See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/289537160

PowerGen Gas Turbine Losses and Condition Monitoring: A Loss Data-Based Study

Article · June 2016

DOI: 10.1115/1.4031915

CITATION READS

1 869

1 author:

Bin Zhou
FM Global Research
17 PUBLICATIONS   174 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Steam Turbine LOSS EVALUATION AND CONDITION MONITORING View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Bin Zhou on 08 January 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 3 PowerGen Gas Turbine Losses
4 and Condition Monitoring:
5 A Loss Data-Based Study
6 In situ condition monitoring (CM) is a crucial element in protection and predictive
7 Bin Zhou1 maintenance of large rotating PowerGen equipment, such as gas turbines or steam
8 Mem. ASME turbines. In this work, selected gas turbine loss events occurring during a recent 10-year
9 Risk, Reliability and Failure Prevention Area, period at our clients’ power generation plants were evaluated. For each loss event, a loss
101 FM Global Research, scenario or a chain of failures was outlined after investigating the available loss record.
11 1151 Boston-Providence Turnpike, These loss events were then categorized based on the nature of the associated loss scenario.
122 Norwood, MA 02062 The study subsequently focused on the variables that could be monitored in real time to
13 e-mail: bin.zhou@fmglobal.com detect the abnormal turbine operating conditions, such as vibration characteristics, tem-
14 perature, pressure, quality of working fluids, and material degradations. These groups of
15 CM variables were then matched with detectable failures in each loss event and prioritized
16 based on their effectiveness for failure detection and prevention. The detectable loss events
17 and the associated loss values were used in this evaluation process. The study finally con-
218 1 cluded with a summary of findings and path-forward actions. [DOI: 10.1115/1.4031915]
19 Keywords: PowerGen, gas turbine, loss investigation, condition monitoring, risk
20 mitigation
21
22

23 1 Introduction 2 Categories of Gas Turbine Losses 57

24 Equipment losses contribute to a large portion of losses in higher The common gas turbines consist of stages of bladed rotors; 58
25 hazard occupancies such as PowerGen. While the fleet of insured stationary components including vanes/nozzles, cases/frames, 59
26 gas turbines has seen a steady growth over recent years, the reliabil- combustors; and other accessory systems, such as drive system, 60
27 ity and availability of the gas turbines have been continuously control system, and piping systems for transporting lube oil, fuel, 61
28 challenged by more taxing loads, harsher environment, and over- air, water, and steam. Mechanical failures can initiate at the system 62
29 stretched operations to meet rising power demand. Both operators or component level and lead to the final turbine loss event. System- 63
30 and insurers of gas turbines have become increasingly concerned level failures include rotor-dynamics issues, rubbing, compressor 64
31 with the risk of turbine failures and associated losses. To help clients surge, contamination, control error, and off-design operations. 65
32 improve loss prevention and reduce exposure to the risks, the center At the component level, the various failure mechanisms include 66
33 for property risk solutions continues its efforts to understand turbine rupture, fatigue, creep, corrosion/oxidation, erosion, fretting, and 67
