed BESS in 2018 to less than one incident per gigawatt of installed BESS by 2023.

While this statistic does not mean that modern BESSs pose no failure risks, it strongly indicates that they are becoming safer. This is due to the

FIGURE 1: An example of a typical BESS installation including solar photovoltaic inverters; the BESS is in the CONEX enclosure to the right center of the figure. Courtesy: CDM Smith

ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS

Courtesy: CDM Smith

Insights

BESS insights

u A BESS integrates battery storage, power conversion and advanced management systems to bridge the gap between inconsistent renewable energy production and fluctuating grid demand.

uWhile safety concerns like thermal runaway exist, modern BESS installations are becoming significantly safer through rigorous adherence to evolving industry standards like NFPA 855 and UL 9540.

electrical industry’s ongoing development of new standards and continual improvement of existing ones to better protect BESSs and prevent failures.

NEC and UL requirements for BESS

Article 706 of NFPA 70: National Electrical Code (NEC) was developed to ensure the safe installation and connection of a BESS to the overall system. One of the requirements is to ensure all BESS-related equipment is UL listed — particularly to UL 9540: Energy Storage Systems and Equipment and UL 9540A — and is compliant with all other fire codes and safety standards, including NFPA 855: Standard for the Installation of Stationary Energy Storage Systems, which will be discussed later.

Section 706.15 of the NEC requires a readily accessible disconnect for the entire BESS. The disconnect isolates the system in case of an emergency, like a fire or if maintenance is necessary. This disconnect must either be within the BESS equipment or within eyesight (i.e., within 10 feet) of the system. If the disconnect cannot be placed in either of those two conditions, the disconnect must be lockable, ensuring that it cannot be accidentally reactivated.

Section 706.20 of the NEC establishes installation requirements. A BESS must be properly ventilated in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations and the system’s listing. The required ventilation rate to properly cool a BESS depends on the chemical makeup of the battery (e.g., lead-acid or lithium-ion). Additionally, equipment marking and working clearances must meet the requirement in Sections 110.21(B) and 110.26, respectively.

Section 706.30 addresses the requirements associated with the circuits connecting to the BESS. The maximum rated current of a circuit connected to the BESS is defined by the BESS nameplate rating or the output/input current ratings of the inverter or other power-converting device. Conductor ampacity must not exceed the rating of the overcurrent protective device (OCPD) or the BESS’s rated current. OCPDs must be sized for at least 125% of

the maximum rated current. Any OCPD on the DC portion of the BESS must be listed for DC applications and must include the DC voltage, current and interrupting ratings. The OCPD location is determined by circuit routing. If it passes through a wall, floor or ceiling, the OCPD must be on the BESS side of the circuit.

Common BESS standards

Several industry standards, guides and certifications apply to BESSs. While a detailed investigation into each is beyond the scope of this article, engineers should familiarize themselves with each to better understand how to properly design, specify, commission, and/or operate a BESS.

IEEE 1547: Standard for Interconnection and Interoperability of Distributed Energy Resources with Associated Electric Power Systems Interfaces, establishes the requirements and recommendations for interconnecting distributed energy resources (DERs) — including BESSs — with electrical utilities. Many articles analyze IEEE 1547 and its requirements, especially related to its acceptable voltage and frequency tolerances, disconnection and reconnection strategies and system protection.

NFPA 855 applies to a broad range of storage systems, including BESSs, mechanical storage systems, fuel cell storage systems and flywheel energy storage systems. This standard provides general requirements for system interconnections, commissioning and operation and maintenance. It also includes specific requirements for BESSs used in stationary standby power applications (often called electrochemical energy storage systems). NFPA 855 includes requirements for equipment location and spacing, testing and documentation and fire control and suppression. NFPA 855 requires that BESSs be listed to UL 9540, with limited exceptions allowing inverters be listed to UL 1741: Inverters, Converters, Controllers and Interconnection System Equipment for Use With Distributed Energy Resources and batteries be listed to UL 1973: Batteries for Use in Stationary and Motive Auxiliary Power Applications, establishes UL 1973, even when the entire BESS is not listed to UL 9540.

UL 1741 governs inverter testing and listing for DERs, including BESSs. Compliance with UL 1741 is often required to meet the latest IEEE 1547 requirements. Although the details within UL 1741

FIGURE 2: An example of battery cells within a BESS.

are less important to engineers’ day-to-day tasks, so long as the BESS unit is listed, the listing structure can cause confusion: inverters may be listed to UL 1741, UL 1741 Supplement A (SA) or UL 1741 Supplement B (SB). Each supplement improves upon the previous version’s requirements, adding additional functionality related to safety and grid interoperability. UL 1741 SB is compliant with UL 1741 SA, which is in turn compliant with UL 1741.

In simplified terms, UL 1741 provides requirements for inverters, UL 1741 SA provides requirements for smart inverters and UL 1741 SB provides requirements for smarter inverters that must meet additional testing and interoperability functionality. Depending on jurisdictional requirements and the utility into which the BESS will interconnect, any of the three standards may be required. Currently, most inverters are manufactured to UL 1741 SA or SB requirements.

UL 1973 establishes construction and testing requirements for battery subsystems. Multiple versions of UL 1973 have been released in recent years,

‘Article 706 of NEC was developed to ensure the safe installation and connection of a BESS to the overall system.’

but most BESSs are built to the latest version of the standard.

UL 9540 provides requirements for the overall BESS, not just the battery and inverter subsystems. This standard also references UL 1973 and UL 1741. PE

Will McGugan, PE, is an electrical engineer at CDM Smith who focuses on the design and analysis of electrical power systems.

Aiden Shearin, EIT, is an electrical engineer at CDM Smith who works in the construction engineering industry and specializes in water/wastewater design and power distribution.

BESS

Need Benches?

Try Our 3D Build A Bench App

Configure a workbench to meet your needs. Configure a work bench to meet your requirements.

•Proline’s 3D configurator allows you to choose from four models, eight work surface choices and three frame colors.

•Choose from a heavy duty four leg design, cantilever design , hand crank adjustable or electric height adjustable.

•We have the workbench you need in stock and ready to ship in five days or less.

•With a vast array of modular accessories and options available, you design the bench you need.

Try it today !

ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS

ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND MANAGEMENT

Courtney Pickett, NEMA Motors Division, ABB, Fort Smith, Arkansas

FIGURE 1: Evaluating motor performance within the full pump system context helps identify hidden inefficiencies driven by load behavior, control strategy and motorto-pump alignment.

Courtesy: ABB

Advice for evaluating motor performance and efficiency in pump systems

Pump system inefficiency often develops gradually, driven not by pump failure but by motor selection, load behavior, control strategy and limited performance visibility.

Understanding how motor performance shapes pump system efficiency is no longer optional; it is central to controlling operating cost, maintaining reliability and preparing for future standards.

Energy costs do not always rise because something breaks. In many facilities, flow, pressure and production remain stable while electricity consumption quietly increases. The system continues to meet demand, but it requires more energy to do so.

Motor-driven systems account for most industrial electricity consumption in the United States. Even small shifts in motor efficiency can create measurable financial impact across operating hours and equipment fleets. Over time, motor performance defines the energy, reliability and compliance profile of a pump system.

The question is not whether the system works. It is whether it is aligned.

Balance pumps and their motors to retain efficiency

Pump system inefficiency seldom stems from pump failure. More often, it develops from subtle mismatches between motor performance, load conditions and control strategy that compound over time into measurable energy and reliability losses.

In practice, these losses appear in subtle patterns. A system can continue meeting process demand while operating outside optimal energy conditions, often due to how the motor interacts with the pump and system curve.

Motor-to-pump matching is an often-overlooked inefficiency contributor. A motor selected years ago may have been appropriate for the original operating conditions, but production rates evolve, process requirements shift and equipment ages while the motor remains unchanged.

