Oct 22

WRITTEN BY: Peter Wicklein
Thursday, 22 October 2009 

In today’s world, surrounded by instant answers and immediate reporting (think Twitter), it’s important to remember the value of clear thinking.  The quick and obvious approach is no substitute for proper consideration of a situation in order to solve the problem, not just its symptoms.

A recent assignment brought this home to me.

The customer came to Frame with issues in its data centre’s cooling and electrical systems; both were struggling to keep up with demand.  Sure enough, measurements of the systems showed they were being taxed to the extreme.  The obvious answer was to double everything they have already for managing cooling and power.  In fact, this is exactly what the customer was being told by other consultants and, in the short term, this may have addressed the issues.

The Frame team found a different answer.

With some critical and lateral thinking, and a healthy dose of simple mathematics, we found that the reason for the cooling issues was poor under-floor pressure caused by:

• floor tiles missing at the end of the room, where cooling needs were less
• racks without doors, letting cool air out
• an under-floor blocked with cable bundles, most of them obsolete
• a data hall littered with boxes, displacing the useable air space above floor
• a lack of under-floor baffles to direct cool air to where it was most needed
• racks full of redundant equipment, most of which was still switched on.

Frame recommended the customer adopt low-cost remediation works to fix these issues before contemplating extra cooling capacity.  This would not only make the room more energy-efficient but would also save the customer tens-of-thousands of dollars in capital expenditure.

In regards to the electrical systems, they did need another generator and main switchboard.  However, we also found that future switchboards may not be needed if remediation works were carried out to balance the loads and remove redundant circuits. Re-using UPSs and deploying those in storage could further reduce the cost of the upgrade.  Our recommendation that they source a reconditioned diesel generator rather than a buy a new one—due to the short time the customer will be in the existing location, the long effective life of diesel engines and the typical short running time generators usually accrue in their lives—drove the cost down further.

Lastly, but by no means least, there were occupational health and safety issues which we identified right at the beginning of our report and which, I’m happy to say, were immediately addressed.

In simple terms, our report said:

• first, spend your money to make people safe in their work environment
• second, spend your money to remediate, otherwise any investment will suffer from the current inefficiencies
• third, spend money to meet your needs, but only when you have a very clear view of what they are.

The customer was a little surprised when they got the report—they thought it would just tell them to do what the other consultants had told them.  They were extremely happy with our recommendations and our approach, that we had thought about the problem and that it wasn’t all about money.  And, most importantly, we took them along on the journey of discovery.

Last week I visited the customer.  They proudly showed me all the new safety features of the room and how much cooler it was, without having to have made any capital expenditure.  Our reward?  A job done properly, a happy customer and an ongoing business relationship.

The advantage of clarity … your customers will not only pay for it, they’ll come back for more.