University of East London

MSc Engineering Management

Integrating Continuous Improvement

Strategies into the Quality Management
System for BESS Reliability

Module Code: EG7069

Module Title: Quality Management and Reliability
Assignment Title: Integrating Continuous Improvement Strategies
into the Quality Management System
Guided By: Dr. Muhammad Anwar
Name: Tarika Jani
ID: 3039847

December 17, 2025

Executive Summary

This report looks at how Continuous Improvement (CI) strategies were applied to address criti-
cal reliability and safety issues in the Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) industry, meeting
the requirements of the Quality Management and Reliability module. The specific industrial
problem investigated was the high number of BESS failure incidents, such as thermal runaway,
which were recorded before 2018. To get a clear diagnosis of these system failures, the inves-
tigation utilized the 2024 EPRI BESS Failure Incident Database [7].
Interestingly, the analysis revealed that most issues were not caused by inherent cell defects.
Instead, they stemmed from systemic weaknesses in the Quality Management System (QMS),
particularly regarding execution and integration. The EPRI framework successfully served
as a standardized Check mechanism, helping the industry formally establish a data-driven CI
framework. This framework led to the implementation of targeted quality solutions, including
mandated standards like UL 1973 [17], enhanced workforce training, and predictive analytics.
The effectiveness of this CI strategy is backed up by the quantitative impact assessment, which
shows that the global grid-scale BESS failure rate dropped by a dramatic 97% between 2018
and 2023. Ultimately, the BESS case study demonstrates the essential value of systematic
CI for improving safety, efficiency, and the long-term sustainability of complex engineering
projects.

1
Contents

1 Introduction: The BESS Quality Imperative 3

1.1 Foundational Principles of Quality and Reliability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1.1 The Quality Management System (QMS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1.2 The Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) Cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

2 BESS Failure Diagnosis and Organizational Constraints 5

2.1 The Biaxial Analysis: Root Causes of Incidents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.1.1 Focus on Process Control Failures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2 The Biaxial Analysis: Failed Elements and Organisational Constraints . . . . . 6
2.2.1 The Multi-Vendor Constraint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

3 Establishing Best Industrial Practices and the CI Engine 8

3.1 Formalizing the CI Engine and Feedback Loops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.2 Best Practices: Implementing Data-Driven Process Control . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.3 Quality Control Tools as the Mechanism for CI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.3.1 Pareto Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.3.2 Check Sheets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.3.3 Control Charts (Shewhart Charts) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.3.4 Cause-and-Effect (Fishbone) Diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

4 Implementation and Impact Assessment 12

4.1 Full Implementation of Quality Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.1.1 Engineering-Out Failure (Design for Reliability) . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.1.2 Standardization of Field Execution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.1.3 Leveraging Data for Sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.2 Impact Assessment and Reliability Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

5 Recommendations 14

6 Conclusion 15

A List of Figures 18

2
Chapter 1

Introduction: The BESS Quality

Imperative

The push to decarbonize our power supply has turned Battery Energy Storage Systems, or
BESS, into the backbone of the modern utility grid [10]. We rely on these systems to smooth
out the natural difficulties of solar and wind energy, ensuring the lights stay on even when
the weather does not cooperate. But honestly, the industry moved so fast that the technology
initially outpaced our safety nets. We are talking about complex systems that mash up volatile
electrochemistry with sensitive power electronics, and for a while, our quality frameworks just
could not keep up. Before 2018, we saw a string of fires and failures that really shook the
confidence of regulators and the public alike. It was a harsh wake-up call that proved we
needed to get serious about applying rigorous quality management and reliability engineering
[12].

1.1 Foundational Principles of Quality and Reliability

Addressing the reliability crisis in BESS really comes down to leaning on established engi-
neering and management philosophies. A solid understanding of this groundwork provides the
theoretical map the industry needs to make corrections. Look at the integration of high-power
inverters into renewable energy systems, for example. It is essential for ensuring energy con-
version is both dependable and efficient, a fact supported by research highlighting their role
in handling intermittent power sources and keeping the grid stable [1]. Then there is the opti-
mization of microgrids using metaheuristic algorithms. As shown in studies on economic load
dispatch, applying these proven methodologies enhances operational reliability and resilience,
especially when facing the unpredictability of renewable resources [2].

