International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)

ISSN (Online): 2319-7064

Index Copernicus Value (2016): 79.57 | Impact Factor (2017): 7.296

Preventive Maintenance of Steam Turbine used in

Thermal Power Plant by Reliability Investigation
and FMEA
Satyendra Dhurvey1, Pradeep Kumar Soni2
1
M. Tech. Scholar, Maulana Azad National Institute of Engineering and Technology, Bhopal, India- 462003
2
Assisstant Professor, Maulana Azad National Institute of Engineering and Technology, Bhopal, India- 462003

Abstract: The fault method of steam turbine parts, unbalance of pivoting components, misalignment of turbine shaft, rotor breakdown,
oil film flimsiness of bearing and so on are responsible for problematic and unverifiable failure of energy plant. Experience of
administrators, support arrangement execution of maintenance group and utilizing norms codes of good practices by designers and
makers are diminishing the potential failure methods of the system. This work researches the reliability of steam turbines introduced in
a thermal power plant. reliability estimation depends on a most recent five year verifiable failure database of two turbines of 210 MW,
both are introduced and authorized in the meantime. The technique for reliability assessment depends on ideas of system reliability, for
example, failure mode and impacts examination (FMEA) to order basic segments in light of an authentic failure database to enhance
the system reliability. It is important to enhance the reliability records of the power plant by taking a few measures, for example, very
much arranged and routine maintenance of types of assets and also preparing and retraining of specialized technical human resources
of the major equipment.

Keywords: Reliability, RCM, MTBF, MTTR, FMEA

1. Introduction main aim is to advancement a strategy to enhance the

reliability of the steam turbine control plant. In this regard,
Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) is a broadly Reliability centered maintenance ideas are used as a rule for
utilized building method for characterizing, recognizing and positioning the support arrangement needs of the basic
dispensing with known for potential Failures, issues, segments of steam turbine. The reliability of the framework
blunders et cetera from framework, outline, process, and can be assigned through the deterministically approach or
service before they come to the customer, Stamatis et al. potentially probabilistic approach. De Souza et al. [5]
[1]. While applying FMEA, a cross functional and manage the probabilistic part of operational execution of
multidisciplinary group recognizes Failure modes, estimate energy plant. In the work, deterministic approach of
their dangers and organizes them with the goal that proper reliability examination of the asset is utilized to manages
remedial moves can be made. A Failure mode in one part seeing how and why a system is unsuccessful, and how it
can fill in as the reason for a failure mode in another can be intended to keep away from such Failure from
segment. A Failure cause is characterized as a plan happening or re-happening. This incorporates examination,
shortcoming that may bring about a Failure. For every for example, audit of verifiable field Failure reports,
Failure mode distinguished, the FMEA group ought to figure understanding logical hypothesis behind the disappointment,
out what a definitive impact of Failure will be. A Failure the part and level of support policies. Wang and Billinton
impact is characterized as the consequence of a Failure [6] reported that the part of a power plant is to give power,
mode on the capacity of the item or process as apparent by creatively and with a sensible certification of coherence and
the client, Kwai-Sang Chin et al. [2]. FMEA ends up being quality to its shoppers. Lakhoua [9] proposed that electric
one of the most essential early protection activities in power plant can be partitioned into reasonably subsystems or
system, plan, process or administration which will keep useful regions, for example, age, transmission and
failures and blunders from happening and achieving the conveyance. Reliability examinations might be done
client, Pillay et al. [3]. Steam turbine generator set is a key independently or in blends of each of the three utilitarian
gadget of the power plant. For capable power plant, cost territories. This work is restricted to the estimation of the
effective generation and long run execution, it is basic to age reliability. An advanced power plant is exceptionally
keep up the power plant should run Failure free. Reliability immense, multifaceted and exceedingly incorporated, Gupta
examination have progressively perceived as standard and Tewari [7, 8].
apparatuses for the outlining, booking of task and support of
any system. The dependability of energy plant is identified 2. Reliability Estimation of Steam Turbine
with the likelihood of giving power proficiently and more
sparing with a sensible quality affirmation of coherence, The most recognized meaning of reliability is the ability of a
Wang et al. [4]. A modern power plant framework can be system, item, framework, and so forth., to work under
separated into age, transmission and circulation utilitarian chosen working conditions for a particular period or number
territory. The framework can be thought about freely or in of cycles. Consequently, the reliability is the likelihood of a
blends of every one of the three useful zones. This work is system to actualize required task for a given time frame with
restricted to the assessment of the age dependability. The no failure under indicated conditions for which it is foreseen.
Volume 7 Issue 6, June 2018
www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: ART20182675 DOI: 10.21275/ART20182675 18
 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN (Online): 2319-7064
Index Copernicus Value (2016): 79.57 | Impact Factor (2017): 7.296
The measure for reliability estimation of non-repairable (MTBF). Numerically, reliability of a part/component for
asset/system is Mean Time to Failure (MTTF) and for given period t can be represented as,
repairable framework is Mean Time between Failure R(t) = e−λt…………………………… (1)

