Reliability Analysis of Gas Turbine

Fernando Jesus Guevara Carazas and Gilberto Francisco

Martha de Souza

Abstract This chapter presents the application of reliability concepts to evaluate

the overall performance of gas turbine used in open cycle or combined-cycle
thermal power plants. The thermodynamics derived performance parameters of
gas turbines are presented, including the presentation of the tests codes used to
evaluate turbine performance during power plant commissioning. The IEEE Std
762 is presented as traditional way to measure gas turbine availability although it
is based on deterministic analysis and does not allow long-term prediction of gas
turbine performance. The fundamental reliability and availability concepts asso-
ciated with gas turbine are presented and an example of reliability analysis of a
heavy duty gas turbine is also presented.

1 Gas Turbine

The accelerated evolution of gas turbines from the 1940s was basically in the
interest of the armed forces that used that piece of equipment as propulsion
engines for combat aircraft during World War II. Gas turbine engines quickly
replaced the reciprocating engines use at that time. After demostrating the effec-
tiveness of gas turbine as propulsion engines for military aircraft, that equipment
began to be installed on commercial aircraft designed from the 1950s. In this way,
later in 1960 and 1970, most commercial aircraft, medium and wide bodies, such
as the Boeing 707, McDonnell Douglas DC-8, Airbus A300, Boeing 747,

F. J. G. Carazas  G. F. M. de Souza (&)

Department of Mechatronics and Mechanical Systems Engineering, Polytechnic School,
University of São Paulo, Av. Prof. Mello Moraes 2231, 05508-900 São Paulo, Brazil
e-mail: [email protected]

G. F. M. de Souza (ed.), Thermal Power Plant Performance Analysis, 189

Springer Series in Reliability Engineering, DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4471-2309-5_8,
 Springer-Verlag London Limited 2012
190 F. J. G. Carazas and G. F. M. de Souza

Fig. 1 Gas turbine

configurations a Simple gas
turbine system b Aero-
derivative gas turbine
configuration

McDonnell Douglas DC-10 among others, used gas turbine as propulsion

engines. In parallel to the evolution of aircraft industry, the concepts of reli-
ability applied to design and maintenance of those aircraft had occupied an
important place. Thus, at the request of the Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) in
1965 was initiated a work to re-evaluate maintenance procedures of the Boeing
747, which later would give rise to the current philosophy of reliability-centred
maintenance (RCM) [18, 22].
Gas turbines are complex systems of energy transformation. Just like any
internal combustion engine they are composed of hundreds of components.
However all gas turbines have three main sections that carry out the processes
needed for the transformation of the fuel’s chemical energy into mechanical
energy. First, the compression section, where atmospheric air incomes and, by the
compression process, the air pressure and temperature are increased. Next, the
compressed air is driven to a combustion section where fuel is injected and burnt,
increasing the temperature at constant pressure. Finally, the combustion products
at high temperature are expanded in the turbine blades section generating net shaft
power. In the case that the gas turbine is used for electric power generation, the
shaft power is used to drive an electrical generator. The combustion products are
exhausted through a nozzle into the atmosphere. The basic principle of gas turbine
operation is show in Fig. 1.
Reliability Analysis of Gas Turbine 191

2 Gas Turbine Applications

Besides to the aeronautic industry, the technology of gas turbine was gaining
application in other areas of industry. In 1950 the Westinghouse Company began
to produce gas turbines for industrial use. These turbines, despite using the same
operating principle of aeronautical gas turbines, present some differences to those
used in the aviation industry. The gas turbines are classified into two main groups:
Aero-derivative and Heavy-Duty Gas Turbine.

2.1 Aero-Derivative Gas turbine (Aircraft-Derivative)

These turbines are derived from aeronautical designs and adapted for industrial
work, consisting of two basic components: an aircraft-derivative gas generator,
and a free-power turbine [7]. This configuration is show in Fig. 1b.
Once aero-derivative gas turbines derived from aircraft designs they are
considered more reliable and economic, taking in view that it is easy to adapt
existing technology to develop new technology for large gas turbines. Aero-
derivative turbines currently reach around 40 MW. The main applications of
such gas turbines are in the petrochemical industry and power generation
industry, for combined-cycle power generation and cogeneration plants. In the
petroleum industry, mainly in offshore platform, they are used for power
generation and as prime movers for compressors and pumps. Finally, the
aero-derivative gas turbines are used in military ship propulsion.

2.2 Frame Type Heavy-Duty Gas Turbine

These gas turbines began to be produced after the World War II. Nowadays the
power output varies from 20 MW to around 250 MW with efficiencies around
40%, according to manufacturers such as GE and Siemens. This type of turbine
has single shaft configuration, so that part of the energy produced by the
turbine is transmitted to the compressor and the remaining energy is used as
power output on the shaft. This configuration meets the needs of high load and
constant speed typical from electric power generation [16]. This configuration is
shown in Fig. 1a.
The industrial heavy-duty gas turbines employ compressors with 15–18 stages
of axial-flow compression. Combustion chambers often use ring-shaped frame
installed around the turbine. These turbines are characterized by high fuel flex-
ibility, including dual fuel operation. Another feature of modern gas turbines is
their low emission of NOx. Manufacturers development programs have focused on
evolutionary combustion systems capable of meeting the extremely low NOx
192 F. J. G. Carazas and G. F. M. de Souza

Fig. 2 Heavy-duty gas

turbine (Adapted from
Siemens, 2006)

levels required to meet current and future environmental regulations. Heavy-duty

gas turbines are mainly used for pure power generation, including combined-cycle,
and industrial cogeneration [2]. In Fig. 2 it is shown a heavy-duty gas turbine.
For power generation gas turbines are frequently used in both open cycle
and combined-cycle configurations. Typically the open cycle gas turbine (gas
turbine is operated alone) is used for reserve or peak generating capacity and is
operated for a limited number of hours per year, between 2,000 and 5,000 h
[5]. Usually the open cycle gas turbine power plants are converted on the
combined-cycle configuration over the years. This change must be planned from
the beginning of plant design, particularly in relation to the space needed for
the installation of combined-cycle equipment. The simple cycle configuration is
show in Fig. 3a.
The combined-cycle power plant consists of one or more gas turbines linked to
an electrical generator and the exhaust gas flow into one or more heat recovery
steam generator (HRSG). The exhaust gas from the gas turbine is directed through
an HRSG that generates steam at one or more pressure levels (nowadays up to 3
pressure levels). The steam is fed to a steam turbine that drives a dedicated
electrical generator [5].
For operation in combined cycle the exhaust gas temperature of heavy-duty gas
turbines is usually higher than that of aero-derivative gas turbines. Additionally the
exhaust flow in the heavy-duty gas turbines is high, allowing more steam gener-
ation in HRSG at higher temperatures. For this reason it is possible to generate
more electrical energy with steam turbine. The combined-cycle configuration is
show in Fig. 3b.
Reliability Analysis of Gas Turbine 193

Fig. 3 Gas turbines thermoelectric driven power plants configurations a Simple cycle power
plant configuration b Combined cycle power plant configuration