1.1.1 The Quality Management System (QMS)

A solid Quality Management System, structured around international standards like ISO 9001:2015,
is really the foundation of industrial excellence [11]. We are talking about everything from the
initial design and procurement all the way to installation and operation. As recent studies on
wind energy challenges point out, a QMS needs to be strong enough to manage the variability
and complexity of modern energy systems. This is especially true when you are dealing with
multiple vendors. You can see this in the early failures of Battery Energy Storage Systems.

3
Those issues revealed a failure not just of individual parts, but of the QMS itself. It struggled to
manage complexity and keep standards high across a multi-vendor supply chain, which reflects
the current discussions on power systems optimization [13].

1.1.2 The Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) Cycle

At its heart, true systemic improvement relies on the philosophy of Continuous Improvement.
This concept runs on the engine of the PDCA cycle [6], which breaks the process down into
four logical steps. First, there is Plan, where you define the problem and produce a theory. Then
comes Do, where you test that solution out on a trial basis. After that, you Check, measuring
the results against your plan using real data. Finally, you Act. If the solution worked, you
make it the new standard; if not, you either refine the plan or scrap it entirely. The challenge
in industrial settings has often been a lack of a rigorous "Check" mechanism. Missing that
step tends to put a brake on systematic progress. This is exactly where the EPRI BESS Failure
Incident Database steps in. It serves as a crucial resource by offering the standardized failure
data needed to help the BESS Quality Management System stop merely fighting fires and start
driving initiative-taking improvement [7]. This data-driven approach is especially important
for operational efficiency, much like we see in maritime systems where integrating renewable
energy boosts reliability. It just goes to show how essential it is to use standardized data when
evaluating your processes [3].

4
Chapter 2

BESS Failure Diagnosis and

Organizational Constraints

A robust quality intervention must begin with an objective diagnosis of the problem, diligently
separating symptoms from root causes to ensure clarity in addressing the issue at hand. In the
BESS industry, this critical step was effectively realized through the EPRI Biaxial Analysis,
which stands out as a superior method compared to simple failure tracking, as it concurrently
investigates the why (root cause) and the what (failed element) [7].

2.1 The Biaxial Analysis: Root Causes of Incidents

When you look at the failure database, the data reveals something important. The main reason
BESS fail isn’t usually because of deep flaws in the battery chemistry, but because of weak-
nesses in the systemic processes. This distinction really highlights why we need to focus on
organizational processes and management practices. As research points out, getting those sys-
temic approaches right is key to significantly reducing the risks involved with these complex
systems [4].

2.1.1 Focus on Process Control Failures

The analysis of Root Cause, which illuminates deficiencies in the QMS, produced the following
breakdown:
• Integration, Assembly & Construction (36%): It took the top spot, accounting for
36% of the issues. That high number highlights a real gap in process control during the
construction phase. We are mostly looking at human errors here, whether it is applying
the wrong torque, mis-wiring cables, installing components awkwardly, or just drifting
away from the sequence protocols [12]. In high-consequence setups like BESS, you sim-
ply cannot afford that kind of variation in installation quality. That makes standardization
and control a massive priority.
• Operation (29%): This covers things like maintenance mishaps, software glitches, and
settings that were not right. It points clearly to gaps in training, missing documentation,
or a lack of robustness in the operational QMS.

5
 • Design (21%): While that matters, it suggests the core electrochemical science is sound.
The challenge is just implementing it better through Design for Reliability (DFR) princi-
ples [14].

Integration
& Con-
struction
(36%)

Operation
(29%)

Manuf.
(14%)

Design
(21%)

Figure 2.1: Distribution of BESS Incident Root Causes. The chart highlights that 65%
of failures are linked to systemic issues in Integration and Operations, rather than deep
electrochemical flaws. Adapted from EPRI (2024).

2.2 The Biaxial Analysis: Failed Elements and Organisa-

tional Constraints
The second axis of the analysis elucidates the specific components that failed, thereby high-
lighting the technical and organizational constraints inherent in Battery Energy Storage System
projects. Controls are responsible for 46% of failures, which encompass critical elements such
as the Battery Management System, master controllers, and safety interlocks [9]. This sig-
nificant failure rate underscores a pressing technical constraint: the absolute dependence on
advanced, stable software and control hardware to effectively manage complex interactions
among multiple cells and to avert potential thermal events. Additionally, Balance of System
(BOS) components, which include HVAC cooling, fire suppression systems, power conversion
equipment, and interconnect cabling, exhibit a failure rate of 43%. In contrast, Battery Modules
or Cells account for a notably smaller share of total failures at only 8%–11% [16].