34 loss scenarios and failure mechanisms, and further, the risk mitiga- impact. 68
35 tion methods based on effective monitoring of turbine condition Gas turbine mechanical failures occur rarely as isolated events, 69
36 variables. but rather as a series of sequentially linked failure incidents. The 70
37 Gas turbine loss events due to mechanical breakdown during a series of failures that contribute to the final loss event is referred 71
38 recent 10-year period at clients’ power generation plants were to as a loss scenario. A good example of a typical gas turbine failure 72
39 evaluated. While the true root causes of individual loss events root cause analysis taken from the literature is described below [1]. 73
40 may have been ambiguous in a number of cases, the study focused In this loss case, it was found that the chain of failures started with a 74
41 on the detection of the developing failure at an early stage through compressor surge caused by an improper amount of inlet water in- 75
42 CM, so as to stop the failure progression or adjust the maintenance jection. This resulted in corrosion pitting and ultimately liberation 76
plan accordingly to mitigate the risk of equipment loss. Each of the
of a third-stage stator vane due to high-cycle fatigue (HCF). Impact 77
43
damages as a result of the liberated vane cascaded throughout the 78
44 reviewed loss events can be described as a loss scenario composed
entire turbine. 79
45 of a series of component failures. As a first step, these loss events
Various system and component-level failures can occur in gas 80
46 were categorized based on the nature of their respective loss scenar-
turbines and result in catastrophic turbine losses. These failure 81
47 ios. Such categorization improves the understanding of major con- mechanisms are often linked and intertwined, and may occur simul- 82
48 tributors of the turbine loss events. Second, the failures in each taneously or in sequence. 83
49 typical loss scenario of the categories led to the identification of
50 appropriate condition variables that can be monitored to detect these
51 failures. Relevant monitoring technologies were reviewed for each 2.1 Introduction of Loss Categories. Useful categorization 84
52 group of CM variables. Finally, evaluation and prioritization of the of the turbine loss events requires recognition of not only the fam- 85
53 major types or groups of CM variables were performed based on ilies of damaged components but also the loss scenario and the as- 86
54 the effectiveness of failure detection and prevention. The remainder sociated failure mechanisms. In most cases, loss events can be 87
55 of the paper is structured following the steps of the study outlined categorized based on the first “known” family of failed components 88
56 earlier. in a loss scenario. In other cases, a group of loss events can be put 89
into one category because of their common distinctive failure mode 90
that would result in failures of multiple component families at the 91
1
Corresponding author.
same time. Each loss category may have one or multiple typical loss 92
Manuscript received February 23, 2015; final manuscript received October 29, scenarios that are similar in nature but different in material failure 93
2015; published online Month XX, XXXX. Assoc. Editor: Chimba Mkandawire. mechanisms. Further explanation of the categorization methods 94

ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems Vol. 0 / 1-1

Part B: Mechanical Engineering Copyright © 2015 by ASME
 Table 1 Gas turbine loss categories

T1:1 No. Loss category short description

T1:2 1 Blades crack and liberate causing DOD
T1:3 2 Rubbing-caused damage on blades and casing
T1:4 3 Attachments break or detach causing DOD
T1:5 4 Foreign or unknown objects damage (UOD/FOD)
T1:6 5 Stator vanes crack and liberate causing DOD
T1:7 6 Bearing damage (wiping)
T1:8 7 Seal leakage
T1:9 8 Rotor (nonblade) damage (crack and imbalance)
T1:10 9 Combustor module crack
T1:11 10 Piping leakage or blockage (including piping
for air, fuel, oil, water/steam)
T1:12 11 Control system error
T1:13 12 Case/frame crack
T1:14 13 Gear teeth crack

95 using examples of the loss categories is included in this paper. Fig. 1 Percentages of total loss value and loss count by F1:1
96 While the true root cause of individual loss events may have been loss categories F1:2
97 ambiguous in a number of cases, the categorization described above
98 helps to identify CM variables for failure detection at the early
99 stages of the turbine loss.
100 The present study was based on PowerGen gas turbine losses of
101 insured fleet during a recent 10-year period. The study focused on
102 hundreds of gas turbine losses due to mechanical breakdown, which
103 was a dominant 96% of the total PowerGen gas turbine loss value.
104 The loss events spanned over all major turbine components. All loss
105 events were grouped into 13 categories as shown in Table 1, each
106 category representing a typical loss scenario or a group of similar
107 loss scenarios. Loss category no. 1, e.g., represents all loss events
108 with reported first known material failure of rotating blades and
109 subsequent domestic object damage (DOD) from released blade
110 mass. Typically, individual blade failure could be a result of several
111 potential material damage mechanisms, each of them forming the
112 basis of a unique failure scenario in this category. These failure
113 mechanisms may include blade vibration with consequent HCF
114 failure, blade thermomechanical damage, creep rupture or hot
115 corrosion, or cracking of the blade dovetail or attachment portion.
116 A given turbine loss event can be classified into loss category
117 no. 1, fitting either one of these loss scenarios. Loss categories Fig. 2 Normalized average loss value by loss categories F2:1
118 nos. 2 and 4 were created with an emphasis on the broad nature
119 of loss scenario rather than a particular family of failed components,
120 because these types of losses involve damage of multiple families
121 of components simultaneously; there was no clear indication unknown object damages (UODs) ranked right after. This indicates 145
122 of any incipient failure of a single family of components. It should that loss events as a result of impact damages are very common 146
123 also be noted that training and administrative-control-related in gas turbines. 147
124 issues would also contribute to mechanical hardware failures; how- The average loss value per event is compared in Fig. 2 for all loss 148
125 ever, they were not considered separately in the categorization categories. These values represent the severity of loss for each loss 149
126 process. category. Rubbing is shown as the most costly loss category, prob- 150
ably because it represents a type of system-level failure that involves 151
multiple families of component types including rotor, blades, bear- 152
127 2.2 Turbine Loss Data by Loss Categories. The reviewed
ings, vanes, seals, and casing. Average total loss value due to initial 153
128 gas turbine loss events were summarized in terms of total loss value
blade failure is the next highest on the list. 154
129 and numbers of loss events for each of the 13 loss categories out-
130 lined earlier. Figure 1 shows the percentages of total loss values and
131 loss counts for all loss categories, ranked in descending order by 2.3 Compressor Losses Versus Turbine Losses. Compres- 155
132 total loss value. The top four categories involve major blade dam- sor and turbine are the two main modules in the gas turbine, each 156
133 age, and the combined loss value represents more than 80% of the having a large number of rotating blades that are susceptible to vari- 157
134 total value of the losses reviewed. Loss events in these categories ous kinds of damage. The nature of mechanical failures in the two 158
135 also involve casing damage due to rubbing, vane damage as a result modules is, however, somewhat different. Understanding such a 159
136 of DOD or foreign object damage (FOD), and failures of attachment difference may help the appropriate application of CM methods 160
137 parts that are normally considerably smaller in value compared to in either module. Further investigation into the loss data was con- 161
138 blade damage. Loss dollar values due to blade damage further in- ducted to understand the characteristics and the composition of 162
139 crease because released material from damaged stator vanes or com- losses in compressor and turbine modules. In Table 2, loss events 163
140 bustors (loss categories nos. 5 and 9) may result in subsequent due to failures in the compressor and turbine are assembled sepa- 164
141 impact damage to the blades as well. The top four categories in total rately for relevant loss categories.2 165
142 loss value are also consistently the top four in terms of numbers of
143 losses. The blade-failure-initiated loss events occur most frequently. 2
On a few occasions, a single loss event was classified into two loss categories.
144 The numbers of losses due to attachments’ DODs and FODs or Some loss events incur both compressor and turbine failures.