In addition, higher-efficiency replacement motors introduce another variable. Because these motors typically operate with lower slip, they run at slightly higher speeds under load. In centrifugal pump applications, even a slight increase in rotational speed can increase flow, pressure and horsepower demand. That shift may push the motor closer to its service factor or move the pump away from its best efficiency point. This means system still works with flow delivered, but energy use increases.

A motor is designed to operate most efficiently near its rated load, meaning the output level it is built to deliver continuously. In facilities where pumps cycle or operate at partial load for extended periods, motors may spend much of their life below optimal efficiency. Undersized motors can operate continuously near maximum load, increasing temperature rise and reducing insulation life. Oversized motors may operate inefficiently at low load while consuming unnecessary reactive power.

Control strategy further influences performance. Fixed-speed motors paired with throttling valves are common in legacy systems. When flow demand drops, the motor continues to operate at full speed while the valve dissipates excess energy as pressure loss. The pump does not reduce energy consumption. It simply transfers energy to another part of the system.

These conditions don’t often trigger alarms. Instead, they create gradual increases in electricity consumption, incremental thermal stress and longterm reliability concerns.

A motor does not need to fail to affect the bottom line. It only needs to operate slightly outside optimal conditions for long enough.

Over time, these incremental inefficiencies compound across facilities, fleets and industries. As energy demand and regulatory scrutiny increases, previously acceptable efficiencies are now being reexamined.

Why efficiency expectations are changing

Motor efficiency now plays a direct role in operating cost, regulatory compliance and long-term performance. Motor efficiency is receiving renewed

attention because of its growing scale of impact. Industrial motor systems account for roughly 70% of industrial electricity use globally. Pumps, fans and compressors represent a significant share of that demand. Improving efficiency offers one of the most practical pathways to reducing industrial energy consumption.

The U.S. Department of Energy’s updated standards, effective June 1, 2027, increases minimum efficiency requirements for most three-phase induction motors from 1 to 750 horsepower. Midrange motors must meet IE4 efficiency levels, commonly referred to as NEMA Super Premium efficiency or NEMA Premium 4 efficiency, while smaller and larger motors remain at NEMA Premium efficiency/IE3, and expanded coverage of fractional horsepower motors begins in 2029.

This is the most significant federal motor efficiency update in more than a decade. For plant engineers and operators, the rule extends well beyond compliance. It influences capital planning, system design decisions and long-term operating cost. While the motor’s purchase price represents only a small portion of its total life cycle cost, electricity consumption accounts for the overwhelming majority.

Consider a motor operating 5,000 to 8,000 hours per year. Over a 20-year service life, electricity costs can exceed the original purchase price many times over. In that context, even a 10% improvement in efficiency can deliver substantial cumulative savings.

Keep in mind that projects specified today may not be energized until after 2027. Selecting motors that meet or exceed upcoming requirements reduces the risk of redesign, avoids premature replace-

FIGURE 2: Higher-efficiency motors operate with lower slip, which can slightly increase running speed. In centrifugal pump applications, even small speed changes can raise horsepower demand and impact overall energy consumption. Courtesy: ABB

Learningu

Objectives

• Identify how motor selection, slip, load profile and control strategy influence pump system energy consumption and overall efficiency.

• Evaluate the impact of the 2027 Department of Energy motor efficiency standards on capital planning, life cycle cost and system design decisions.

• Recognize how variable speed control and predictive maintenance technologies support sustained efficiency, reliability and reduced operating cost.

ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS

‘For engineers, the opportunity is to ensure that compliance aligns with measurable operational improvement.’

ment and positions facilities for stronger long-term performance.

Beyond regulatory alignment, higher-efficiency motors can also improve the immediate financial case. Many utilities offer rebates for motors that exceed minimum efficiency thresholds, helping shorten payback periods when factored into capital planning. In some cases, the incremental cost of a higher-efficiency motor can be recovered within just a few years.

Efficiency standards are rising because energy use matters at scale. For engineers, the opportunity is to ensure that compliance aligns with measurable operational improvement.

As minimum thresholds increase, the question shifts from whether efficiency matters to what truly defines an efficient motor within a pump system.

What defines an efficient motor in a pump system

An efficient motor in a pump system is defined by how well its performance aligns with real oper-

ating conditions, system dynamics and control strategy. Efficiency classifications such as IE3, IE4 and IE5 establish standardized reference points. IE4 motors reduce losses compared to IE3 designs. IE5 technologies, including advanced synchronous reluctance motors paired with variable speed drives, reduce further losses.

However, nameplate efficiency alone does not guarantee improved system performance. Motor efficiency changes with load and operating conditions and many pump systems operate below peak demand for much of the year. In applications with variable flow requirements, evaluating part-load efficiency is essential to capturing meaningful performance gains.

Another influence on system behavior is slip and operating speed. Higher-efficiency motors typically have lower slip, which results in slightly higher operating speeds. In centrifugal pump applications, horsepower demand increases with the cube of speed, so even small speed changes can materially affect energy use. Without evalu-

ating pump curves and system resistance, minor speed increases may drive higher energy consumption than anticipated.

Aside from energy behavior, motor quality also relies on thermal performance. Lower temperature rise supports longer insulation life and improved reliability. Reduced heat places less stress on bearings and windings, helping extend maintenance intervals and overall service life.

When specifying motors for pump applications, engineers and operation managers should consider:

• Efficiency at expected operating load

• Service factor relative to actual duty cycle

• Temperature rise and cooling capability

• Compatibility with variable speed drives

• Starting characteristics and inrush current.

Control strategy ultimately determines whether motor efficiency gains translate into real system savings. In fixed-speed systems, motors run at

constant speed while flow is adjusted mechanically. The motor delivers full speed and torque regardless of demand and excess flow is restricted through valves. As a result, energy is consumed even when it is not required.

But variable speed drives change that dynamic. By adjusting the frequency and voltage supplied to the motor, a drive aligns speed directly with process requirements. In centrifugal applications, even modest speed reductions can significantly lower horsepower demand. For facilities with variable load profiles, speed control often saves energy.

Drives, however, require proper evaluation and integration. Motors must be rated for inverter duty where appropriate and factors such as harmonics, low-speed cooling performance and system resonance must be addressed. When applied correctly,

FIGURE 3: Selecting motors based on expected operating load, thermal performance and inverter-duty capability improves system reliability and supports long-term efficiency gains. Courtesy: ABB

26_002743_Plant_Engineering_JUN Mod: April 15, 2026 3:56 PM Print: 04/22/26 page 1 v2.5

ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS

variable speed control aligns energy consumption with actual operating demand far more effectively than mechanical throttling.

An efficient motor improves performance when applied within the context of the full pump system. Component-level efficiency must align with system behavior.

Even a well-specified motor can drift from optimal performance as operating conditions evolve. Load profiles change, components wear and system adjustments accumulate over time. Sustaining efficiency requires more than proper selection; it requires visibility into how the motor performs in real conditions.

Predictive maintenance, system visibility to boost efficiency

Sustained motor efficiency depends on continuous performance visibility instead of one-time specification decisions. Even well-specified systems can drift from optimal performance over time. Bearing wear, alignment shifts, impeller modifications and control adjustments all influence how motors operate. Without visibility into performance trends, inefficiencies can develop quietly and persist.

deviations early and restore performance before excess energy use becomes normalized.

Instead of discovering inefficiencies through rising utility bills or unexpected maintenance events, teams can respond proactively based on data. Efficiency cannot be managed without visibility.

Predictive monitoring protects efficiency investments, but efficiency must be treated as an ongoing system-level priority rather than a component-level attribute.

Efficiency as a system responsibility

Efficiency in pump systems is a system responsibility shaped by motor selection, control strategy and ongoing performance visibility.