3 Performance, Reliability and Availability

of Gas Turbines

Considering that gas turbines are derived from the aerospace industry, they are
designed to operate with high reliability and high performance. However an
industrial turbine must present an important feature specially when used for power
generation, which is availability. That index represents the percentage of given
period of time, expressed in hours, that the unit is in service and capable of
providing a given nominal output.
194 F. J. G. Carazas and G. F. M. de Souza

Table 1 Gas turbine performance parameters

Performance Parameter Component Composition Unit
1 Compressor inlet temperature Compressor T2 F or C
2 Compression Rate Compressor P3/P2
3 Turbine inlet temperature Compressor T4 F or C
4 Exhaust temperature Turbine T5 = T6 F or C
5 Exhaust gas flow Turbine m_ 5 a lb/h
6 Exhaust heat Turbine m_ 5  T5 Mbtu/h
7 Inlet pressure loss Compressor P1 - P2 In. H2O
8 Exhaust pressure loss Turbine P5 - P6 In. H2O
a
m_ 5 ¼ ðm_ 1 þ m_ F þ m_ W  m_ L Þ

3.1 Gas Turbine Performance Parameters

Typically the gas turbine generator performance is characterized by generator

output and heat rate. Generator output is the electrical generation of the gas turbine
generator measured at the generator terminals in SI (International System of Units)
power units such as, watts, kilowatts and megawatts.
Heat rate is a measurement used in the energy industry to calculate how
efficiently a generator uses heat energy. It is expressed in units of Btu (British
Thermal Units) of heat required to produce a kilowatt-hour of energy (Btu/kWh).
Heat rate is the ratio of the heat consumption to generator output. Heat
consumption represents the thermal energy consumed by the gas turbine. Heat
consumption is calculated as the product of the fuel mass flow rate and the heating
value of the fuel. The convention, for gas turbines, is to use the lower heating
value of the fuel. Consequently, heat rate for gas turbines is typically expressed on
a lower heating value basis, and is calculated with the expression presented in
Eq. 1 [5].
 
Btu Heat consuption ðBtu=hÞ
Heat rate ¼ ð1Þ
kWh Generator output ðkWÞ
Operators of generating facilities can make reasonably accurate estimates of the
amount of heat energy present in a given quantity of any type of fuel, so when this
is compared to the actual energy produced by the generator, the resulting figure
tells how efficiently the generator converts that fuel into electrical energy. Other
main gas turbine performance parameters are listed in Table 1.
These parameters are commonly used in acceptance testing, testing to deter-
mine degradation of the machine, and operational range testing. Figure 4 shows
the location where performance parameters of gas turbines can be measured [5].
The performance and reliability are governed by some standards such as those
edited by The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), American
Petroleum Institute (API) and International Organization for Standardization
Reliability Analysis of Gas Turbine 195

Fig. 4 Gas turbine generator performance parameters

(ISO). For performance analysis the ASME performance test codes (PTC) are
used, and for reliability analysis the mechanical standards and codes are used.

3.1.1 Performance Test Codes

Performance testing is conducted on new gas turbines at the time of starting

operation to determine compliance with its guarantee electrical output and heat
rate. Performance testing is also conducted on existing units to determine their
current electrical output and heat rate. ASME developed these performance test
codes to provide explicit test procedures with accuracies consistent with current
engineering knowledge and practice.
The objective of performance test codes is to provide standard directions and
rules to conduct and to report results of tests of specific equipment and how to
execute the measurement of related phenomena.
Over the past years, the international community has concentrated its efforts to
spread the use of standards and codes produced by ASME, such as:
• ASME, Performance Test Code on Gas Turbines, ASME PTC 22 1997. The
objective of the test(s) is to determine the power output and thermal efficiency of
the gas turbine when operating at the test conditions, and correcting these test
results to standard or specified operating and control conditions. Procedures for
conducting the test, calculating the results, and making the corrections are
defined, ASME PTC22, [1].
• ASME, Performance Test Code on Overall Plant Performance, ASME PTC 46
1996. The target of this code is establishing the overall plant performance,
including combined-cycle and cogeneration power plants. The PTC 46 provides
explicit procedures for the determination of power plant thermal performance
and electrical output. Frequently the test results are used as defined by a contract
for the basis of determination of fulfillment of contract guarantees.
• ASME, Performance Test Code on Test Uncertainly: Instruments and Apparatus
PTC 19.1 1988. PTC 19 describes and specifies procedures for evaluation of
196 F. J. G. Carazas and G. F. M. de Souza

uncertainties in individual test measurements, arising from both random errors

and systematic errors, and the propagation of random and systematic uncer-
tainties into the uncertainty of a test result. With these parameters it is estimated
an approximate test confidence level. This is especially important when com-
puting guarantees in plant output and plant efficiency.

3.1.2 Mechanical Parameters

Regarding mechanical performance, the industry recognizes as the best standards

those developed by the American Petroleum Institute (API) and The American
Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME). The ASME and the API mechanical
equipment standards aid in specifying and selecting equipment for general petro-
chemical use. The main purpose of these mechanical standards is to provide speci-
fications for the development of equipments with very high-quality, without losing
the needs associated with the safety standards for the operation of gas turbines.
In the power generation industry it is becoming more frequent the use of heavy-
duty gas turbines for open cycle and combined-cycle operation as a result of the short
installation time and high efficiency coupled with low emissions. Additionally, the
major gas turbine manufacturers develop increasingly flexible machines in relation
to the type of fuel they consume, thereby increasing the available capacity of energy
production. As a matter of fact, all of these features increase the installation and
operation of plants to operate on the basis of market power.
The oil industry is one of the biggest users of gas turbine and uses that piece of
equipment to generate power to move mechanical equipment such as pumps,
compressors and electric generators. Therefore the specifications written by API
and ASME are suitable for all areas, and operation and maintenance tips apply to
all industries. Thus the specifications are well suited for the industry, and the tips
of operation and maintenance apply for all industries, Boyce [7]. The main
mechanical equipment standards are present in Table 2.
Table 2 only mentions the main mechanical standards. The application of the
mechanical standards enables verification of the requirements for the operation of
gas turbines. ASME and API developed these standards to somehow ensure high
reliability of gas turbines, but among the rules it is not included a mechanism for
calculating the reliability of that piece of equipment.