6
 Controls
(46%)

Cells (11%)

BOS (43%)

Figure 2.2: Breakdown of BESS Failures by Failed Element. The analysis reveals that
Controls (46%) and Balance of System (43%) components are the primary failure points,
vastly outweighing failures in actual battery cells (11%). Data derived from the EPRI
Failure Incident Database.

2.2.1 The Multi-Vendor Constraint

It presents significant challenges for achieving reliability and operational efficiency. As BESS
projects often incorporate a diverse array of components from multiple manufacturers, discrep-
ancies in communication protocols, system architecture, and software compatibility can hinder
the effective integration of these systems. This fragmentation increases the risk of sub-optimal
performance, as components that are not designed to operate cohesively may introduce unfore-
seen errors or inefficiencies, ultimately compromising overall system reliability. According to
recent findings, multi-vendor environments can exacerbate issues of incomplete visibility and
management complexity, making it difficult for non-expert users to monitor and control system
behaviour effectively. To address these challenges, it is essential to establish a robust framework
that not only facilitates interoperability among heterogeneous devices but also supports contin-
uous improvement strategies aimed at proactively identifying and mitigating potential failures.
For instance, adopting a predictive maintenance paradigm that leverages data analytics and ma-
chine learning can significantly enhance asset reliability by enabling timely interventions based
on insights derived from multi-sensor data [8].

7
Chapter 3

Establishing Best Industrial Practices and

the CI Engine

The diagnosis confirmed that the BESS problem was fundamentally a quality management
issue, which underscores the importance of reliability engineering in the energy sector. The
strategic response was to establish the EPRI Biaxial Framework not merely as a report, but
as the permanent Check step of the industry-wide PDCA cycle. This approach aligns with
current findings that emphasize the need for continuous improvement and formal continuous
improvement engines in maintaining reliable systems within the burgeoning market of BESS
and the broader energy infrastructure. By integrating this framework, the industry aims to
address safety and reliability concerns effectively, reflecting the critical relationship between
quality management and operational performance [15].

3.1 Formalizing the CI Engine and Feedback Loops

The Continuous Improvement engine operates through two essential, formalized feedback
loops that are designed to tackle the root causes outlined in Section 2. The Design for Re-
liability Feedback Loop utilizes data on failed elements, such as controls, and channels this
information directly back to the manufacturers’ product design teams. This process encourages
the early integration of DFR principles, including component derating, redundancy planning,
and failure mode analysis, thus proactively eliminating known failure pathways. In parallel, the
Process Control Feedback Loop incorporates data on root causes associated with integration
and assembly, which is then communicated back to site engineering and construction manage-
ment. This feedback necessitates the development of standardized, zero-tolerance procedures
aimed at minimizing process variation and human error during installation.

3.2 Best Practices: Implementing Data-Driven Process Con-

trol
The data directly informed the development of three critical best practices: Standardized Bi-
axial Commissioning Protocols, which recognize that mere installation conformance is insuffi-
cient. The best practice has shifted to rigorous commissioning protocols that specifically evalu-
ate the interfaces between vendor systems under various simulated conditions, enforcing quality

8
hold-points and ensuring that the entire integrated system meets reliability requirements before
operation. Additionally, a Shift to Predictive Quality, which involves using real-time data to
monitor system conditions and predict potential failures, represents a mature level of reliabil-
ity engineering. Furthermore, Enhanced Supplier Quality Management expands the Quality
Management System to enforce quality not just internally but across the entire supply chain,
requiring suppliers of critical components to demonstrate how their processes directly mitigate
failure modes identified by the Biaxial Analysis.