1-2 / Vol. 0 Transactions of the ASME

 Table 2 Gas turbine losses compressor versus turbine 3 Gas Turbine CM 198

T2:1 Type Unit Compressor Turbine

Turbine CM has been widely researched and applied selectively 199
by original equipment manufacturers and turbine operators to 200
T2:2 Blade-DOD Count 16 36 address concerns of equipment failures. CM, or sometimes also 201
T2:3 % Total value 20% 24% called health monitoring, is a process of continuously monitoring 202
T2:4 Rubbing Count 14 4
T2:5 % Total value 21% 6% parameters of operating conditions in turbines or other machinery 203
T2:6 Other-DOD Count 10 23 to identify significant changes as indications of developing failures. 204
T2:7 % Total value 5% 8% As such, CM not only enables the prompt activation of turbine pro- 205
T2:8 UOD/FOD Count 14 11 tection mechanisms at imminent failures to prevent losses but also 206
T2:9 % Total value 9% 5% forms the core of a condition-based maintenance system, through 207
T2:10 Vane-DOD Count 5 4
which maintenance schedules can be adjusted to effectively mitigate 208
T2:11 % Total value 4% 2%
T2:12 Wheel-DOD Count 1 4 the risk of turbine loss. Installation or upgrades of gas turbine CM 209
T2:13 % Total value 0.4% 1.4% systems improves turbine reliability and availability in the long run 210
T2:14 ALL Count 59 79 and has great potential to be proven economically viable and ben- 211
T2:15 % Total value 57% 43% eficial. Sophisticated CM systems are a necessity for advanced gas 212
turbine systems to prevent and mitigate damage to high-cost equip- 213
ment, and the presence of risk-reducing CM systems could allow 214
insurers to take a more positive view on insured hardware [2]. 215
166 In the category of blade-damage-initiated events (Blade-DOD), It should be clarified that in situ or online CM during turbine oper- 216
167 the number of loss events associated with the turbine module is ation does not eliminate the need for periodic inspections. 217
168 more than two times that associated with the compressor; the In this work, major types of CM variables were categorized into 218
169 percentage of total loss value is moderately higher for the turbine. six groups: (1) blade vibration, (2) rotor/case vibration and clear- 219
170 Turbine blades and wheels in general experience more modes of ance, (3) temperature, (4) pressure, (5) quality of fluids, and 220
171 failure mechanisms due to the high-temperature working environ- (6) cracking or degradation of material. Although the direct mon- 221
172 ment and, therefore, would fail at a higher rate. Rotor wheel crack- itoring of material cracking or degradation can potentially be ap- 222
173 ing and the following blade liberation (a subgroup of the rotor loss plied to any components, such monitoring is most practical for 223
174 category) also follow the same trend for a similar reason. On the stationary components such as stator vanes. 224
175 other hand, specific features in the compressor, such as the larger
176 number of stages and blade counts, and unique failure mechanisms, 3.1 Blade Vibration Monitoring. Blade vibration character- 225
177 including surge and flutter, largely increase the value per loss event istics including natural frequencies, mode shapes, vibration ampli- 226
178 due to compressor blade failure. tude, and phase are all functions of several key parameters, 227
179 Rubbing-induced loss events occur dominantly in the compres- i.e., mass, stiffness, damping, and excitation. These parameters in 228
180 sor module, due to the higher blade counts, larger blade motion as- turn depend on the airfoil external and internal geometry, material, 229
181 sociated with aerodynamic design and instability, as well as certain attachment or support methods, and various excitation sources. Any 230
182 operational procedures such as water washing and inlet fogging, changes in these factors will alter the blade vibration characteristics 231
183 which could trigger aerodynamic instability in the compressor. and therefore potentially be detected. Figure 4 shows the cause and 232
184 Impact damages also exhibit different characteristics in the com- effect relations among factors at different levels leading to blade 233
185 pressor and the turbine. The compressor is located upstream and is vibration characteristics. It is apparent that blade vibration repre- 234
186 therefore more susceptible to FOD coming from the inlet, whereas sents a critical variable for CM because (1) over 80% of the gas 235
187 the turbine is less susceptible to this type of damage due to reduced turbine loss value involves some kind of blade damage that changes 236
188 debris momentum and reduced chance of impact. Turbine modules the blade geometry or stiffness and hence the vibration signature 237
189 on the other hand experience a higher likelihood of DOD impact in multiple loss categories; (2) off-design or abnormal operating 238
190 including debris from blade rows, combustors, attachments, and conditions often manifest themselves in blade vibration character- 239
191 fasteners. istics; and (3) status change of blade attachments affects the stiffness 240
192 In summary, turbine module component failures result in a larger and damping of the bladed rotor system and thus also changes the 241
193 number of loss events, whereas loss due to compressor component blade vibration signature. 242
194 failures is relatively more costly as shown in Fig. 3. While the aver- During turbine operation, practical factors such as hostile envi- 243
195 age turbine loss value was significant, average compressor loss ronment, FOD/DOD, loss of attachment, and off-design operating 244
196 value was nearly twice the amount. The overall risk of compres- practices preclude the use of surface-mounted strain gages on rotat- 245
197 sor-failure-induced losses is higher. ing blades due to their poor durability and associated high cost of 246