Systems that appear stable may still operate harder than necessary, but the most effective improvements preserve production while reducing energy demand and mechanical stress at the same time.

u

Insights

Efficiency insights

u In this article, we examine how motors become hidden drivers of pump inefficiency, why regulatory and economic pressures are reshaping design priorities, what truly defines an efficient motor within a pump application and how predictive maintenance and system visibility sustain performance long after installation.

u As 2027 Department of Energy efficiency standards raise expectations, engineers must evaluate motor performance within the full system context to control operating cost, sustain reliability and strengthen long-term competitiveness.

Traditional maintenance strategies focus on preventing catastrophic failure. Predictive maintenance expands that focus to include performance stability and energy behavior. The objective is not only to avoid breakdowns, but to sustain consistent, efficient operations.

Modern motors increasingly incorporate sensors that monitor temperature, vibration and load trends. Remote condition monitoring enables engineers to track changes in current draw, operating temperature and vibration signatures over time, providing early warning of emerging inefficiencies.

With that visibility, subtle inefficiencies are measurable. Elevated temperatures may indicate sustained high load. Rising current draw can signal increased system resistance or speed changes. Shifts in vibration patterns often reveal misalignment or mechanical wear that increases energy loss long before failure occurs.

Because proactive monitoring increases uptime, it safeguards efficiency investments. A motor specified for high efficiency today may gradually drift from optimal alignment with system requirements. Continuous visibility allows engineers to detect

The 2027 Department of Energy standards signal where the industry is heading and motors will continue to play a central role in industrial electricity consumption. Decisions made today will influence operating costs for decades to come. Selecting higher-efficiency motors, aligning them with pump requirements and integrating monitoring capabilities strengthens both compliance and competitiveness.

For plant engineers, the opportunity extends beyond meeting regulatory thresholds. It involves evaluating systems that already perform and asking whether they perform efficiently.

That distinction becomes clear at the system level. A pump meets process demand by delivering the required flow, while a motor that delivers that same flow with lower energy use, cooler operation and greater reliability enhances the performance of the entire system.

By focusing on motor performance within the broader system, engineers can lower operating costs, extend equipment life and prepare facilities for rising efficiency expectations without disrupting production.

When efficiency improves, benefits become visible in operating budgets and long-term reliability. PE

Courtney Pickett is a Product Specialist in ABB’s NEMA Motors Division, specializing in motor solutions for pumping applications.

ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS

ASSET MANAGEMENT

Bruce A. Wesner, CRL, Life Cycle Engineering, Charleston, South Carolina

How to manage the intersection of safety and asset management

By beginning with the end in mind and integrating engineering disciplines into the safety framework, leaders can transition from reactive reporting to a state of proactive intelligence and operational resilience.

Learningu

Objectives

• Understand the symbiotic relationship between equipment performance and human safety, specifically how reducing unplanned downtime and emergent work directly lowers the probability of recordable incidents.

• Learn to use visual diagnostic tools like injury heat maps to identify risk clusters and concentrations of injuries and severity and drive technical change through cross functional collaboration.

• Develop strategies for implementing reliability by design through early collaboration with OEMs to ensure standardized maintenance and safety protocols are established before startup.

The resurgence of domestic manufacturing in 2026 represents a pivotal moment for industry leaders. As onshoring brings production back to the United States, plant engineers are entering a new golden age for the sector.

However, this shift requires more than just moving physical assets; it demands a fundamental mindset shift in how manufacturers approach the intersection of safety and asset management.

For a manufacturing leader, the nonnegotiable requirement is to begin with the end in mind. This means designing for reliability from the very first day to ensure that operational strategies are integrated not merely efficiently, but inherently safe. We are no longer in an era where we can afford to fix things after the process is already running; the stakes, both human and financial, are simply too high.

Balance reliability and safety

Historically, a wall existed between the engineering office and the safety department. This divide often relegated environmental health and safety (EHS) to a reactive role that focused almost exclusively on incident reporting and compliance after a tragedy had already occurred.

In a world-class manufacturing environment, this siloed approach is a liability. Real operational resilience is achieved only when safety and reliability are viewed as two sides of the same coin. By integrating engineering and reliability work into a single cohesive strategy, it is possible to transform a facility's performance in ways that were previously thought impossible.

For example, this transformation took shape within the building products sector. By combining traditional engineering with reliability engineering, Life Cycle Engineering helped a large-scale operation grow its asset availability from a struggling 55% to 95%. More importantly, this transition drove a staggering improvement in safety. Plant managers saw the facility’s total recordable incident rate drop from 11 down to 1.8. These are not just numbers on a page; they are people going home whole because the leadership decided to take the physical risk out of the hands of the team members through better engineering.

Safety is essentially a function of predictability. When a machine operates as intended within its designed parameters, the risk to the operator is minimized. Conversely, the most dangerous moments in any plant occur during unplanned downtime or during emergent/reactive work. When a critical asset fails unexpectedly, the resulting pressure to resume production creates a chaotic environment.

In that chaos, the human element is most vulnerable. Rushed decisions, bypassed protocols and the sheer physical stress of a breakdown are the primary ingredients for workplace injuries. A predictable environment is, by definition, a safe environment. The most successful transformations occur when the maintenance and safety departments stop seeing themselves as separate entities

FIGURE 1: This example shows a reliability excellence transformation map. Courtesy: Life Cycle Engineering

with competing goals and instead realize they are working toward a single outcome: an uninterrupted, risk-free production flow.

The power of visual risk mitigation

To move from a reactive culture to a proactive one, leaders must embrace visual data that is gathered from their asset management system as their primary diagnostic tool. Never underestimate the power of your own eyes and the clarity that well-constructed data visualization can provide.

One of the most effective tools in this transition is the use of injury heat maps. By overlaying safety trends directly onto maintenance performance data, organizations can identify exactly where risks are concentrated within a production process.

These maps provide a geographic and operational view of where recordables and first-aid incidents occur. They allow cross-functional teams — including engineering, EHS and operations — to see patterns that would remain hidden in a standard spreadsheet.

For instance, a heat map might reveal a cluster of minor lacerations or strains at a specific assembly point. This is an early warning system. Rather than simply instructing employees to be more careful,

‘To move from a reactive culture to a proactive one, leaders must embrace visual data that is gathered from their asset management system as their primary diagnostic tool.’

which is a reactive and often ineffective approach, the engineering team can step in to eliminate the underlying risk. This might involve using technology to automate a hazardous task or re-engineering the workflow to remove the human element from a potential point of injury.

This evolution is best captured in a multiyear transformation map. Improving safety and reliability is not an overnight task; it requires a focused plan that prioritizes and aligns the organization on the most critical aspects of the operation. As the organization moves from reactive to proactive maintenance, teams will see a measurable, positive

ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS

‘While technical infrastructure and digital monitoring are crucial, safety remains a holistic concept that includes people as much as technology.’

shift in the performance. A plant will realize more planned work and fewer emergency break-in events. This shift is the hallmark of a mature asset management program.

Standardizing excellence, safety with OEM collaboration

As manufacturing returns to the United States, plant managers and safety experts have a unique opportunity to implement process design for reliability. With the global supply chain shifts of 2026, we are no longer at the mercy of fragmented overseas production.

The focus must be on working with original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) to ensure that safety, maintenance and reli-

ability and operational care are packaged and delivered for the equipment before it is even turned on. The conversations should happen during the design and procurement phase, not six months after the machines have been bolted to the floor.

While an OEM may produce world-class technology, it may not be the right partner if its maintenance and reliability packages are inadequate. To bring in industry-leading technology, bring in a package that helps the workforce maintain and operate it safely from Day One. This means demanding detailed maintenance logic, standardized operating procedures and pre-packaged training materials as part of the capital investment. When reliability is designed from the start, managers significantly reduce the organizational risk associated with equipment failure.

Protecting the IP

In the modern manufacturing landscape, an organization's secret sauce is no longer just the final product it ships. The true value resides in the specific operating parameters and sound maintenance and reliability package that are defined for the production environment. This internal intelligence is developed through years of engineering and consistent observation of equipment performance.