3.3 Quality Control Tools as the Mechanism for CI

The translation of strategic intent into practical action (Standardized Commissioning) is per-
formed using statistical and analytic Quality Control tools, which are essential for ensuring sys-
tematic planning and execution in various engineering and technological applications. These
tools provide the necessary rigor and quantification for the Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) Check
step, enabling organizations to assess the effectiveness of their processes and make informed
decisions based on data-driven insights. By integrating these methodologies, organizations can
improve their operational performance and foster continuous improvement practices [12].

3.3.1 Pareto Chart

The Pareto Chart, based on the 80/20 rule, is the foundational tool for prioritization. In the
BESS context, the Biaxial Analysis itself acts as a sophisticated Pareto exercise. The visualiza-
tion confirms that focusing on the Integration (36%) and Controls/BOS (89%) failure modes
will yield the maximum return on quality investment, justifying the allocation of finite re-
sources. The graph generated through this analysis illustrates that directing attention towards
the Integration (36%) and Controls/BOS (89%) failure modes will provide the maximum return
on quality investment, a strategy that aligns with the growing emphasis on safety systems and
reliability in BESS design.

Pareto Analysis of Failure Modes

100
100
80
80
Cumulative %
Quantity

60
50 60
40 35
40

20 20
8
3
0 0
Integration BOS Battery Other

Figure 3.1: Pareto Chart for Failure Prioritization. The chart demonstrates the appli-
cation of the 80/20 rule, confirming that Integration and Balance of System (BOS) failures
constitute the "vital few" issues. Focusing resources here addresses nearly 90% of all sys-
temic failures.

9
3.3.2 Check Sheets
The implementation of check sheets within Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) is inte-
gral to fostering a culture of continuous improvement and enhancing overall system reliability.
Check sheets serve as systematic tools for data collection and analysis, enabling operators to
document occurrences of failures, malfunctions, or safety incidents related to BESS operations.

3.3.3 Control Charts (Shewhart Charts)

The Shewhart control chart, also known as the control chart, is a fundamental tool in statis-
tical quality control that facilitates the monitoring of processes over time to ensure consistent
performance and reliability, particularly in complex systems like Battery Energy Storage Sys-
tems. By plotting data points in relation to pre-established control limits, the Shewhart chart
enables engineers and managers to detect variations that may signal underlying issues in system
performance, such as equipment degradation or external environmental influences. Proactive
intervention is key to sustainable reliability.
Performance Metric (e.g., Temp/Voltage)

Shewhart Control Chart Example

120

110

100
Mean
UCL
90 LCL
Measured Data
80
0 5 10 15 20
Time (Samples)

Figure 3.2: Shewhart Control Chart for Predictive Maintenance. This tool allows the
QMS to shift from reactive to predictive action. By monitoring performance against Upper
and Lower Control Limits (UCL/LCL), deviations can be corrected before they lead to
critical system failure [6].

3.3.4 Cause-and-Effect (Fishbone) Diagram

By visually mapping out potential factors categorized into various domains such as technol-
ogy, processes, materials, and human resources the diagram facilitates a systematic analysis of
the underlying problems that can impede BESS performance. For instance, as seen in recent
studies, varying market dynamics and operational risks can significantly affect BESS efficiency
and reliability, emphasizing the necessity of continuous monitoring and strategic adjustments.
In addition, integrating fuzzy logic management systems, like those evaluated in the context of
DC microgrids, enhances the effectiveness of the Fishbone diagram by allowing for nuanced
interpretations of data points, thereby refining cause identification. Through this multi-faceted
approach, the Fishbone diagram not only aids in identifying direct causes of failures or inef-

10
ficiencies but also promotes a culture of proactive problem-solving that aligns with broader
continuous improvement efforts [5].

Assembly & Controls & Design &

Construction Software Engineering

Cable mis-wiring Sensor drift Firmware error

Incorrect torque specs Protocol mismatch No DFR analysis

Systemic Inter-
face Failures
Leading to Un-
reliable BESS
Operator error Faulty cooling

Expired PM schedule Uncertified components

Operation & BOS &

Maintenance Materials

Figure 3.3: Cause-and-Effect (Ishikawa) Diagram. This diagram provides a systematic

visualization of root causes, categorizing factors from "Incorrect Torque Specs" (Construc-
tion) to "Sensor Drift" (Controls) that contribute to overall system unreliability.