F3:1 Fig. 3 Compressor versus turbine losses

ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems Vol. 0 / 1-3

Part B: Mechanical Engineering
F4:1 Fig. 4 Blade vibrations: cause and effect

247 instrumentation. With these limitations, turbine operators are left sources of clearance change may include casing contraction and 295
248 with only noncontact vibration monitoring systems for monitoring blade growth. 296
249 the rotating blades. Case-mounted noncontact blade vibration meas- Rotor lateral vibrations can be detected by measurement of dis- 297
250 urement (NBVM) sensors pick up a signal as each blade passes by, placement, velocity, and acceleration. This leads to common sensing 298
251 and the blade tip time of arrival is measured to infer blade vibration technologies including proximity probes, accelerometers, and veloc- 299
252 amplitude and frequency. Compared to strain gages, NBVM ity transducers. Rotor torsional vibration, on the other hand, is nor- 300
253 techniques have higher durability and also cover all blades in a mally measured by torque sensors. Proximity probes are often 301
254 given row. mounted on plain/fluid bearings to directly monitor the vibration 302
255 Resonance frequencies as well as vibration amplitude and phase of a rotating shaft, through the measurement of relative motion be- 303
256 of concerned blade vibratory modes are captured by the NBVM tween the rotor and bearing without contact. When dually used as 304
257 system. A significant percentage shift of resonant frequency of blade row tip clearance or blade vibration monitors, these probes 305
258 an individual blade may be an indicator of blade damage and/or are mounted on the casing directly above the blade rows, with con- 306
259 loose attachment [3]. The high vibration response amplitude of nected data acquisition and analysis systems adjusted accordingly. 307
260 all blades due to any type of abnormal vibration can be monitored Different from heavy industrial turbines, aeroderivative turbines 308
261 in real time for violations against alarm and trip limits to protect the or gas generators use rolling element bearings, where case-mounted 309
262 turbine from hardware damages automatically [3]. The blade static accelerometers or velocity sensors for vibration measurements 310
263 positions are observable to NBVM systems in addition to the vibra- are required, as no relative movement between the shaft and the 311
264 tion signatures. While the original blade static positions at a given rigid bearing would occur. Case- and frame-mounted sensors can 312
265 speed and power setting are dictated by as-manufactured geometry also be used to detect high vibration leading to HCF of these 313
266 and assembly, the unique positional signature can be altered at the structures. 314
267 same running condition by rubbing, surge, cracking, and impact
268 damage. The blade row static position can be continuously moni-
269 tored with imposed protection limits on deviation from the original 3.3 Temperature, Pressure, and Performance Monitoring. 315
270 profile [4]. Temperature measurements are widely applied to monitor condi- 316
tions for lube oil, fuel, air (exhaust spread, inlet, extraction and in- 317
jection, rotor stages, etc.), water or steam injection, and metal 318
271 3.2 Rotor/Case Vibration and Clearance Monitoring. (usually bearing). Typically, excessive temperature represents an 319
272 These condition variables are grouped together not only for their early sign of malfunction or failure. Temperature monitoring is 320
273 intrinsic cross relations but also because the monitoring technolo- normally done with temperature sensors including thermocouples 321
274 gies involved are the same or similar. and resistance temperature detectors, as well as noncontact infrared 322
275 Vibration of the rotor in a gas turbine is a system-level issue and thermometers when applicable. 323
276 can lead to damage of virtually any turbine component. Root causes Static- or steady-state pressure sensors measure pressure at a 324
277 of rotor vibration include, but are not limited to, damaged/worn steady-state for a given operating condition at a given location. 325
278 bearings, imbalance, rotor bow, misalignment, improper mounting, Measurements include stage pressures, fuel pressure, lube oil pres- 326
279 rubbing, undesired bearing and seal fluid conditions, and aerody- sure, inlet filter delta pressure, and exhaust backpressure. Abnormal 327
280 namic instabilities. These factors are interconnected and contribute measured pressure may be an indicator of leakage, blockage, or 328
281 to the change of the rotor’s natural vibratory modes or critical aerodynamic instability. The so-called “dynamic” pressure sensors 329
282 speeds, the mechanical, fluid-dynamic and aerodynamic loading, or unsteady pressure sensors measure pressures that change rapidly. 330
283 as well as the system damping. Vibration of the casing and frames For gas turbines with lean or dry low-NOx combustion, the pressure 331
284 is normally linked to rotor vibration through bearings, although pulsations in the combustion chamber are commonly monitored to 332
285 it may also come from other sources such as foundations. Rotor avoid the onset of combustion instability that would cause failure by 333
286 vibration and blade vibration can lead to each other. While blade HCF of combustor components. 334
287 damage and material loss will cause rotor imbalance and vibration, Performance monitoring uses measured temperature, pressure, 335
288 rotor vibration will result in blade tip rubbing, cracking, and further and/or flow measurement to calculate heat balance or turbine effi- 336
289 DOD damage downstream. ciencies, and power output online during turbine operation. Perfor- 337
290 Blade row tip clearance is an important parameter for turbine mance monitoring allows proactive responses to incoming failures, 338
291 operability and performance. Tight tip clearance helps to maintain understanding of long-term trends of deterioration, and perfor- 339
292 turbine performance but at the same time makes the tip prone to mance degradation so as to improve the scheduling of maintenance. 340
293 rubbing. The main source of rubbing is rotor eccentricity or run- Measurement of mass flow is typically inferred from measurements 341
294 out, which often times is associated with rotor vibrations. Other of pressure and temperature. 342