Protecting this intellectual property is essential for maintaining a competitive edge in an increasingly automated world. While technical platforms provide the speed and precision necessary to manage complex maintenance schedules, the foundational strength of a facility lies in the maturity of its predictive logic.

By analyzing equipment trends and sensor outputs, teams can identify early indicators of wear and potential failures long before they result in a critical shutdown. This foresight allows for planned intervention, which prevents the catastrophic failures that endanger both the machinery and the employees.

However, these predictive frameworks are only as good as the information they receive. Achieving high data quality is a cultural mission rather than a technical one.

Technicians must be encouraged to move beyond a checklist mentality. Cursory inspections and operator care tasks the practice of signing off on a task without performing it — cannot be accepted. This requires a cultural shift where the individuals who understand the equipment most intimately are the ones driving the proactive intelligence of the entire company. This data is the lifeblood of the modern plant. Protecting it ensures that operational advantages cannot be easily replicated by competitors.

Using change management to achieve safety

While technical infrastructure and digital monitoring are crucial, safety remains a holistic concept that includes people as

much as technology. Delivering technical change requires a deep focus on organizational change management. Change management methodologies ensure that the human element is not left behind during a technological shift. Leaders must foster a culture of ownership where employees at all levels feel empowered to identify and mitigate impending risks.

This ownership is built through transparency and functional partnerships across departments. When operators are involved in the reliability process, they transition from merely using a machine to caring for an asset. They become the first line of defense, identifying strange noises, smells or minor leaks before they escalate into something much worse.

This shift in perspective is the goal of a world-class asset management program. It moves the organization away from a culture of perfunctory compliance toward one of genuine engagement and continuous improvement.

Quantifying the economic impact

The financial return on this investment is clear. Beyond the reduction in injuries and the associated costs, a proactive reliability program can significantly increase the bottom line annually, often yielding double-digit percentage savings in maintenance and operational expenses. A rigorous focus on asset management can drop significant savings annually to the bottom line for a single facility. When a plant operates at 95% availability, it is not just more productive, it is more cost-effec tive. The need for emergency parts shipping, overtime for reac tive repairs and the high cost of replacement equipment are all significantly reduced.

By extending the life cycle of assets, companies can prioritize capital planning and spending on growth and innovation rather than constantly fixing what is broken. This financial stability pro vides the resources necessary to continue investing in safety and technology, creating a virtuous cycle of improvement. In 2026, the companies that thrive will be those that treat their mainte nance budget as an investment in resilience rather than a neces sary evil.

Integrate safety, asset management from the start

As we look toward the remainder of 2026 and beyond, the message for manufacturing leaders is clear: the costliest way to address safety, quality and productivity risks is to fix them after the operations are already running. The organizations that will thrive in this new era are those that integrate safety and asset management into a single, cohesive strategy from the very begin ning. This requires a commitment to partner with the right OEMs, capturing and using data for decision-making, a focus on effective engineering and a dedication to cultural change.

Ultimately, the goal is to create an organization that learns. Every work order, every safety incident and every sensor alert should be a data point that informs the operation to take actions and continuously improve. When these feedback loops are in the organizational DNA, a facility can achieve true operational resilience. Plants become capable of anticipating challenges before they manifest as crises. This is the future of manufacturing — a state where intelligence drives action and where the safety of every employee is guaranteed by the reliability of the system they operate within. PE

Bruce A. Wesner, CRL, is a Senior Managing Principal at Life Cycle Engineering.

Insightsu

Safety insights

uModern manufacturing excellence requires a fundamental shift where safety and asset management are no longer treated as separate silos but as two sides of the same coin.

u By integrating reliability engineering into a cohesive asset management strategy, leaders can transform chaotic, reactive environments into predictable systems that inherently prioritize worker safety.

SOLUTIONS

Herbert Post, TRADESAFE, Las Vegas

Designing for automation to make manufacturing operations resilient

As

factories integrate advanced automation, AI and connected technologies, operations become faster — but also more fragile.

Advanced technologies are fundamentally reshaping how factories operate. From predictive maintenance to automation, these tools can drastically improve safety, uptime and productivity.

But despite the promise, the gap between what’s possible and what’s practiced is growing. And most of the time, it’s not because the tools are flawed.

Look at adoption. Many companies jump into advanced manufacturing with high expectations, but most don’t get far. According to the State of U.S. Manufacturing Report 2024, more than 70% of firms investing in technologies like artificial intelligence (AI), advanced analytics or 3D printing never move past the pilot stage. Not because the technologies fail, but because the organization wasn’t ready for what success required.

Objectives

• Identify where and why advanced technologies such as automation fail to scale beyond the pilot stage.

• Explore how resilience is achieved through systems design, not heroic interventions.

• Learn how regulatory frameworks (like OSHA and NFPA 70B) are evolving to support digital safety strategies.

In fact, an ABB global survey of 3,600 industrial leaders found that only 55% have a strategic, proactive plan to modernize their facilities and even those with plans often struggle to execute. Among companies experiencing weekly downtime issues, only about one in five had implemented a modernization strategy despite almost all recognizing the need.

It’s easy to treat complexity as the problem or cast technology as either a silver bullet or a looming threat. But neither is inherently good nor bad; both act as amplifiers. Their impact depends entirely on the system they land on. In well-prepared environments, they drive exponential value. In fragile ones, they multiply risk. And in tightly cou-

pled systems, even small oversights can ripple into major disruptions.

The result is a growing readiness gap: factories may own cutting-edge technology, but without structure and support, its value is left on the table. In many cases, technology is moving faster than the systems meant to absorb it.

What distinguishes technologies that deliver measurable impact is how they combine physical execution, system visibility and decision support. Deployments that align automation and robotics with industrial internet of things (IIoT), analytics and targeted digital tools report cycle-time reductions, fewer false rejects, predictive maintenance gains and compressed tooling lead times, as shown in the table below.

The most prepared organizations aren’t relying on heroic fixes when things go wrong. They’re structured not just to withstand disruption but to learn from it and adapt. Resilience, in this sense, is built into the design. Performance doesn’t come from ambition alone (see Table 1).

Implementing automation

The challenges tied to integration are industrywide. Automation, cloud-based analytics and connected equipment have become standard operating tools across U.S. manufacturing. Deloitte reports that 57% of surveyed manufacturers are using cloud computing in their operations, 57% are leveraging data analytics and nearly half (46%) have deployed IIoT technologies.

But there is a widening distance between technological advancement and organizational readiness. According to data cited in the 2024 State of U.S. Manufacturing report, nearly half of manufacturers say they lack the skilled workforce to stay competitive over the next year. In the U.S. alone, the manufacturing skills gap is projected to leave as many as

2.1 million jobs unfilled by 2030, with a potential economic impact of $1 trillion in that year, according to analysis from The Manufacturing Institute. Technology is advancing faster than the labor pool can absorb, a reality that can hinder the safe and effective implementation of innovations.

Where readiness breaks down

Manufacturing readiness can break down in four ways:

• Technology’s promise requires parallel investment in people and structure: Nearly half of manufacturers regret recent software purchases due to slow, difficult rollouts and low user adoption. The World Economic Forum has noted that for every $2 spent on new technology, up to $5 may be spent later just to scale or integrate it into daily operations.

• Legacy systems clash with new realities: Safety protocols built for analog environments don’t always translate to connected systems. As factories rely more on contractors and vendors for advanced tech, questions of accountability multiply and risks fall through the cracks.

• Organizational structure resists adaptation: Hierarchies designed for stability become bottlenecks when agility is needed. Without rethinking roles, workflows and authority lines, even the best tools stall inside outdated decision-making models.

• Cyber defense remains immature: Despite rising threats, few manufacturers consider themselves “mature” in cybersecurity. Traditional safety protocols struggle to keep up with network-connected systems and many firms have already experienced costly disruptions with no clear response infrastructure in place.

Table 2 translates each structural weakness into its operational signal and the consequence it creates when left unaddressed.