The reliability of steam turbine has ascertained based most ζ =ψi/Φn=1/μ …………………… (4)
recent five years historical failure database of two turbines
of 210 MW, both are installed and commissioned at the Where, ψi = total outage hours per year, Φn= number of
same time. The reliability count is appeared in Table-01. failures per year and μ = expected repair rate.
Mean time between failures (m), mean time to repair (ζ) and
reliability is assessed by preparing the historical fault data It is expected that failed system is quickly repaired, when we
available. compute the mean time between failures (MTBF).
Therefore, mean time to repair (MTTR) or repair rate is
Mean time between failures (m) is a ratio of aggregate zero, in real framework this is inconceivable; along these
working time between maintenance every year to the lines. MTBF is considered as sum of the MTTF and MTTR.
quantity of failure every year. It is the measure of number In contrast with MTBF, mean time to failure (MTTF) is a
arithmetic mean (average) time, in which period the asset measure of average time to failures with the demonstrating
will execute a predetermined task before an unplanned speculation that the failed system can't be repaired. The
failure will occur. Consequently it is the reciprocal of the MTTF is essentially the reciprocal of the failure rate.
failure rate,
𝜆 =𝛷𝑛/𝛽𝑡…………………….… (2) Reliability R(t) is viewed as the ability of a asset to execute
𝑚 =1/ λ ………………………..… (3) its required function reasonably under given conditions amid
Where, λ = Expected no of failure, Φn = no of failures per an expressed time frame [Ireson et al. (1996), and Smith and
year and βt = total operating time between maintenance in Hinchcliffe (2004)]. Accordingly, reliability is a probability
the year. that the equipment is operating without failure in the specific
time t.
Mean time to repair (ζ) is a ratio of total outage hours per 𝑅(𝑡) =𝑒−𝑡/𝑚………….………… (5)
year to number of failures per year. It is an inverse of Therefore, (𝑡) = 𝑒−𝜆𝑡…………………….. (6)
expected repair rate. Hence, mean time to repair is Where, t = specified period of failure-free operation.
quantified the average outage hours; the equipment can
bring back to normal operating condition when it does fail.
Table 1: Calculation of MTBF, MTTR and Reliability for “Turbine-01” of the year 2013-2017
Year 𝜱𝒏 𝜷𝒕 𝝀=𝜱𝒏/𝜷𝒕 𝒎=𝟏/𝝀 𝛙𝐢 𝛇=𝛙𝐢/𝚽𝐧 𝛍 =𝟏/𝛇 t R(t) = e−𝜆𝑡
2013 12 7213 0.00166 602.41 71 5.92 0.1689 241 0.670
2014 24 6187 0.00387 258.39 75 3.12 0.3200 227 0.415
2015 17 7287 0.00233 429.18 63 3.70 0.2702 183 0.653
2016 21 6552 0.00320 312.50 52 2.48 0.4032 243 0.459
2017 23 7640 0.00301 332.25 58 2.25 0.4444 264 0.452

Table 2: Calculation of MTBF, MTTR and Reliability for “Turbine-02” of the year 2013-2017
Year 𝜱𝒏 𝜷𝒕 𝝀=𝜱𝒏/𝜷𝒕 𝒎 =𝟏/𝝀 𝛙𝐢 𝛇=𝛙𝐢/𝚽𝐧 𝛍 =𝟏/𝛇 t R(t) = e−𝜆𝑡
2013 8 7818 0.00102 980.39 87 10.87 0.0919 289 0.744
2014 13 8196 0.00158 632.91 41 3.15 0.3174 196 0.734
2015 15 8039 0.00186 537.63 36 2.40 0.4166 213 0.672
2016 11 7726 0.00142 704.22 43 3.90 0.2564 179 0.775
2017 9 8411 0.00107 934.57 47 5.22 0.1915 162 0.840

The investigation shows that steam turbine-01 has maximum procedure and beginning to work at the same time. Time to
failure rate and minimum reliability in comparison to turbine- failure information has utilized for reliability investigation of
02. Reliability of the steam turbine can be enhanced a system. Mean time to failure (MTTF) is for the most part
considerably by reviewing maintenance practices. Routine utilized parameter to describe reliability of a system. The
preventive maintenance should be given additional attention mean time to failure is given by,
to improve the performance of power plant. 𝑀𝑇𝑇𝐹=∫R (𝑡), [0 to ∞] ……………. (7)

3. Reliability Analysis of Steam Turbine Where, R (t) = reliability at time t and t = time period
(hours)
The failure criterion of any component of steam turbine is
lack of ability of creating the ostensible power output. The In the reliability investigation the Bath-Tub Curve (Figure-1)
reliability investigation is executed for two steam turbines is extensively utilized for time subordinate failure rate of
introduced in the power plant, submitted to same appointing segments. Bath-Tub has three distinct regions: early life