1-4 / Vol. 0 Transactions of the ASME

343 3.4 Fluid Quality Monitoring. The broad reference to “fluid” feasible for vanes. Vibration transducers, e.g., can be mounted only 387
344 includes lube oil, water, as well as gas fuel, air, and steam. CM in on the casing and frame in a minimum amount, but cannot be ap- 388
345 this category refers mainly to the monitoring of contamination and plied on stator vanes due to blockage of flows that would reduce the 389
346 degradation of these fluids of either a chemical or physical nature, in turbine performance. Strain gages on the other hand are limited by 390
347 addition to performance parameters such as temperature, pressure, counts and durability concerns. 391
348 and flow. While such monitoring is often based on periodic fluid While direct material failure detection methods are normally 392
349 sampling and testing, there are existing systems for real-time mon- used for field nondestructive evaluation, a couple of these such 393
350 itoring of lube oil particles/debris, water content, steam purity, and as acoustic emission (AE) and meandering winding magnetometer 394
351 other properties. [6] have shown potential for continuous CM. AE technology, 395
352 CM of lube oil should focus on cleanliness, particle counts, e.g., can measure transient elastic waves propagating within a 396
353 water content, total acid number, viscosity, and corrosive elements material due to the release of localized stress/strain energy in terms 397
354 to identify contamination and degradation as well as the signs of of material failure, friction, impact, and fluid blockage/leakage. 398
355 deterioration of bearings and gears [5]. A group of AE transducers also can be used to locate the sources 399
356 Besides maintaining a functioning inlet filtering system, quality of events by measuring the travel time of the wave. A very recent 400
357 of inlet air needs to be monitored or periodically checked for solid study has shown that AE sensors were able to detect the location of 401
358 objects and liquid contaminants including water or oil droplets and an event of stator vane cracking during turbine operation [7]. 402
359 water-dissolved corrosive chemicals that can cause FOD, erosion, However, these advanced methods for failure detection have seen 403
360 fouling, and corrosion. Monitoring of contaminants in exhaust very limited successful industrial applications, especially in gas 404
361 emission should also be applied to comply with environmental reg- turbines. 405
362 ulations and to assist inlet air quality analysis.
363 A number of contaminants including solids, water, other com-
364 bustibles, and chemicals may potentially exist in the fuel. These
365 contaminants should be monitored to prevent hot corrosion, fouling, 4 Prioritization of CM 406
366 combustion issues, injectors coking, and excessive emissions. For To evaluate the effectiveness of CM for failure detection, the 407
367 liquid fuels, monitoring of viscosity is also a key for smooth com- identified groups of condition variables were linked with the 408
368 bustion. detectable failures of a given loss event. Figure 5 shows a typical 409
369 Water or steam enters into a gas turbine from inlet fogging and blade HCF-induced loss event along with applicable CM at various 410
370 interstage cooling, combustor steam injection, water washing, and stages of the event. Such a loss event may be generally described 411