When these problems persist, the outcome is predictable:

• Underused systems

• Frustrated employees

• Latent risks.

Closing this readiness gap requires more than investment. Manufacturers are boosting workforce development programs, redefining decision-making structures and cultivating a culture of continuous learning to keep up with the tools at their disposal.

Figure 1 illustrates this imbalance directly; while technology investment climbs steadily — driven by cloud adoption, automation and measurable efficiency gains — organizational readiness rises more slowly, constrained by workforce shortages, structural bottlenecks and scaling friction. The gap between the two is clearly structural.

Safety recommendations for high-tech facilities

To close the tech-readiness gap, safety must be treated as systems design: clear ownership, standardized workflows and measurable leading indicators that show whether the organization can absorb new tools.

1: The gap between tech investments and organizational readiness can be mitigated by training, workflow integration and leadership to bridge the gap.

FIGURE

Courtesy: TRADESAFE

ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS

Table 1: How plants are turning advanced industrial technologies into tangible gain

Siemens – Electronics Works Amberg (EWA) 2017, Amberg, Germany

Schneider Electric –Le Vaudreuil Lighthouse 2022, Le Vaudreuil, France

Volkswagen Autoeuropa – In-House Tooling (UltiMaker) 2019, location unspecified

Bosch (Curitiba) –Machine Vision Upgrade 2023, Curitiba, Brazil

Integrated “digital enterprise” model: automation and information technology integration, factory wide data/analytics, programmable production lines, closed feedback loops

Internet of things-enabled equipment, digital resource monitoring, analytics-driven energy and materials optimization

Desktop fused filament fabrication/fused deposition modeling 3D printing for tools, jigs and fixtures; shift from external sourcing to internal production

Machine vision and optical character recognition verification, KUKA robotic positioning, programmable logic controller integration, Zebra Aurora Design Assistant, multicamera system

TABLE 1: This shows how plants are turning advanced industrial technologies into tangible gain. Courtesy: TRADESAFE

• 99.9989% built-in quality

• ~75% automation

• −40% nonconformance costs

• >99.5% delivery reliability

• +20% mean time between failure over 10 years

• −25% power consumption

• −17% waste

• −25% CO₂ emissions

• −91% purchasing costs (versus external suppliers)

• −95% implementation time

• ~8 weeks average time reduction

• ~€325,000 annual savings

• €475,000 saved in first two years (est.)

• False rejects reduced to 5%

• 7,000 parts/day production volume

• System build time ~1 month

• Three inspection processes consolidated into one

In high-tech plants, Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA)-aligned programs become most useful when they translate into three operational levers:

• Training that proves competence

• Workflow integration that controls change

• Leadership structures that remove decision bottlenecks

The use of advanced industrial technologies has pushed many companies toward systems-thinking approaches, viewing safety not just as the absence of accidents, but as the outcome of well-designed, adaptive operations.

Most large manufacturers now track traditional metrics like total recordable incident rate and lost time injury frequency. They are also seeking more nuanced ways to evaluate whether their initiatives are truly working. This includes measuring:

• Role-based qualification rates: Who is certified for which tasks and systems.

• Workflow adoption: Percent of shifts using digital checklists/escalation paths as designed.

• Near-miss and anomaly reporting: Including cyber/automation anomalies, not only physical hazards.

• Time-to-correct: How fast hazards, miscalibrations or control deviations are closed.

• Preventive maintenance compliance: Especially for safety-critical assets and electrical systems.

The logic is straightforward: if a company claims to have a “strong safety culture,” there should be tangible evidence such as high employee participation in safety programs, fast correction of reported hazards and consistent reporting of minor incidents.

• Training (competence, not completion): Move from “training done” to role-based qualification. Define who is authorized to run, maintain, bypass or recalibrate automated systems and require demonstrated proficiency (simulations, supervised tasks, sign-off) before access is granted.

• Workflow integration (control the change): Treat every new sensor, dashboard, robot cell or AI model as a controlled change. Build it into daily routines: prestart checks, maintenance triggers, escalation rules and stop-the-line authority. If it isn’t embedded into the workflow, it will remain optional — and stall.

• Leadership (decision rights and response speed): Reduce bottlenecks by defining decision thresholds (what operators can stop, what supervisors must approve, what engineering must review). Resilience is faster, clearer decisions under pressure — not heroic improvisation.

Regulators and companies are encouraging the use of leading indicators. Lagging indicators (like injury rates or lost workdays) measure outcomes after something has happened, which is useful, but they don’t prevent accidents. Leading indicators measure proactive safety activities (inspections completed, hazards reported, workers trained, near-miss corrections) that provide insight into how effectively risks are being controlled in the moment.

According to OSHA guidance on improving safety and health outcomes, the agency strongly encourages employers to use leading indicators as part of their safety programs, calling them “proactive and preventive measures that can shed light about the effectiveness of safety and health activities and reveal potential problems.”

A good safety program now tracks things like:

• The number of safety suggestions employees submit

• The response time to repair a reported hazard

• Compliance with preventive maintenance schedules

This concept aligns with modern standards such as ISO 45001, which require worker participation and iterative risk assessment and fosters a safety culture in which everyone actively looks for early warning signs. The standards include:

• Internal leadership (especially finance executives and operations directors) has become more metrics-focused, often under initiatives like Six Sigma, Lean or ISO management systems that require tracking of key performance indicators.

• External pressures such as environmental, social and governance reporting, investor demands and customer audits mean that manufacturing plants must publicly disclose aspects of their safety and environmental performance.

• The availability of data through digital systems makes it feasible to measure things that were once hard to quantify —so the bar of evidence is naturally rising. In essence, if you can measure it, you will be expected to.

Maintaining continuous digital records helps meet and exceed regulatory standards. OSHA and NFPA 70B: Standard for Electrical Equipment Maintenance requirements — such as equipment maintenance schedules and documentation — can now be supported through automated logging and real-time interventions.

This is especially true for lockout/tagout procedures, where digital platforms enable timestamped verifications, electronic sign-offs and centralized control over isolation steps.

Integrating automation

The themes discussed — rising complexity with lower failure tolerance, the tech-readiness gap, dynamic safety management and outcome-based accountability — do not exist in isolation. They intersect in the daily reality of plant operations, creating both opportunities and tensions that industrial professionals must manage.

On one hand, new technologies (from advanced automation to AI-driven analytics)

Table 2: Where readiness breaks down

Where readiness breaks down

Tech’s promise requires parallel investment in people and structure

Legacy systems clash with new realities

Organizational structure resists adaptation

Cyber-defense remains immature

What it looks like on the plant floor

Tools launch, but training, standard operating procedures and adoption lag behind.

Analog safety controls don’t map cleanly onto connected equipment and vendor-led changes.

Escalations and approvals are slow, unclear or overly centralized.

Operational technology systems stay exposed (weak access control, patching delays, unclear response playbooks).

What it leads to

Low use, inconsistent execution and preventable errors.

Accountability gaps and risk falling between teams.

Delayed hazard correction and prolonged downtime under abnormal conditions.

Disruptions that cascade into safety and production impacts.

offer the promise of safer, more efficient and more sustainable manufacturing. On the other hand, implementing these technologies is not trivial: it brings challenges in workforce adaptation, requires robust change management and can introduce new failure modes.

The journey of modernizing a plant is therefore a careful balancing act.

Every innovation must be accompanied by training, revised procedures and sometimes a cultural shift in how work is done. It’s not enough to install a technology; the organization must be ready to use it effectively.

In essence, the modern industrial plant is a socio-technical system that must continually learn and adapt. Complexity isn’t going away; in fact, it will increase as supply chains, technologies and regulations become more intricate. The key is developing resilient systems and a culture that is prepared for new changes. This includes investing in workforce development, as the data strongly suggests (a lack of skilled workers will undercut any high-tech initiative).

The plants that thrive will likely be those that go beyond the status quo narratives. They won’t just say “more automation equals more productivity” or “more complexity equals more risk.”