3.2 Gas Turbine Reliability and Availability

The terminology of reliability can sometimes be confusing, for example, most gas
turbine manufactures (aero-derivative or heavy-duty) often claim that their prod-
ucts present highest reliability. This is why the term reliability must be clearly
defined.
Reliability Analysis of Gas Turbine 197

Table 2 Main mechanical equipment standards for gas turbines

Mechanical Mechanical standard title Published Reaffirmed
standard year year
acronym
API Std 616 Gas turbine for the petroleum, chemical, and gas 1998
industry services
ASME B133.2 Basic gas turbine 1977 1997
ASME Gas turbine fuels 1985 1992
B133.7M
ASME B133.4 Gas turbine control and protection systems 1978 1997
ASME B133.8 Procurement standard for gas turbine auxiliary 1981 1994
equipment
ASME B133.9 Measurement of exhaust emission from stationary 1994
gas turbine engines
ASME B133.5 Procurement standard for gas turbine electrical 1978 1997
equipment
ASME B133.3 Procurement standard for gas turbine auxiliary 1981 1994
equipment
API Std 618 Reciprocating compressors for petroleum, chemical, 1995
and gas industry services
API Std 619 Rotary-type positive displacement compressors for 1997
petroleum, chemical, and gas industry
API Std 613 Special purpose gear units for petroleum, chemical, 1995
and gas industry services
API Std 677 General-purpose gear units for petroleum, chemical, 1997 2000
and gas industry services
API Std 614 Lubrication, shaft-sealing, and control-oil systems 1999
and auxiliaries for petroleum, chemical, and gas
industry services
API Std 671 Special purpose couplings for petroleum, chemical, 1998
and gas industry services
ANSI/API Std Vibration, axial-position, and bearing-temperature 1993
670 monitoring systems

3.2.1 Reliability Concepts

The formal definition of reliability is: ‘‘Reliability is the probability that a device
will satisfactorily perform a specified function for a specified period of time under
given operating conditions’’ [22]. (For more information see the Chap. 5). Reli-
ability is represented by:
RðtÞ ¼ 1  FðtÞ ð2Þ

where:
R(t) Reliability at time t
F(t) Failure probability at time t
198 F. J. G. Carazas and G. F. M. de Souza

Based on this definition, reliability reflects the physical performance of prod-

ucts over time and is taken as a measure of their dependability and trustworthiness,
Ohring [20]. Therefore, the highest reliability of a complex system, such a gas
turbine, is really significant if calculated for an operational period (usually from
720 to 8700 h).
Moreover, some gas turbine manufacturers, define reliability as: ‘‘Probability of
not being out of service when the unit is needed—includes forced outage hours
(FOH) while in service, while on reserve shutdown and while attempting to start,
normalized by period hours (PH)—percentage units (%)’’ [3].
Thus the reliability is calculated by:
 
FOH
Reliability ¼ 1   100 ð3Þ
PH

where:
FOH Total forced outage (hours)
PH Operation period (hours)

Forced outage is related to the occurrence of random failures (unexpected). This

type of failure is corrected with the corrective maintenance interventions.
The main difference between the ways of calculating reliability is: the manu-
factures use only downtime (FOH) and operation time (PH), without associating a
probability distribution. When the operational time between failures is associated
with a probability distribution, we obtain statistical measures of the failure
probability what makes possible the use of more accurate tools for the analysis of
equipment, extending the results in an operational period.
In the case of non-parametric reliability estimate (manufactures way), it is only
known the punctual behaviour, and the result cannot be extended to the entire time
domain. The major probability distributions associated with the reliability evalu-
ation are exponential distribution, lognormal distribution and Weibull distribution.
These distributions are those that best represent the behaviour of the reliability of
electro-mechanical systems.
On the other hand, gas turbines are pieces of equipment composed of a large
numbers of subsystems, with a large number of components, being considered
complex systems. To analyze the reliability of complex systems the analyst can
follow two main phylosophies, the quantitative and qualitative analysis. The most
commonly used quantitative techniques are Markov chain, Monte Carlo simula-
tion, block diagram analysis and fault tree analysis (for more information see the
Chap. 5), and the qualitative techniques are Failure Modes and Effects Analysis
(FMEA), Failure Modes, Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA), and Fault
Tree Analysis (FTA).
To obtain satisfactory results, it is necessary to implement these techniques in a
structured way, in other words, with the application of a method of analysis. The
main methods of reliability analysis are presented in item 8.4.
Reliability Analysis of Gas Turbine 199

Fig. 5 Loss system performance caused by a functional failure of a component

A method for reliability analysis of complex system refers to the evaluation of

the reliability of a system based on the reliability of its components. So it is
necessary to define how the low reliability of components affects the system
reliability. As an example, for gas turbine, when the bearings lubrication system,
which plays a fundamental function, is presenting failure, the gas turbine has a
forced outage. Figure 5 shows this behaviour for a system composed of 3 com-
ponents (A, B and C). The performance of component C is reduced below the
minimum necessary to fulfil its function (functional failure), leading to system
failure, independently if the other components are presenting performance
according to the operational standards.
The result of reliability analysis is usually the mean time to failure (MTTF).
Suppose a number (n) of components that fail in service after successively longer
times t1 ; t2 ; t3 . . .tn : The MTTF is simply defined as:
t1 þ t2 þ t3 þ    þ tn
MTTF ¼ ð4Þ
n
The importance of analyzing the reliability of each component is given by the
close relationship between components reliability and system availability.

3.2.2 Maintainability

As well as satisfactory operational time is represented by the reliability, system

behaviour during the repair time is represented by the maintainability. Maintain-
ability (M) is formally defined as ‘‘a characteristic of design and installation which
determines the probability that a failed equipment, machine, or system can be
restored to its normal operable state within a given timeframe, using the prescribed
practices and procedures’’ [6].
200 F. J. G. Carazas and G. F. M. de Souza

Therefore maintainability is the probability of maintaining a piece of

equipment in a specified time duration. As a result of maintainability analysis it
is possible to determine the mean time to repair (MTTR). The MTTR is simply
defined as.
Downtimes for repair ðtr Þ tr1 þ tr2 þ tr3 þ    þ trn
MTTR ¼ ¼ ð5Þ
Number of repairs nr
where tri is the time to repair after the ith failure and nr is the number of repairs.
The downtime for repair (maintenance downtime), is a total time period during
which the system is not in condition to perform its intended function. This time
includes the mean active maintenance time, logistics delay time, and administra-
tive delay time. In other words, maintenance downtime is strongly associated with
maintenance planning strategies and maintenance policy [6].
In fact, the successful execution of a maintenance plan will reduce downtime
and will increase equipment life avoiding the degradation of reliability and will be
guaranteeing high availability.