371 turbine cooling injection. Purity of the water or steam used in the by a category no. 1 (see Table 1) loss scenario. As shown in the 412
372 turbine operation should be monitored and contaminants should be figure, blade vibration monitoring can be effective during various 413
373 removed through a demineralization process to reach the required stages of the loss scenario. Fluid quality monitoring may help to 414
374 quality. These contaminants can cause airfoil deposit buildup, reduce corrosion, therefore preventing or delaying the blade fatigue 415
375 which results in aerodynamic instability, performance reduction, failure initiated at corrosion pits. Monitoring of rotor vibration and/ 416
376 rotor-dynamics issues, erosion, and corrosion. or blade tip clearance would also be effective, but anomalies 417
would be detected only after blade mass loss occurs. Temperature, 418
377 3.5 Monitoring Material Cracking or Degradation. pressure, and performance monitoring may also indicate anomalies 419
378 Turbine losses due to failure of stationary components, including subsequent to blade mass loss. It can be noted that a loss event 420
379 stator vanes, cases, and frames, can be substantial. Stator vane fail- could be considered detectable by multiple-condition variable 421
380 ure in particular is significant and ranked no. 5 both in terms of total groups. 422
381 loss value and event counts. A large number of stator vanes are As the main groups of CM variables were linked to detectable 423
382 placed between the blade rows in the turbine flow path. These vanes failures in a given loss event, the event itself was deemed detectable 424
383 are exposed to aerodynamic loads, thermal attack, corrosion, ero- by the corresponding condition variable(s). The groups of condition 425
384 sion, and impact by flying objects. Broken pieces of vanes may variables were subsequently evaluated for the effectiveness of fail- 426
385 cause further impact damage to blades and other components. Most ure detection based on their detectable loss events and the associ- 427
386 methods of vibration monitoring may not be practical or even ated loss value. Figure 6 shows a comparison of the percentages 428

F5:1 Fig. 5 Blade failure scenario and monitoring variables

ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems Vol. 0 / 1-5

Part B: Mechanical Engineering
 following blade failure and loss-of-mass-induced imbalance. This 448
observation implies that blade vibration monitoring is a better 449
option to detect the majority of vibration-related failures at earlier 450
stages of the loss. 451

5 Conclusions 452
Loss events reported as PowerGen gas turbine mechanical 453
breakdown in a recent 10-year period were reviewed. Loss events 454
were grouped into 13 loss categories that supported the understand- 455
ing of typical gas turbine loss scenarios and associated failure mech- 456
anisms. Major groups of condition variables were subsequently 457
identified, so that continuous real-time monitoring of these variables 458
would lead to detection of failures and improve loss prevention. 459
Failure detection and monitoring technologies associated with these 460
variables also were reviewed. Lastly, identified groups of CM var- 461
iables were evaluated and prioritized based on the effectiveness of 462
F6:1 Fig. 6 Percentages of total loss value and loss counts failure detection for these known losses. The summary of findings is 463
F6:2 detectable by groups of CM variables presented below: 464