Instead, they will dig into the nuanced reality: automation requires upskilling and vigilant risk management; innovation demands smarter simplification and robust contingency planning. They will support every claim with tangible evidence, whether it’s training hours delivered, sensors installed, incident rates reduced or dollars saved. PE

Herbert Post is the VP at TRADESAFE.

TABLE 2: Understand where manufacturing readiness breaks down, what it looks like on the plant floor and its consequences.

Courtesy: TRADESAFE

Insightsu

Automation insights

uThe gap between technical capability and organizational readiness is widening, making modern plants highly efficient until they meet limits they weren’t designed to handle.

uSuccess isn’t just about adopting automation technology — it’s about being structurally prepared to absorb it.

ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS

Jayme Leonard, Atlas Copco Compressors, Rock Hill, South Carolina

Safety makes for resilient and productive manufacturing operations

Effective manufacturing starts with safe operations. Learn ways to create workplaces where safety and productivity thrive together.

Walk onto any manufacturing floor and watch a carefully choreographed operation in motion. Machines run, materials move and people are solving problems in real time. It is impressive and efficient, but it can also be unforgiving. Manufacturing relies on precision, speed and reliability. None of that matters if the people doing the work are not safe.

Safety programs, signage and procedures are common across the industry. Safety does not exist only on a poster or inside a binder, however. It lives in daily decisions, particularly the ones made when no one is watching. Every worker, supervisor and manager plays a role in making sure the floor remains a secure place to work.'

The real cost of unsafe workplaces

When discussing safety, compliance often dominates the conversation. Regulations are essential but only serve as a baseline. The real cost of unsafe workplaces extends far beyond fines or insurance claims.

An injury does not just affect one shift. It disrupts production schedules, pulls supervisors into investigations and leaves teams short-handed. More importantly, it changes how people feel about coming to work. Confidence decreases, trust erodes and a once predictable workplace suddenly feels risky.

The mental toll is often overlooked. Near-misses rarely appear in spreadsheets, yet they linger in workers’ minds. Avoiding an accident by a narrow margin can lead to second-guessing and hesitation, which are not compatible with high-performance operations.

From a business standpoint, unsafe conditions are expensive. From a human standpoint, they are unacceptable. No production target is worth a preventable injury, even if it looked good on yesterday’s dashboard. Organizations that recognize both the tangible and intangible costs of unsafe workplaces are better positioned to invest in meaningful safety programs that prevent incidents before they occur.

FIGURE 1: Service technician on the phone. Courtesy: Atlas Copco Compressors

The line between routine and risk

One of the biggest challenges in manufacturing safety is that risk often hides inside routine. Tasks performed hundreds or thousands of times can begin to feel automatic. When work becomes muscle memory, attention naturally shifts elsewhere, creating opportunities for errors.

Safety issues often begin with minor deviations rather than outright rule-breaking. Skipping a step to save time, reaching instead of repositioning or assuming a machine behaves the way it always has may seem harmless individually. Collectively, these small decisions increase the likelihood of accidents.

Experienced workers are not immune. Familiarity brings efficiency but can reduce perceived risk. The challenge is maintaining awareness and vigilance even when speed and output are constant pressures. Effective safety programs acknowledge that people are human, not careless and that routine work can conceal hazards.

Common manufacturing safety hazards

Hazards in manufacturing are not always obvious. The most dangerous risks are often the ones workers see every day and stop noticing. Some of the most common include:

Moving machinery: Rotating equipment, conveyors and automated systems are essential to operations but demand respect. Pinch points, unexpected startups and bypassed guards are leading contributors to serious injuries. Familiarity can breed overconfidence, which can quietly turn into complacency.

Slips, trips and falls: While not glamorous, these hazards are among the most frequent. A hose left across the floor, a spill that is yet to be cleaned or uneven surfaces in high-traffic areas can quickly transform routine movement into injury.

Pressurized systems and compressed air: Compressed air is critical in many processes but is often misunderstood. Improper use, such as cleaning with compressed air or using damaged hoses, can result in severe injuries. Common does not mean harmless.

Electrical and thermal hazards: Live circuits, exposed wiring, hot surfaces and high-temperature processes pose constant threats, especially during maintenance and troubleshooting. Incidents often occur during tasks outside normal operations, when routines change and assumptions take over.

‘Organizations that recognize both the tangible and intangible costs of unsafe workplaces are better positioned to invest in meaningful safety programs.

Human factors: Fatigue, rushing, distractions and shortcuts contribute significantly to accidents. Unsafe decisions are rarely deliberate; they often result from pressure, tiredness or the desire to be helpful. Addressing human factors through training, scheduling and culture is critical to reducing risk.

Safety culture: what happens when no one is watching

Safety culture is defined not by the number of procedures, but by how people act when supervision is absent. Strong cultures empower workers to stop a process when something seems wrong, correct each other respectfully and trust that reporting issues leads to improvement rather than punishment.

Leadership sets the tone. Supervisors following the same rules as everyone else reinforce that safety is a priority. Conversely, prioritizing production over safety sends a message that shortcuts are acceptable. A healthy safety culture does not demand perfection — it demands consistency. Workers notice when safety is a shared responsibility rather than a checklist. Laminated signs help, but culture is built through daily behavior.

Learningu

Objectives

• Understand how routine tasks, moving machinery, slips, electrical systems and human factors contribute to workplace incidents and why familiar hazards are often the most dangerous.

• Learn strategies to cultivate accountability without blame, encourage proactive reporting and build habits where workers follow safe practices even when unsupervised.

• Gain insights into effective hands-on safety training, proper equipment maintenance and using data-driven tools to prevent incidents while supporting informed, human-centered decision making.

FIGURE 2: Warehouse worker in safety goggles. Courtesy: Atlas Copco Compressors

ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS

Safety accountability without blame

Accountability is often misunderstood in safety discussions. True accountability is not about punishment but clarity. Clear roles, procedures and expectations reduce uncertainty. When everyone understands what "safe" looks like, recognizing deviations becomes easier.

Insights

Safety insights

uAnyone reviewing safety in manufacturing should examine the risks, culture, equipment and people involved. The focus is on understanding why safety matters and how manufacturers can create environments where productivity and protection coexist.

uWhile speed, precision and efficiency are critical, they mean little if workers are at risk. Safety is a daily practice embedded in decisions, behaviors and culture.

Response to incidents and near-misses is equally important. Finger-pointing discourages reporting. Focusing on learning and improvement encourages it. Workers are far more likely to speak up when they believe their input will lead to action rather than consequences. Silence in manufacturing is far more dangerous than a difficult conversation.

Safety training and tools that work

Training is one of the most effective safety tools when done correctly. Many workers can recite safety rules without truly internalizing them. Long, generic sessions fade quickly once people return to the floor. The most effective training includes real examples, hands-on practice and scenarios recognizable from workers’ own jobs.

Effective safety training:

• Uses real incidents and near-misses as learning tools.

• Focuses on “why,” not just “what.”

• Is reinforced regularly, not once a year.

• Encourages questions and conversation.

Workers are more likely to follow procedures they understand and trust. While training need not be entertaining, engagement greatly improves retention and application.

Training the next generation

As experienced workers retire and new employees enter manufacturing, safety knowledge becomes fragmented between formal training and informal on-the-job learning. New workers learn by observing peers. If shortcuts are common, these become the norm. If procedures are consistently followed, that behavior carries forward.

Effective onboarding pairs new workers with safety-minded mentors, reinforces expectations from Day One and checks in regularly during the first months. This reduces incident rates and communicates that safety is a core part of the job, not something learned later.

When safety gets lost in translation

Manufacturing is noisy, literally and figuratively. Shift changes, maintenance schedules, production targets and staffing adjustments can allow critical information to fall through the cracks. Safety incidents often occur during transitions, including shift handovers, equipment maintenance or process changes.