3.2.3 Availability

Availability is defined as ‘‘the ability of equipment to successfully perform its

required function at a stated instant of time or over stated period of time’’ [11] and
is often calculated with the following equation:
MTTF
A¼ ð6Þ
MTTR þ MTTF
The electric power industry uses the IEEE Std. 762 (Definitions for Use in
Reporting Electric Generating Unit Reliability, Availability, and Productivity) to
define the availability as: ‘‘availability measures are concerned with the fraction of
time in which a unit is capable of providing service and accounts for outage
frequency and duration’’ [14].
The IEEE Std. 762 was developed to aid the electric power industry in reporting
and evaluating electric generating unit reliability, availability and productivity.
Among the most important indexes in the IEEE Std. 762, are the Availability
Factor (AF) defined as ‘‘the fraction of a given operating period in which a gen-
erating unit is available without any outages’’, and Equivalent Availability Factor
(EAF) defined as ‘‘the fraction of a given operating period in which a generating
unit is available without any outages and equipment or seasonal deratings’’ [10].
The AF index, usually evaluated monthly, is reported in a Generating
Availability Data System (GADS) and can be used for comparison between
different generating systems. According to the standard the EAF is the sug-
gested parameter to measure a plant Reliability, Availability and Maintainability
(RAM) performance. The EAF factor is the equivalent percentage of time in a
specified time period that the plant is capable of generating full-power output.
Reliability Analysis of Gas Turbine 201

The EAF factor is less than 100% due to the occurrence of unplanned and
planned outages.
The equivalent unplanned outage factor (EUOF) is the equivalent percentage of
hours in a specified time period that the plant is not capable of operating at full-
power because of unplanned outage events, and the equivalent planned outage
factor (EMOF) is the equivalent percentage of hours in a specified time period that
the plant is not capable of operating at full power because of planned outage
events, usually associated with preventive maintenance planned intervention. That
intervention includes tasks of inspection, testing or overhaul and is scheduled well
in advance.
The EAF index is also dependent on how often a planned (or unplanned) outage
occurs, on the length of time that an outage lasts once it has occurred, and on the
loss of plant capacity associated with the outage.
For unplanned outages, the Std. IEEE 762 classifies the outages according to
five classes, defined from class 0 to class 3 and maintenance. Unplanned outage
Class 0 applies to a start-up failure and Class 1 applies to a condition requiring
immediate outage. The unplanned outage Class 2 or Class 3 and Maintenance
are determined by the amount of delay that can be exercised in the time of
removal of the unit from service. That index is deterministic and can only be
used for maintenance efficiency management.
In order to improve maintenance efficiency and to reduce maintenance costs it
is recommended the use of reliability and maintainability concepts, calculated
based on the power plant record of failure and operational context. The analysis
allows the evaluation of MTTF and MTTR of the system, as proposed by the
Eqs. 4 and 5.
As mentioned, the availability of a complex system, such as a gas turbine, is
strongly associated with the parts reliability and the maintenance policy. That
policy not only influences the parts repair time but also the parts reliability
affecting the system degradation and availability.
Most of the maintenance tasks of power plant equipment are based on manu-
facturer’s recommendations. Those recommendations are not always based on real
experience data. Many manufacturers get very little feedback from the users of
their equipment after the guarantee period is over. Fear of product liability claims
may perhaps also influence the manufactures’ recommendations.
In a large enterprise, such as a power plant, keeping asset reliability and
availability, reducing costs related to asset maintenance, repair, and ultimate
replacement are at the top of management concerns.
In response to these concerns a great number of maintenance planning methods
have been developed including those based on the Reliability Centered Mainte-
nance (RCM) concepts.
202 F. J. G. Carazas and G. F. M. de Souza

4 Reliability Analysis of Gas Turbine (Case Study)

A reliability analysis has as main objective to analyze the systems behaviour based
on their ‘‘time to failure’’ database. These assessments are useful for planning
activities that improve their operational times. The most used method is the
Reliability Centered Maintenance. In the Chap. 6 the main concepts associated
with that philosophy where analyzed.
In general the major objectives of RCM methodology are: Preserve functions;
Identify failure modes that can defeat the functions; Prioritize function need;
Select main monitoring systems to evaluate critical component degradation to
allow the definition of maintenance actions before the occurrence of functional
failure.
The sequence for implementation may vary depending on need and depth of
analysis as discussed in Chap. 6.

4.1 Heavy-Duty Gas Turbine Case Study

This item presents a reliability analysis, using the RCM guidelines, of a heavy-
duty F series gas turbine that has 150 MW ISO output (with natural gas as fuel).
The F series gas turbines are similar, despite the diversity of manufactures such
as Siemens, Mitsubishi and GE. The F series are developed based on the concern
with the problem of global warming which has been attributed to the burning of
fossil fuels. At the same time its development was motivated to obtain high-
efficiency with low-cost power generation.
The quality and the availability of fuels represent a continuous challenge to the
manufacturers. The F series gas turbine, are designed to—through modifications in
the combustor chambers—use a variety of fuels, increasing the system complexity
from the point of view of reliability analysis.
A complex system reliability analysis consists on four main steps: functional
tree construction; FMEA development; critical components selection; and main-
tenance policies selection, Carazas and Souza [9].

4.2 Functional Tree

The functional tree for heavy-duty gas turbine is presented in Fig. 6. The equip-
ment is divided into five main subsystems: trunnion support, compressor,
combustors, power turbine and start/stop subsystem.
Those main subsystems are divided into components, each one performing a
specific function in connection with the subsystems main function. Loss of per-
formance or functional failure in a component at the bottom of the tree can cause
Reliability Analysis of Gas Turbine 203

Fig. 6 Gas turbine functional tree

effects on all subsystems above it, causing a degradation in the gas turbine per-
formance, represented by reduction in the nominal power output or degradation of
some other operational parameter. If the gas turbine is operating in combined-
cycle (as usually operate), the result of functional failure is more serious because it
affects the power plant nominal output.

4.3 Failure Modes and Effects Analysis

In an objective manner, the FMEA is ‘‘Bottom up’ approach where potential

failure modes in every sub-item are analyzed, defining their effects on other sub-
items, and their consequences on the system performance’’ [8].
Although there are many variants of FMEA, it is always based on a table, as
shown in Table 3. In the left-hand column the component under analysis is listed;
then in the next column the physical modes by which the component may fail are
204 F. J. G. Carazas and G. F. M. de Souza

Table 3 Failure Modes and Effect Analysis FMEA

Function Failure mode Failure causes Failure effects Critically
(A) Failure modes and effect analysis—Example: trunnion support
Support Achieve Fatigue failure, Loss of structural 9
turbine ultimate fracture, Buckling support, extensive
housing limit state damage to the
turbine
Achieve Plastic deformation Loss of structural 8
operational due to overloading, stiffness, possible
limit state existence of fatigue turbine vibration.
crack
(B) Failure modes and effect analysis—Example: Electric motor
Transform Sheared shaft Fatigue Electric motor 8
electrical is locked
energy in Cracked Fatigue/external Leakage of dust into 6/8
mechanical housing shock or Vibration motor/possible
energy short circuit
Bearing wear Poor lubrication/ Noisy/heat build-up/ 4/6/8
contamination/ possible shaft
overloading or high locking
temperature

provided. This is followed, in the third column, by the possible causes of each of
the failure modes. In the Table 3(A) and (B) are two examples of FMEA, for the
trunnion support and electric motor respectively.
In the same way, the fourth column lists the effects of each failure mode that are
classified according to the criticality scale.
The FMEA analyzes different failure modes and their effects on the system and
classifies the level of importance based on ‘‘criticality’’ of the effect of failure.
The ranking process of criticality can be accomplished by utilizing existing failure
data or by a subjective ranking procedure conducted by a team of people with an
understanding of the system operation. For the analysis of the level of severity of
faults in power generation systems, the authors suggest using Table 4. This
criticality scale expresses the degradation degree in the turbine operation.
The FMEA analysis was performed for each component listed in the end of a
given branch of the functional tree.
The failure modes for the components were developed according to information
from the literature [16, 7, 5, 8, 9]; from the catalogues of the manufacturers,
[12, 13], Siemens 2006; [23], and based on the experience of the operators of
various power plants, and study of maintenance records.
The analysis pointed out that the most critical components for the gas turbine,
which are listed in Table 5.
Reliability Analysis of Gas Turbine 205