11
Chapter 4

Implementation and Impact Assessment

The implementation of continuous improvement strategies in Battery Energy Storage Systems

reliability necessitates a comprehensive impact assessment framework that evaluates both tech-
nical performance and operational efficiency. It is essential to analyse performance metrics such
as energy discharge cycles, response times to grid demands, and overall lifecycle longevity in
conjunction with evolving market conditions and regulatory requirements.

4.1 Full Implementation of Quality Solutions

Following initiatives represent the full commitment to quality solutions:

4.1.1 Engineering-Out Failure (Design for Reliability)

Engineering out failure through a Design for Reliability approach is pivotal for enhancing the
performance and longevity of BESS. By focusing on systematic methodologies during the de-
sign phase, engineers can proactively identify and mitigate potential failure modes, improv-
ing system reliability. This process involves rigorous analysis of components, environmental
stresses, and operational conditions that the BESS may encounter throughout its lifecycle. By
adhering to a philosophy of continuous improvement and applying DfR principles, the overall
resilience and operational efficacy of BESS can be significantly elevated, providing sustainable
and dependable energy solutions.

4.1.2 Standardization of Field Execution

Within the context of BESS is a critical factor in enhancing operational reliability and effi-
ciency. By establishing uniform protocols and training programs, organizations can ensure that
field executives possess a consistent set of skills and knowledge, which is essential for effec-
tively managing the complexities of BESS technologies. Standardization not only streamlines
communication and reinforces best practices across diverse geographical locations, but it also
facilitates the systematic collection of performance data, which can be leveraged for continu-
ous improvement initiatives. Furthermore, a standardized approach enables field executives to
quickly adapt to modern technologies and methodologies, fostering a culture of innovation that
is vital in the rapidly evolving landscape of energy storage.

12
4.1.3 Leveraging Data for Sustainability
The implementation of Predictive Quality Analytics, particularly through Control Charts, offers
substantial advantages for sustainability in energy systems. In reactive maintenance scenarios,
a malfunctioning battery operating system component can lead to catastrophic shutdowns, ne-
cessitating the replacement of large, expensive components. By employing Control Charts to
continuously monitor the systems conditions, minor issues can be proactively addressed before
they escalate into significant problems. This proactive approach not only extends the oper-
ational lifespan of the entire asset but also minimizes waste and reduces the environmental
impact associated with the frequent manufacture and transportation of components [8].

4.2 Impact Assessment and Reliability Improvement

The final, and most compelling, stage of the Continuous Improvement process is the critical as-
sessment of its impact. The execution of systematic quality and reliability measures has yielded
a quantifiable and assessed impact: the most profound metric is the finding that between 2018
and 2023, the global grid-scale BESS failure rate decreased by 97%. This overwhelming suc-
cess validates every step of the CI strategy from diagnosis, as supported by the Electric Power
Research Institute data (EPRI, 2021), to standardization, facilitated by the use of Check Sheets,
and on to systemic improvement, represented by Data Failure Reporting techniques. The imple-
mentation of a rigorous, data-driven Quality Management System has successfully translated
complex engineering requirements into reliable field performance. Furthermore, the notable
drop in failure rate correlates directly with a significant increase in system availability, illus-
trating the effectiveness of the continuous improvement mechanisms in enhancing operational
reliability.

20 10

8 Failures per Deployed GW

15
Failure Incidents (#)

6
10
4

5
2

0 0
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Year
Failure Rate (per GW)
Failure Incidents

Figure 4.1: Global Grid-Scale BESS Deployment and Failure Statistics. This graph
validates the effectiveness of the implemented CI strategies. Despite the exponential growth
in deployment (blue bars), the failure rate per GW (orange line) has plummeted by 97%,
indicating massive reliability gains.

13
Chapter 5

Recommendations

To enhance the reliability of Battery Energy Storage Systems, it is imperative to adopt con-
tinuous improvement strategies that prioritize safety, efficiency, and operational effectiveness.
Organizations should implement a framework that integrates regular assessments of safety-
related systems, as discussed in the foundational work on safety design principles and the
aging of systems. By frequently analysing and refining design processes, potential hazards can
be identified and mitigated before they manifest into critical failures. Additionally, deploying
advanced optimization techniques tailored to specific applications will further improve opera-
tional performance. Research indicates that hybrid optimization methods, which combine vari-
ous methodologies, outperform single-approach strategies by providing robust solutions to both
economic and technical challenges [13]. These hybrid approaches should be incorporated into
the management practices of BESS to ensure that they not only meet current energy demands
but also adapt to evolving market conditions and technological advancements. As a result, fos-
tering a culture of continuous improvement will help stakeholders achieve greater reliability,
enhanced safety, and a more sustainable integration of BESS within the energy landscape.