Strong communication is intentional. It uses multiple formats, reinforces key messages and encourages questions. Workers closest to processes often see risks first and they must be empowered to share them. Clear communication does not slow production. It prevents injuries, rework and costly surprises.

Equipment safety: respect the tools that power the plant

Manufacturing depends on powerful equipment. Machines fail predictably, often when maintenance is delayed or warnings are ignored. Preventive maintenance is both a safety and operational strategy. Worn components, leaks, vibrations and unusual noises are early indicators of risk. Addressing these early prevents both downtime and unsafe conditions.

Compressed air systems illustrate this point. Proper use, correct pressure and maintenance are essential. Tools are safer when respected. Improvised fixes may be practical but carry hidden risks. Encouraging workers to flag concerns early fosters trust and prevents unsafe workarounds.

FIGURE 3: Warehouse worker with Turbo Compressor. Courtesy: Atlas Copco Compressors

Technology, data and smarter safety decisions

Advances in technology allow proactive safety approaches. Sensors, monitoring systems and digital reporting tools identify issues before incidents occur. Data highlights recurring near-misses, maintenance gaps and process anomalies.

Technology supports better decision making but cannot replace human awareness. Even the most advanced monitoring system cannot compensate for a culture where reporting is ignored. Technology works best when it supports people, not replaces them.

Making safety personal

Rules are important, but personal investment drives safe behavior. Workers are more likely to follow procedures when they understand how practices protect themselves, coworkers and families. Sharing stories of near-misses, lessons learned and improvements reinforces safety as a shared responsibility.

At its core, safety is about looking out for one another, stepping in when something seems wrong and trusting that the right call is being made. Safety is a team effort requiring participation from the production floor to support staff.

A safer workplace is a better workplace

Manufacturing will always involve risk, but unsafe conditions are preventable. Treating safety as a priority improves productivity, resilience and

‘Effective onboarding pairs new workers with safety-minded mentors, reinforces expectations from Day One and checks in regularly during the first months.’

workplace attractiveness. The goal is zero preventable injuries.

Safety is not separate from productivity, quality or efficiency. It supports all three. Successful manufacturers manage risk responsibly, consistently and collaboratively. Embedding safety into daily work makes operations stronger and more reliable. A safe operation is not just compliant. It is resilient. PE

Jayme

Leonard is Digital Communications Manager at Atlas Copco Compressors.

ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS

Brandon Thompson, CITGO Petroleum Corp., Houston

Why lubricant labels are so important

Misreading labels and lubricant viscosity in real-world applications can lead to costly downtime, potential operational problems and even environment compliance issues.

In industrial plants, lubrication decisions can often appear straightforward. A technician checks the lubricant equipment manual, confirms the viscosity grade on the drum and fills the system. The process seems routine, until it isn’t. Consider a common scenario. A technician pulls a drum labeled “ISO 46 Hydraulic Oil.” The viscosity matched what’s listed in the equipment manual, so the lubricant goes into service. Weeks later, the hydraulic system begins running hotter than expected. Valves start sticking. Maintenance crews notice sluggish actuator performance. Eventually, a teardown reveals varnish deposits and signs of

Key properties in a lubricant technical data sheet

oxidation throughout the system. The label wasn’t wrong. It just wasn’t the full story.

Lubricant misapplication rarely occurs because someone ignores instructions. Often, it happens because decisions are made using partial information. Viscosity may be confirmed, but performance specifications are overlooked. Marketing claims are trusted, but performance data isn’t reviewed. Safety warnings may be skimmed, but handling requirements are not reinforced.

In modern plants, lubrication decisions influence far more than component wear. They affect equipment reliability, warranty compliance, energy efficiency, worker safety and environmental responsibility. For engineers and maintenance leaders, understanding lubricant documentation is essential.

The label is only the starting point. The real insight lies in the technical and safety documentation behind it.

What a lubricant label tells you

Lubricant packaging labels are designed for quick identification. They provide essential information, but they are not intended to communicate every performance characteristic of a product.

Typically, a lubricant label includes several key elements:

Courtesy: CITGO Petroleum Corp.

• Viscosity grade, such as SAE or ISO classification

FIGURE 1: Key properties in a lubricant technical data sheet.

Image courtesy Adobe Stock

• Service category, such as industry standards or engine classifications (API, ACEA)

• Application type, identifying the intended system (hydraulic, gear, engine oil, etc.)

• Marketing descriptors, including terms like synthetic, premium or high-performance

These identifiers are helpful, but they do not reveal the complete performance profile of a lubricant.

Critical details that typically do not appear on the label include:

• Additive chemistry and concentration levels

• Shear stability characteristics

• Oxidation resistance and service life

• Zinc or phosphorous content in anti-wear formulations

• Foaming characteristics

• Water separation ability (demulsibility)

• Seal compatibility

• Worker exposure and safety concerns

In other words, two lubricants can carry the same viscosity grade while performing very differently in operation.

For engineers responsible for equipment reliability, relying solely on label information can create unnecessary risk. To make informed decisions, maintenance professionals must look beyond packaging and review the documentation that defines a lubricant’s true operational performance.

How to read a lubricant product data sheet

The technical data sheet (TDS), sometimes called a product data sheet, translates marketing claims into measurable performance data. It is one of the most valuable documents for evaluating lubricant stability in plant environments.

Understanding how to interpret a TDS allows engineers and technicians to determine whether a product will perform reliably under specific environments.

The first step in reviewing a TDS is confirming that the lubricant is designed for the correct application. Questions to consider include:

• Is the lubricant intended for engines, hydraulic systems, compressors or gearboxes?

• Does it support the load conditions of the equipment?

The five-step lubricant decision framework

TO REDUCE THE RISK of misapplication, plant leaders can follow a structured lubricant evaluation process. A practical lubricant review framework includes five important steps:

1. Confirm original equipment manufacturer (OEM) requirements: Verify the lubricant specifications listed in the equipment manual.

2. Verify viscosity grade: Ensure the lubricant matches the required viscosity classification.

3. Confirm industry/OEM specifications: Check for formal approvals or compliance with required standards.

4. Review technical data sheet (TDS) performance properties: Evaluate critical characteristics such as oxidation stability, viscosity index, demulsibility and foam control.

5. Check safety data sheet considerations: Confirm appropriate handling procedures, personal protective equipment requirements and storage conditions.

• Is it formulated for the expected temperature range?

Different industrial systems impose different demands on lubricants. A product optimized for one environment may perform poorly in another.

Key performance properties to review

A TDS contains numerous performance metrics. Some of the most important include the following.

Kinematic viscosity (40°C & 100°C): Viscosity defines a fluid’s resistance to flow. Most TDS provide viscosity measurements at 40°C and 100°C. Why two temperatures? Because viscosity changes significantly as temperature changes. Measuring viscosity at both moderate and elevated temperatures helps engineers understand how the lubricant will behave during cold start conditions and under operating heat.

Viscosity index (VI): The VI indicates how stable a lubricant’s viscosity remains as temperatures fluctuate. A higher VI means the oil maintains more consistent thickness across a wider temperature range. This stability is particularly valuable in systems exposed to varying ambient conditions or fluctuating operating temperatures.

Pour point: The pour point represents the lowest temperature at which an oil can still flow.

In colder environments or during startup conditions, an oil with a high pour point may struggle to circulate effectively. Poor flow during startup can result in inadequate lubrication during the most critical moments of equipment operation.

Learningu

Objectives

• Recognize the operation risks of relying solely on lubricant labels, including the potential for equipment damage, downtime, safety exposure and environmental issues.

• Interpret key information found in technical data sheets (TDS) and safety data sheets (SDS) to evaluate lubricant performance characteristics, safety considerations and suitability for specific plant applications.

• Apply a structured lubricant selection process that verifies OEM requirements, performance specifications and safety documentation to reduce misapplication risks and improve equipment reliability.

ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS

Flash point: The flash point identifies the temperature at which oil vapors may ignite in the presence of a spark and serves primarily as an indicator of flammability and handling safety rather than a maximum operating temperature.

Zinc and phosphorous levels: Many anti-wear additives rely on zinc and phosphorous compounds, commonly referred to as ZDDP. These additives provide protection under high-load conditions, especially in hydraulic pumps and heavily loaded components. But their presence and concentration must align with original equipment manufacturer (OEM).specifications due to potential material-compatibility and system-sensitivity considerations.

Oxidation stability: Oxidation resistance determines how well an oil maintains its integrity over tie when exposed to heat and oxygen. Poor oxidation stability can lead to varnish formation, sludge buildup and shorten oil life, all of which can contribute to maintenance costs and system breakdowns.

Demulsibility: Industrial systems often encounter moisture contamination through condensation or environmental exposure. Demulsibility refers to an oil’s ability to separate from water. In systems such as turbines, compressors and hydraulic reservoirs, good water separation helps prevent corrosion and maintains lubrication performance.

Foam test results: Foaming occurs when air becomes entrained in the lubricant. Excessive foam can reduce lubrication effectiveness, increase oxidation and cause erratic system behavior. TDS foam test data provides insight into how well the lubricant resists aeration.

The TDS converts performance claims into quantifiable data. It provides the numbers needed to evaluate whether a lubricant is suitable for a specific application.

How to read an SDS

While the TDS focuses on performance, the safety data sheet (SDS) focuses on risk management.

Plant maintenance leaders must consider several factors when evaluating lubricants:

• Worker exposure risks

• Storage requirements

• Fire hazards

• Disposal practices

• Environmental compliance

The SDS provides the regulatory information needed to manage these considerations.

The SDS is a regulatory document designed to communicate chemical hazards. In the United States, it must comply with standards established by the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling Chemicals (GHS) and adopted by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. SDS documents follow a standardized 16-section format, ensuring consistent information across manufacturers.

Several sections of the SDS are particularly relevant for plant engineers and maintenance teams when reviewing the document.

Section 2: Hazard identification: This section provides a quick overview of safety concerns, including:

• Signal words such as “danger” or “warning”

• Hazard pictograms

• Statements describing potential risks

Section 4: First aid measures: This section outlines response procedures if exposure occurs, including contact with skin, eyes or inhalation.

Section 7: Handling and storage: This guides proper storage conditions, including temperature control, ventilation requirements and incompatible materials.

Section 8: Exposure controls/personal protective equipment (PPE): This details recommended PPE and exposure limits for workers handling the product.

Section 9: Physical and chemical properties: Provides additional data such as vapor pressure, density and flash point.

Section 10: Stability and reactivity: Identifies conditions that could cause chemical instability or hazardous reactions.

Section 12: Ecological information: Describes

FIGURE 2: Understand the lubricant selection process. Courtesy: CITGO Petroleum Corp.

environmental impact considerations if product enters soil or water systems.

In practical terms, the SDS protects people, while the TDS protects equipment. Both documents must be understood to ensure safe and reliable operations.

Approvals versus marketing language

Once common source of confusion in lubricant selection involves wording on labels and marketing materials. Phrases like “approved by” or “meets requirements of” may appear similar but represent very different levels of verification.

• “Approved by” typically means the product has undergone formal testing and certification by an OEM.

• “Meets requirements of” often indicates the manufacturer believes the product aligns with the specification, but it has not necessarily been formally approved.

OEM approvals matter because many equipment warranties require the use of approved lubricants. Using a product that merely “meets requirements” could create complications if warranty claims arise.

Maintaining documentation of lubricant approvals protects both equipment performance and plant management accountability.

Red flags in labels or data sheets

Certain warning signs should prompt closer scrutiny when evaluating a lubricant. Potential red flags to watch for include:

• No publicly available technical or safety documentation

• Missing viscosity values at both 40°C and 100°C

• Lack of referenced test methods such as ASTM standards

• No document revision date

• Vague marketing claims without supporting data

• No manufacturer contact information

Lack of transparency in documentation is an indicator of product unreliability.

Training teams on lubricants

Even the best documentation cannot prevent errors if maintenance teams lack the training to interpret it. Plant managers can reduce lubrication mistakes through several practical measures:

• Establish a standardized approved lubricant list for all equipment

• Maintain digital access to TDS and SDS documents

• Conduct annual lubrication literacy training for technicians

• Perform routine audits of lubrication storage areas

Investing in lubrication education can significantly improve equipment reliability and reduce safety risks and maintenance costs.

Lubricant success

Lubrication decisions are not routine maintenance tasks. While labels provide quick identification, they represent only a fraction of the information needed to determine whether a lubricant is truly suitable for an application.

The TDS reveals the measurable performance characteristics that determine how a lubricant will behave under load, temperature changes and contamination exposure. The SDS, meanwhile, outlines the procedures necessary to protect workers, manage hazards and maintain regulatory compliance. Both documents are important tools for maintenance and reliability professionals.

For plant engineers and maintenance leaders, relying solely on label information can lead to equipment damage, unplanned downtime, safety risks and environmental exposure. Reviewing the full technical and safety documentation behind a lubricant helps ensure that products are applied correctly and that systems operate reliably. In industrial settings, labels are shorthand, but data sheets are the truth and safety documentation is nonnegotiable.

In modern industrial environments, reliability, safety and compliance depend on making lubrication choices on complete confirmation. PE

Brandon Thompson is Product Marketing Manager, Lubricants at CITGO Petroleum Corp.

‘Maintaining documentation of lubricant approvals protects both equipment performance and plant management accountability.’

Insightsu

Lubricant insights

uWhile a lubricant label provides a quick reference for viscosity and application, relying on it alone can lead to system failures if detailed performance specifications are overlooked.

u To ensure equipment reliability and worker safety, maintenance professionals must look beyond the packaging to the technical and safety data sheets that define the true operational profile of a lubricant.

SVP

Sales

Sales

Sales Account Manager

Sales Account Manager

Jack Gillerlain

Sales Account Manager

Susan Powers

Sales Account Manager

ABuehner@WTWHMedia.com

JPinsel@wtwhmedia.com

774-507-6780

RGroth@wtwhmedia.com

773-724-1638

TDuggan@WTWHMedia.com

773-909-2718

JGillerlain@wtwhmedia.com

847-380-0469 SPowers@WTWHMedia.com

Nina Diamond 831-236-4482 NDiamond@wtwhmedia.com

Publication Services

McKenzie Burns, Marketing Manager MBurns@WTWHmedia.com

Rick Ellis, Director, Audience Growth 303-246-1250, REllis@WTWHMedia.com

Custom reprints, print/electronic: Matt Claney, 216-860-5253, MClaney@WTWHMedia.com

Information: For a Media Kit or Editorial Calendar, go to https://www.plantengineering.com/advertise-with-us.

Letters to the editor: Please e-mail us your opinions to ARozgus@WTWHMedia.com. Letters should include name, company, and address, and may be edited.

RESEARCH

Stay on top of market trends through research.

FEATURE-PACKED FOR YOUR MACHINE

With real-time data collection, speeds up to 7,000 RPM, a 3.5 kHz frequency response, multi-axis SERVOPACKS, and expanded functions, Sigma-X takes servo response to a higher level.

• Integrated data collection from servo motor to SERVOPACK for preventative maintenance.

• Higher speed and frequency response shorten cycle times to improve machine performance.

• Standard high resolution 26-bit absolute encoder, speed ripple compensation and output torque compensation functions improve precision and accuracy.

• Expanded tuning-less function to 100 times the load shortens servo tuning time.

• Two and three-axis SERVOPACKS reduce control panel size and reduce wiring time.

Want to get an edge on your competition? Contact Yaskawa today.

From planned projects to last-minute needs, The Home Depot delivers on your schedule—same day, next day or any day you need to keep the job moving. When and Where You Need It.

homedepot.com/c/pro