Table 4 Criticality index description for FMEA analysis

Index Effects on the turbine operation
1 (None) This severity ranking is given when a component potential failure mode can
cause reduction of performance of the equipment but does not cause
damage to other eq. components, possibly affecting:- the eq. operation,
when it is stopped to substitute or repair the failed component (substitution
is not immediate);- no effect on power plant performance until the eq. is
repaired
2 (Very minor) This severity ranking is given when a component potential failure mode can
cause reduction of performance of the eq. but does not cause damage to
other eq. components, possibly affecting:- the eq. operation, when it is
stopped to substitute or repair the failed component (substitution is not
immediate);- very minor loss of power plant perf. until the eq. is repaired
3 (Minor) This severity ranking is given when a component potential failure mode can
cause reduction of perf. of the eq. but does not cause damage to other eq.
components, possibly affecting:—the eq. operation, when it is stopped to
substitute or repair the failed component (substitution is not immediate);—
minor loss of power plant perf until the eq. is repaired;—possible minor
effect in the environment
4 (Moderate) This severity ranking is given when a component potential failure mode can
cause reduction of perf. of the eq. but does not cause damage to other eq.
components, possibly affecting:—the eq. operation, once it must be
stopped to substitute or repair the failed component;—minor effect in the
environment;—minor loss of power plant perf. until the eq. is repaired;
minor loss of perf. in the power plant control system
5 (Significant) This severity ranking is given when a component potential failure mode can
cause reduction of performance of the eq. but does not cause damage to
other eq. components, possibly affecting:—the eq. operation, once it must
be stopped to substitute or repair the failed component;—the
environment;—loss of power plant perf. until the eq. is repaired; loss of
prf. in the power plant control system
6 (High) This severity ranking is given when a component potential failure mode can
cause reduction of prf. of the eq. but does not cause damage to other eq.
components, possibly affecting:—the eq. operation, once it must be
stopped to substitute or repair the failed component;—the environment;—
the compliance with government requirements.;—loss of power plant prf.
until the eq. is repaired; severe loss of prf. in the power plant control
system
7(Severe) This severity ranking is given when a component potential failure mode can
cause unavailability of the eq. but does not cause damage to other eq.
components, possibly affecting:—the eq. operation, once it must be
stopped;—the environment in a severe manner;—the compliance with
government requirements. The failure also causes the need of repair and/or
replacement of the failed component. The plant is unavailable for short
period of time
(continued)
206 F. J. G. Carazas and G. F. M. de Souza

Table 4 (continued)
Index Effects on the turbine operation
8 (Very severe) This severity ranking is given when a component potential failure mode can
cause unavailability of the eq. but do not cause damage to other eq.
components, possibly affecting:—the eq. operation, once it must be
stopped;—the environment in a severe manner;—the compliance with
government requirements. The failure also causes the need of repair and/or
replacement of the failed component. The plant is unavailable for long
period of time
9 (Hazardous This severity ranking is given when a component potential failure mode can
effects) cause severe damage to other components and/or to the eq., possibly
affecting:—the eq. operation, once it must be stopped;—the environmental
safety, including leakage of hazardous materials;—the safe power plant
operation;—the compliance with government requirements. The failure
also causes the need of repair and/or replacement of a great number of
components. The plant is unavailable for long period of time

4.4 Reliability Analysis

Manufactures such as GE say they’ve obtained 100% reliability an 108-day period

of continuous operation [13]. This value may not be used as a benchmark espe-
cially if the gas turbine is new. These reliability values are often used by manu-
factures, but also dependent on very stringent preventive inspections procedures
and monitoring operation.
For example in Table 6 some data provided by manufactures related to
inspection plans are presented and their effects on the calculated availability of a
power plant are analyzed, [17].
Reliability can be defined as the probability that a system will perform properly
for a specified period of time under a given set of operating conditions. Implied in
this definition is a clear-cut criterion for failure, from which one may judge at what
point the system is no longer functioning properly. For the gas turbine the failure
criterion is any component failure that causes incapacity of generating the nominal
power output.
Probably the single most used parameter to characterize reliability is the mean
time to failure (or MTTF). It is just the expected or mean value of the failure time,
expressed as:
Z1
MTTF ¼ RðtÞdt ð7Þ
0

where:
R(t) reliability at time t
T time period (h)
Table 5 Critical components of the gas turbine based on FMEA analysis results
System Subsystem Component Failure mode Criticality
Gas turbine Structure Reach ultimate limit state 9
Reach operational limit state 8
Compressor Blades, Crown Permanent deformation 8
Rupture 8
Presence of flaw 7
Blades, fixture Fatigue or overload rupture 7
Permanent deformation 7
Blades Rupture 8
Vanes Loss of fixture 7
Reliability Analysis of Gas Turbine

Loss of geometrical tolerances 7

Rupture 8
Shaft Rupture due to fatigue or overloading 8
Permanent deformation 7
Trust or guide bearing Oil tank Rupture 9
lubrication system Oil pump No outcome flow 7
Electric Motor Impossibility to convert mechanical 7
into electrical energy
Electrical control Electrical current interruption 7
system (Contato) 7
Contactor: open circuit
Contactor interrupts electric 7
current incorrectly
Interrupted electrical wiring 7
Intermittent failure in electrical contact 7
Piping Rupture 8
Transversal section clogging 8
(continued)
207
Table 5 (continued)
208

System Subsystem Component Failure mode Criticality

Heat exchanger Incapacity of cooling 7
Partial heat exchanging capacity 7
Filter Filter clogging 7
Air bleeding system Low pressure valve Incapacity of closure 7
Incapacity of opening 7
High pressure valve Incapacity of closure 7
Incapacity of opening 7
Washing system Valve Incapacity of closure 8
Leaking 7
Partial closure 7
Combustor system Transition ring Rupture 8
Combustion chamber Rupture 8
Cross flame tube Rupture 8
Igniter system 8
- Spring Permanent deformation 8
- Igniter No supply power 8
Rupture 8
Cooling system Flange Rupture 8
Piping Rupture 7
Tubine blade system Blade Rupture 8
Blade ring Permanent deformation 8
Rupture 8
Shaft Couplings Rupture 7
Torque transmitter Rupture 8
Exhaust Casing Rupture 8
Exhaust pipe Rupture 8
F. J. G. Carazas and G. F. M. de Souza
Reliability Analysis of Gas Turbine 209

Table 6 Manufacturer’s inspections recommendations and expected availability

Year Maintenance Reliability %
First year Periodic inspections 97
Year in which occurs Combustion inspection 95
Year in which occurs Hot gas path inspection 93
Year in which occurs Major inspections 90