• Blade-damage-related turbine loss represents a dominant 465

fraction of the total loss value and number of loss events 466
reviewed in the study. 467
• Vibration monitoring on blades and rotors was found most 468
effective in the detection of developing mechanical failures 469
in gas turbines, and should therefore be given higher priority. 470
Blade vibration monitoring also has the advantage of detect- 471
ing vibration-related failures earlier. 472
• The present study provides only a prioritization of the CM 473
variables based on their effectiveness of failure detection. 474
Further reviews including cost–benefit analysis would help 475
to understand the practicality and feasibility of advanced 476
monitoring technologies. 477

Acknowledgment 478
Support from Kumar Bhimavarapu, William Doerr, Erik 479
Verloop, and Franco Tamanini in reviewing and discussing the 480
contents of the manuscript is greatly appreciated. This work was 481
supported by FM Global internal funding. 482
F7:1 Fig. 7 Blade and rotor vibration monitoring

References 483
429 of total loss value, which can be detected by each group of CM [1] Simmons, H. R., Brun, K., and Cheruvu, S., 2006, “Aerodynamic Instability Ef- 484
fects on Compressor Blade Failure: A Root Cause Failure Analysis,” Proceedings 485
430 variables. Both blade vibration and rotor vibration monitoring of ASME Turbo Expo, Barcelona, Spain, Vol. 5, pp. 649–660. 3486
431 can effectively detect a dominant portion, i.e., 94% and 97%, re- [2] Latcovich, J. A., 2002, “Condition Monitoring and Its Effect on the Insurance of 487
432 spectively, of the total loss value. Detections of abnormal temper- New Advanced Gas Turbines,” Turbine Power Systems Conference and Condition 488
433 ature, pressure, quality of fluids, and material cracking or Monitoring Workshop, Galveston, TX, pp. 25–27. 489
[3] Roorda, B., 2009, “Prognostic Health Management (PHM) System for Monitoring 490
434 degradation on stator vanes and cases rank lower with 45%, Blade Vibrations in Turbo Machinery,” Propulsion—Safety and Affordable Read- 491
435 16%, 10%, and 6% of the total loss value of all the loss events. iness Forum, Myrtle Beach, SC. 492
436 A consistent trend or ranking can be observed on the percentage [4] Zielinski, M., and Ziller, G., 2005, “Noncontact Crack Detection on Compressor 493
437 of loss counts detectable by different monitoring variable groups. Rotor Blades to Prevent Further Damage after HCF-Failure,” NATO, RTO 494
(Research and Technology Organization)-MP (Meeting Proceedings)-AVT-121, 495
438 The loss events attributed to the top two groups were further Applied Vehicle Technology Panel Symposium, Granada, Spain. 496
439 investigated in order to differentiate the sequence and promptness [5] Sheng, S., 2011, “Investigation of Oil Conditioning, Real-Time Monitoring 497
440 of the failure detection. As shown in Fig. 7, 50% of the total loss and Oil Sample Analysis for Wind Turbine Gearboxes,” AWEA (American Wind 498
441 value detectable by blade monitoring is actually initiated by the Energy Association) Project Performance and Reliability Workshop, San Diego, 499
CA. 500
442 blade itself or FOD, with the other 44% attributed to secondary [6] Sheiretov, Y., Grundy, D., Zilberstein, V., Goldfine, N., and Maley, S., 2009, 501
443 blade damages following other component-failure-induced DOD, “MWM-Array Sensors for In Situ Monitoring of High-Temperature Components 502
444 rubbing, and other failures. On the other hand, only 29% of the total in Power Plants,” Sens. J., 9(11), pp. 1527–1536. 503
445 loss value detectable by rotor vibration monitoring is actually ini- [7] Momeni, S., Koduru, J. P., Gonzalez, M., and Godinez, V., 2013, “Online Acoustic 504
Emission Monitoring of Combustion Turbines for Compressor Stator Vane Crack 505
446 tiated by the rotor system itself, including typical rubbing, bearing Detection,” Proceedingsof SPIE, Industrial and Commercial Applications of Smart 506
447 vibration, and damage; the other 68% is due to rotor vibration Structures Technologies, Vol. 8690, pp. 86900B. 507

1-6 / Vol. 0 Transactions of the ASME

View publication stats