14
Chapter 6

Conclusion

In conclusion, the integration of continuous improvement strategies into the reliability frame-
work of Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) represents a critical advancement in enhanc-
ing the operational effectiveness and lifespan of these systems. By employing methodolo-
gies such as Lean Six Sigma, Total Quality Management, and the Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle,
stakeholders can systematically identify inefficiencies and mitigate risks associated with per-
formance degradation and lifecycle management. Moreover, the dynamic nature of BESS tech-
nology, coupled with the increasing complexity of energy demands, necessitates a proactive
approach to reliability that aligns with industry best practices and regulatory standards. The im-
plementation of data-driven decision-making processes, coupled with iterative feedback loops,
facilitates not only immediate improvements but also supports long-term sustainability within
the energy ecosystem. Ultimately, the ongoing commitment to integrating continuous improve-
ment strategies is paramount in securing the reliability and efficiency of BESS, thus ensuring
their role as vital components in the transition to a more resilient and renewable energy future.

15
Bibliography

[1] Allali, A., et al. (2019). Power Quality Enhancement in Electricity Grids with Wind En-
ergy Using Multicell Converters and Energy Storage. AIP Publishing.
[2] Alvarado Barrios, L., et al. (2019). An Evolutionary Computational Approach for the
Problem of Unit Commitment and Economic Dispatch in Microgrids. MDPI AG.
[3] Buonomano, A., et al. (2024). Empowering sea ports with renewable energy under the
enabling framework of the energy communities.
[4] Crosby, P. B. (1979). Quality is Free: The Art of Making Quality Certain. McGraw-Hill.
[5] Das, S., & Pan, I. (2018). Fractional Order Fuzzy Control of Hybrid Power System with
Renewable Generation Using Chaotic PSO. Elsevier BV.
[6] Deming, W. E. (2000). The New Economics: For Industry, Government, Education. MIT
Press.
[7] EPRI. (2024). Insights from EPRI’s Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) Failure Inci-
dent Database: Analysis of Failure Root Cause. Electric Power Research Institute.
[8] Gharehpetian, G. B., et al. (2019). Attributes of Big Data Analytics for Data-Driven De-
cision Making in Cyber-Physical Power Systems. IEEE.
[9] Hodge, et al. (2020). Controls and Safety Interlocks in BESS: A Reliability Analysis.
Energy Systems Journal.
[10] International Energy Agency. (2025). Global Energy Review. IEA Publishing.
[11] ISO. (2015). ISO 9001:2015: Quality Management Systems Requirements. International
Organization for Standardization.
[12] Juran, J. M., & Godfrey, A. B. (1999). Juran’s Quality Handbook. McGraw-Hill.
[13] Mišák, S., & Vysocký, J. (2020). Review of trends and targets of complex systems for
power system optimization. MDPI AG.
[14] O’Connor, P. D. T., & Kleyner, A. (2025). Practical Reliability Engineering. John Wiley
& Sons.
[15] Pande, P. S., Neuman, R. P., & Cavanagh, R. R. (2000). The Six Sigma Way: How GE,
Motorola, and Other Top Companies are Honing Their Performance. McGraw-Hill.
[16] Smith, & Thomas. (2022). Analysis of Failed Elements in BESS Projects. Journal of
Energy Storage.

16
[17] UL Solutions. (2025). UL 1973: Standard for Batteries for Use in Stationary Applica-
tions. UL Standards & Engagement.

17
Appendix A

List of Figures

2.1 Root Causes of Incidents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

2.2 Breakdown of BESS Failures by Failed Element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

3.1 Pareto Chart for Failure Prioritization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

3.2 Shewhart Control Chart for Predictive Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.3 Ishikawa (Fishbone) Diagram for BESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

4.1 Global Grid-Scale BESS Deployment and Failure Statistics . . . . . . . . . . . 13

18