Random failures (represented by the exponential probability function) consti-

tute the most widely used model for describing reliability phenomena. They are
defined by the assumption that the rate of failure of a system is independent of its
age and other characteristics of its operating history. In that case the use of mean
time to failure to describe reliability can be acceptable once the exponential dis-
tribution parameter, the failure rate, is directly associated with MTTF, Lewis [15].
The constant failure rate approximation is often quite adequate even though a
system or some of its components may exhibit moderate early-failures or aging
effects, for example mechanical components. The magnitude of early failures is
limited by strictly quality control in manufacturing and aging effects can be
sharply limited by careful predictive or preventive maintenance. For example
during transport and storage keep the parts in places with low temperature, low
relative humidity, low solar irradiation and minimum vibration levels [4].
For a gas turbine in the beginning of its operational life, it is hard to affirm that
the system present random failure, since its performance depends on commis-
sioning and operational procedures and even on environmental conditions.
When the phenomena of early failures, aging effects, or both, are presented, the
reliability of a device or system becomes a strong function of its age.
The Weibull probability distribution is one of the most widely used distribu-
tions in reliability calculations involving time related failures. Through the
appropriate choice of parameters a variety of failure rate behaviours can be
modelled, including constant failure rate, in addition to failure rates modelling
both wear-in and wear-out phenomena.
In the sequence of the chapter, a reliability analysis of a gas turbine is pre-
sented. The database used in the reliability analysis corresponds to first 5 years of
gas turbine operation. The reliability analysis is based on the time to failure data
analysis. The turbine is modeled as one block. (See Chap. 5 or [15]).
Given that the gas turbine is composed mainly by mechanical parts, the reli-
ability (R(t)) can be represented by a Weibull probability distribution, widely used
in reliability calculations.
The two-parameter Weibull distribution, typically used to model wear-out or
fatigue failures, is represented by the following equation:
t b
RðtÞ ¼ eðgÞ ð8Þ
210 F. J. G. Carazas and G. F. M. de Souza

Table 7 Weibull distribution System Weibull distribution parameters

parameters for gas turbine
reliability calculations, Heavy-duty gas turbine b = 0.58
Carazas and Souza [9] g = 1014.24

Reliability v s Time
1,00

0,80
Reliability, R(t)=1-F(t)

0,60

0,40

0,20

0
0 1752,00 3504,00 5256,00 7008,00 8760,00
Time, (t)

Fig. 7 Gas turbine reliability distribution

where:
R(t) reliability at time t
T time period (h)
b Weibull distribution shape parameter Weibull distribution characteristic life
(h)

The distribution parameters are estimated through the use of parametric esti-
mation methods that fit the distribution to the ‘time to failure’ data. There are
procedures for estimating the Weibull distribution parameters from data, using
what is known as the maximum likelihood estimation method. For the gas turbine
reliability analysis the software Weibull++ [21] was used for parameter estimation.
Table 7 shows the Weibull distribution parameters for the heavy-duty gas turbines.
The turbine reliability distribution is shown in Fig. 7.
Reliability Analysis of Gas Turbine 211

Fig. 8 Mechanical behavior

of the turbine in the bathtub
curve

The gas turbine has reliability distribution with shape parameters less than one.
When 0 \ b \ 1, the distribution has a decreasing failure rate. The gas turbine
mechanical behaviour will follow the ‘‘failure rate’’ in the ‘‘bathtub curve’’. After
the infant mortality phase, as shown in Fig. 8, it is expected that the equipment
will present almost constant failure rate.
The reliability of gas turbine is equal 91.67%, calculated with Eq. 3, typically
used by manufactures [3, 23].
The gas turbine under study presented 13 failures that caused equipment
unavailability in the analysis period. Among those, more than five failures
occurred in the first year operational. Most of them were related to high temper-
ature in the combustors or excessive vibration on the bearings. The failure root-
cause was sensor calibration problems. In the last 3 years there were two failures
due to high temperature in the exhaust collector, caused by combustor failure.
For this reason most manufactures recommend doing boroscopy inspection
after the first year of operation, or sooner, depending on the type of fuel. An
effective boroscopy inspection can monitor the condition of internal components
without the need for casing removal. Boroscopy inspections should be scheduled
considering the operational context and environmental condition of the gas turbine
and information from the O&M manuals.
The heavy-duty gas turbine designs incorporate provisions in both compressor
casings and turbine shells for visual inspection of intermediate compressor rotor
stages, turbine buckets and turbine nozzle partitions by means of the optical
boroscopy. These provisions, consisting of radially aligned holes through the
compressor casings, turbine shell and internal stationary turbine shrouds, are
designed to allow the penetration of an optical boroscope into the compressor or
turbine flow path area, [3]. Therefore the application of a boroscopy monitoring
will assist the scheduling of power outages and preplanning of spare parts
requirements, resulting in low maintenance costs and high availability and reli-
ability of the gas turbine.
212 F. J. G. Carazas and G. F. M. de Souza

Table 8 Lognormal System Parameters

distribution parameters for
gas turbine maintainability Gas turbine l = 1,52
calculation, Carazas and r = 1,12
Souza [9]

Regarding the reliability analysis, the failures that may affect turbine avail-
ability were associated with components listed at the bottom of functional tree
branches presented in Fig. 6 and were considered as critical in the FMEA analysis
as shown in Table 5.
For the gas turbine, the early failure stage, defined by the great failure con-
centration in the first operational years, is mainly associated with the adjustment of
control systems, mainly sensors.

4.5 Availability Analysis

To calculate availability it is necessary to estimate the parameters of the main-

tenance downtime (maintainability). The maintainability can be well described by
a probability distribution. Typically the lognormal distribution is used to model the
time to repair distribution of complex systems. The maintainability can be
expressed as:
 
ln t  l
MðtÞ ¼ U ð9Þ
r

where:
M(t) maintainability at time t
l lognormal distribution mean value
r lognormal distribution standard deviation
/(•) standard normal distribution cumulative function

Based on the time to repair database for the gas turbine and using the software
Weibull++ [21], the lognormal distribution parameters for maintainability
modeling were calculated and are presented in Table 8.
The graphical representation of the maintainability probability distribution for
gas turbine is presented in Fig. 9. The gas turbine has a mean time to repair
equivalent to 8.56 h. The turbine has had simple failures, usually associated with
sensors or control system devices that require a relative short time to repair.
For complex electrical–mechanical systems such as gas turbines, the deter-
mining factors in estimating repair time vary greatly.
Reliability Analysis of Gas Turbine 213

Maintenability vs Time Plot

1,00

0,80
Maintenability. M(t)

0,60

0,40

0,20

0
0 14,00 28,00 42,00 56,00 70,00
Time, (t)

Fig. 9 Gas turbine maintainability distribution

In mechanical components, the causes of failure are likely to be quite obvious.

The primary time entailed in the repair is then determined by how much time is
required to extract the damage parts and install the new components. In contrast, if
an electronic device (such as sensors or control units) fails, maintenance personnel
may spend most of the repair procedure time in diagnosing the problem, for it may
take considerable effort to understand the nature of the failure well enough to
locate the part that is the cause. Conversely, it may be a rather straightforward
procedure to replace the faulty component once it has been located.
Once the reliability and maintainability parameters are calculated the system
availability can be estimated. Applying the Monte Carlo simulation method, the
availability can be estimated for an operation time.
Considering the gas turbine operating over one year, corresponding to 8760 h,
and using the reliability and maintainability probability distribution presented in
Tables 7 and 8, respectively, the availability for the gas turbine is 99.35%.
The North American Electric Reliability Corporation [19] keeps available a
reliability database based on North America power plants’ performance that can be
used as a benchmark for power plants availability analysis. According to that
database the average availability of gas turbines with nominal output higher than
50 MW, within the period between 2002 and 2006, is 93.95%. The gas turbine
214 F. J. G. Carazas and G. F. M. de Souza

0.8

0.6
A(t)
0.4

0.2

0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000
Time (h)

A(t) Without Maintenace A(t) With Maintenace

Fig. 10 Gas turbine availability simulation with maintenance

analyzed in the present study has higher reliability than the values presented in the
NERC database. That comparison should be used only for initial evaluation of the
gas turbine performance since that database does not clearly define the availability
for heavy-duty gas turbines and the average age of the turbines used in the
database are higher than the equipment evaluated in the presented paper. Never-
theless, the performance of the gas turbine analyzed in the present study can be
considered satisfactory as far as the availability index is concerned.
Considering that the failure rate of the gas turbine is decreasing one can expect
that the frequency of failures can continue to decrease until the equipment reaches
the random failure stage. Based on the reduction of the failure frequency, caused
by maintenance policies, routine inspections, or even operational procedure
improvement, an availability increase can be expected. For example, with the
execution of preventive inspection in periods of 3 months, the availability
increases, as shown the simulation presented in Fig. 10. The first availability curve
represents the availability of the turbine in normal operation, and the second
represents the availability behavior with small peripheral equipment repairs and
periodic inspections.

5 Influence of Fuel Flexibility in Gas Turbine Reliability

(Case Study)

It is known that the constant changes in energy market (price fluctuations and the
availability of fuels) can have a direct impact on the thermoelectric operational
context. In order to face this reality, gas turbines that operate with a variety of fuels
can be the key to success for power plant operators worldwide.
In this section it is presented a study conducted to analyze the reliability of a
turbine with dual fuel system. The method of analysis varies if compared to
Reliability Analysis of Gas Turbine 215

Fig. 11 Thermoelectric
power plant reliability block
diagram

item 8.4. The gas turbine is viewed as a block, with a particular reliability, and the
dual fuel system as another block in series with the gas turbine block, as shown in
Fig. 11.

5.1 Dual Fuel Systems

For any gas turbine-manufacturer, the fuels that will be used will have a great
effect upon both the machine design and the materials of the components. Some
gas turbine applications will always use highly refined and clean fuels; aircraft Jet
engines are the prime example. In this case, materials and designs will primarily be
limited by strength and oxidation characteristics. In most land-based gas turbines,
however, use of cheaper, lower-grade fuels (such as heavy oil or Diesel oil)
dictates that additional emphasis must be placed upon corrosion resistance,
deposits, and the more challenging combustion characteristics.
For that reason, in case of adapting a turbine that uses natural gas to dual fuel,
the combustor system must be replaced by a new design. These new combustors
can burn a wide variety of fuels ranging from natural gas to the various processes
gases, from naphtha to heavy residual oils. Dual fuel nozzles are often used to
allow transfer between fuels without shutdown.
The major impact of the non-gaseous fuel properties on combustor design is on
the liner metal temperature and carbon formation. The degree to which the fuel has
been atomized is an important factor in establishing liner metal temperatures and
reducing carbon formation. Usually in dual-fuel gas turbine the liquid fuel is air
atomized at the fuel nozzle. Typical atomizing air pressure ratios (fuel nozzle air
pressure/compressor discharge pressure) are in the range of 1.2–1.4 for light dis-
tillate fuels with higher ratios being required for heavy fuels. So, to transform a gas
turbine in a dual fuel unit, a pressurized air system must be added to the auxiliary
systems coupled to the turbine.
Special provisions are made for handling the ash-forming liquid fuels. These
modifications are largely outside of the turbine core (which is largely standardized
in construction) and are frequently external modular items. Examples are provi-
sions for air atomizing, handling and treating the fuel, and cleaning the turbine to
remove ash deposits.
Some ash-forming liquid fuels require a derating in firing temperatures, par-
ticularly in the larger machine models. This is accommodated by modifications in
the control circuit, as opposed to changes in the gas turbine properly.
216 F. J. G. Carazas and G. F. M. de Souza

Fig. 12 Dual fuel flow diagram

Fuels may also require heating for pumping and forwarding. For heavy, lower-
grade fuels, it may be necessary to heat the fuel to lower the viscosity to the
operating range of the fuel transfer and filter systems. It may also be necessary to
heat some crudes and heavy distillates to keep wax dissolved. Petroleum waxes
occur to varying extents in crude oils depending on the geographical source, with
the wax tending to become concentrated in the heavy distillate fractions.
Independent of the fuel type, there are certain precautions that can be taken at
the plant site to minimize the chance of contaminants entering into the turbine.
There are two approaches to ensure this condition:
• Minimizing the chance that the fuel will become contaminated by using careful
transportation and storage methods;
• Removal of insoluble contaminants by setting filtration, centrifuging, electro-
static -precipitation, or a combination thereof.
To attain reliable combustor performance and to meet environmental restric-
tions for allowable NOx, and other exhaust gas emission levels, it is necessary to
use water in combustion, adding another auxiliary system to the turbine.
An illustrative flowchart of the auxiliary system added to a gas turbine in case
of dual fuel conversion, considering the use of Diesel oil, is presented in Fig. 12.
The basic subsystems of those auxiliary systems are:
Reliability Analysis of Gas Turbine 217

Fig. 13 Dual fuel reliability block diagram

• Oil supply system: fuel filters (including stand by filter), valves, piping system
(oil line), fuel pump (including stand by pump);
• Oil heating system: piping system, valves, heater and control system
(thermocouple);
• Staring system with oil: hydraulic control system (valves, hydraulic lines,
pump), filter (including stand by system), oil valves, oil injection pump
(including stand by pump);
• NOx control system: water tank, water pump, water piping system, valves and
heat exchanger;
• Atomizing air system: air filter, air piping system, compressor, valves, heat
exchanger and atomizing air nozzle.

5.2 Reliability Analysis of Dual Fuel Systems

5.2.1 Reliability Block Diagram

The block diagram used to calculate the diesel oil system, which is added to the
gas turbine in order to make dual fuel equipment, is presented in Fig. 13. That
block diagram considers the possibility of gas turbine start up with diesel oil.
The reliability of each piece of equipment must be modeled to allow the system
reliability estimative. The reliability of those pieces of equipment can be different
in several power stations. The differences must be attributed to assembly condi-
tions, operational differences and even variations in fuel quality.

5.2.2 Reliability Analysis

For the present analysis the authors will provide an estimate of the diesel oil
supply system using the database published by Reliability Analysis Center (RAC)
to evaluate the components reliability. Those data are presented in Table 9.
218 F. J. G. Carazas and G. F. M. de Souza

Table 9 Reliability of Dual Fuel system components

Component Reliability distribution parameter
Oil supply system
Fuel filter Exponential distribution, k = 6.65 9 10-5 failure/hour
Valves Exponential distribution, k = 4.70 9 10-8 failure/hour
Piping system Exponential distribution, k = 4.7 9 10-7 failure/hour
Fuel pump Exponential distribution, k = 10.4 9 10-6 failure/hour
Oil heating system
Heater Exponential distribution, k = 5.20 9 10-6 failure/hour
Thermoset Exponential distribution, k = 13.27 9 10-6 failure/hour
Staring system with oil
Hydraulic valves Exponential distribution, k = 13.96 9 10-6 failure/hour
Hydraulic pumps Exponential distribution, k = 13.27 9 10-6 failure/hour
Oil injection pump Exponential distribution, k = 13.27 9 10-6 failure/hour
Filter Exponential distribution, k = 13.27 9 10-6 failure/hour
NOx control system
Water tank Exponential distribution, k = 2.24 9 10-6 failure/hour
Piping system Exponential distribution, k = 4.70 9 10-7 failure/hour
Valves Exponential distribution, k = 4.7 9 10-8 failure/hour
Pump Exponential distribution, k = 1.5 9 10-5 failure/hour
Heat exchanger Exponential distribution, k = 6.80 9 10-6 failure/hour
Injection water pump Exponential distribution, k = 1.5 9 10-5 failure/hour
Atomizing air system
Valves Exponential distribution, k = 4.7 9 10-8 failure/hour
Piping system Exponential distribution, k = 4.7 9 10-7 failure/hour
Compressor Exponential distribution, k = 7.6 9 10-7 failure/hour

All components reliability is modeled with an exponential distribution. That

distribution is modeled to represent random failure modes. For mechanical
equipment that approach is valid only if the component is submitted to a very
stringent preventive or predictive maintenance policy in order to eliminate all
aging dependent failure modes. The reliability distribution of diesel oil system is
show in Fig. 14.
Considering the data presented in Table 9 and an operational period of 8760 h,
the reliability of the Diesel oil system is 60.76%. The components that have the
lowest reliability are the hydraulic components used in the startup system with
Diesel oil. The Diesel oil pump in the fuel supply system also presents low
reliability.
The hydraulic components reliability is significantly affected by the hydraulic
oil quality. That quality is usually associated with the presence of particles in the
fluid. Those particles can cause wear of valves and actuators affecting the
hydraulic control system overall performance. The most traditional way to control
hydraulic fluid contamination is by filtration and preventive change of the
hydraulic fluid.
Reliability Analysis of Gas Turbine 219

Fig. 14 Diesel Oil system reliability distribution

Taking in view that the Diesel oil subsystems can be considered as additional
equipment that should be added to the standard gas turbine configuration, based on
the plant operator choice, the gas turbine system reliability is influenced by those
optional subsystem reliability.

6 Conclusion

This chapter presented the fundamentals of reliability analysis applied to gas

turbines used in power plants. The traditional reliability and availability calcula-
tion method, based on index proposed by IEEE 762 [14], is compared with a
method based on fundamental reliability concepts. The last one is strongly
dependent on the existence of a maintenance and operation database where the
operational times between failure and time to repair are correctly registered.
A heavy-duty gas turbine reliability analysis is presented and a discussion about
the implementation of a dual fuel system is also presented. The reliability analysis
seems suitable to identify critical components in the turbine and can be used as a
guide to prepare predictive and preventive maintenance plans aiming at increasing
turbine availability.
220 F. J. G. Carazas and G. F. M. de Souza

References

1. American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) (1999) PTC 22 performance test code
on gas turbine. ASME, New York
2. Siemens (2006) SGT6-5000F (W501F) 3 million hours fleet operational experience. In:
Power-Gen International 2006, Orlando
3. Balevic D, Burger R, Forry D (2009) Heavy-duty gas turbine operating and maintenance
considerations. GE Energy, Atlanta
4. Bajenescu T, Bâzu M (1999) Reliability of electronic components a practical guide to
electronic systems manufacturing. Springer, Berlin
5. Black and Veatch (1996) Power plant engineering. Chapman & Hall, New York
6. Blanchard B, Verma D, Peterson E (1995) Maintainability a key to effective serviceability
and maintenance management. Wiley, New York
7. Boyce M (2001) Gas turbine engineering handbook. Gulf Professional Publishing, Boston
8. Carazas F (2006) Availability analysis of gas turbines used in thermoelectric power plants.
MSc Thesis presented at Polytechnic School—University of São Paulo (In Portuguese). São
Paulo
9. Carazas F, Souza G (2009) Availability analysis of gas turbines used in power plants. Int J
Thermodyn 12:28–37
10. Curley G (2006) Power plant performance indices in new market environment: IEEE
standard 762 working group activities and GADS database. Power engineering society
general meeting, IEEE, 1-4244-0493-2, p 5
11. Duffuaa S, Raouf A, Dixon J (1999) Planning and control of maintenance systems: modeling
and analysis. Wiley, New York
12. GE Energy (2009) Heavy-duty gas turbine products. GEA-12985H (06/09), General Electric
13. GE Energy (2010) 6FA heavy duty gas turbine advanced technology for decentralized power
applications. GEA17987 (07/2010), General Electric
14. Institution of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) (2006) IEEE Std. 762 definitions
for use in reporting electric generating unit reliability, availability, and productivity. IEEE,
New York
15. Lewis E (1996) Introduction to reliability engineering. Wiley, New York
16. Lora E, Nascimento M (2004) Geração termeletrica planejamento, projeto e operação (in
porgies). Interciência, Rio de Janeiro
17. Machado J, Gueiros Jr, Lima E (2008) Reliability analysis of ACH power plant in simple
cycle and its impact on energy planning for the ONS (in Portuguese). In: Proceedings of the
First petrobras themoelectric operational and Maintenance forum, Rio de Janeiro
18. Moubray J (1997) Reliability-centered maintenance. Industrial Press Inc, New York
19. North American Electric ReliabilityReliability Council (NERC) (2006) Generating
availability report. available at www.nerc.com/*filez/gar.html. NERC
20. Ohring M (1998) Reliability and failure electronic materials and devices. Academic, San
Diego
21. Reliasoft Corporation (2003) User’s guide weibull++ version 6. Reliasoft Corporation,
Tucson
22. Smith A, Hinchcliffe G (2004) RCM gateway to world class maintenance. Elsevier
Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford
23. Xia J, Antos R (2006) Siemens Power Generation SGT6-5000F(W501F) 3 Million hours fleet
operational experience. Power-Gen International 2006, Orlando