Volume 7 Issue 6, June 2018

www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: ART20182675 DOI: 10.21275/ART20182675 19
 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN (Online): 2319-7064
Index Copernicus Value (2016): 79.57 | Impact Factor (2017): 7.296
period, useful life period, and wear out period. A decreasing system performance. FMEA is applicable at various levels
curve between day and age t0 to t1 of the bath tub speaks to of system decomposition from the highest level of block
the early life time frame (otherwise called newborn child diagram down to the functions of discrete components.
mortality period) of the system. FMEA is an analysis method faced to system specific
physical unit. Failure mode analysis uses the bottom-up
Random failures are spoken to by the exponential probability method. Based on the basic failure mode of system unit,
function for expressing reliability phenomena. The failure potential fault reasons will be found out. Analyzing the
modes in the beginning of the operational life of steam effect by fault reasons, some actions are took to reduce and
turbine are not are not generally random thusly it can't be prevent the impact of fault on the system [10]. The process
spoken to by an exponential reliability distribution. The early for carrying out an FMEA can be divided into several steps
failure mode of the steam turbine relies on designing, which are briefly explained here [3].
manufacturing, commissioning, operational method, 1) Develop a good understanding of what the system is
misalignment between cylinder and rotor, uneven radial supposed to do when it is operating properly.
clearance caused by improper installation and support and 2) Determine the system analytic hierarchy. Divide the
even on natural conditions. system into sub-systems and assemblies in order to
localize the search for components.
3) Structure system reliability block diagram. Use blue
prints, schematics and flow charts to identify components
and relations among components.
4) Determine failure modes of each component and the
effects of failure modes on assemblies, sub-systems, and
the entire system.
5) Evaluation the impact on the system caused by failure
mode.
6) Categorize the hazard level (severity) of each failure
mode (several qualitative systems have been developed
for this purpose).
7) Estimate the probability and calculate the Risk Priority
Figure 1: Bath-Tub Curve
Number (RPN).
8) Develop recommendations to enhance the system
The failure rate stays steady will stay consistent amid the
performance. This fall into two categories:
valuable life time of any system however failure will happen
a) Preventive actions: avoiding a failure situation.
haphazardly. This is appeared on the diagram for era t1 to t2.
b) Compensatory actions: minimizing losses in the event
Wrong usage, human blunders, and unsatisfactory design
that a failure occurs.
margins might be some of the source for failure in this time
9) Summarize the analysis: this can be accomplished in a
of life. These failures can be condensed by consolidating
tabular form.
repetition in the system. During wear out period (between t2
to t3) the likelihood of failure rate has increments. In this
Generally, an FMEA table will have a major row for each
period the failure happens because of maturing,
component. As these components may have multiple failure
misalignment, crawl, contact, limited existence of segments
modes, the major row is sometimes divided into sub-rows
and less preventive support. These failures can be diminished
where each sub-row summarizes a specific failure mode.
by usage of effective preventive maintenance policies and
The table is organized into the following columns:
substitution of harmed parts. At the point when the maturing
Component, Component Function, Potential Failure mode,
impact (time related failures) and early failures are exhibited
Potential Cause(s) of Failure, Potential Effects of Failure,
then the reliability of steam turbine is generally assessed by
Probability (Occurrence), Hazard level (severity), Detection,
Weibull probability distribution.
RPN (O*S*D ) [11-15].

4. Fault Mode Analysis of Steam Turbine According to the above method, the FMEA table of steam
Based on Fmea Metho turbine was shown in table-03. By using FMEA, we will at
least get the fault symptoms, fault consequence and effect,
Failure Modes and Effect Analysis (FMEA) is known to be a fault reason, preventive actions and other information of
systematic procedure for the analysis of a system to identify steam turbine.
the potential failure modes, their causes and effects on

Table 3: FMEA scale for Probability of Occurrence (O), Severity (S) and Detectability (D)
Probability of Rating
Rating Severity (S) Rating Detectability (D)
occurrence (O)
Failure occurs Design controls almost certain to detect a potential
1 Negligible or no effect. 1 1
every 8 years cause and subsequent failure mode.
Failure occurs Operator will experience minor negative High chance that designing controls will detect a
2 2 2
every 4 years impact on the process. potential cause and subsequent failure mode.
Failure occurs Turbine operable and safe but
3 3 100% visual inspection with visual standards. 3
every 2 years performance degraded.

Volume 7 Issue 6, June 2018

www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: ART20182675 DOI: 10.21275/ART20182675 20
 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN (Online): 2319-7064
Index Copernicus Value (2016): 79.57 | Impact Factor (2017): 7.296
Performance can be severely degraded
Failure occurs
4 and maintenance will be needed within 4 Periodic Non Destructive Testing (NDT). 4
every years
next few months.
Failure occurs Turbine inoperable, immediate Very remote chance that design or machinery
every 6 months 5 shutdown is needed major financial 5 controls will detect a potential cause and 5
impact. subsequent failure mode.

Table 4: Result from the FMEA

Component Potential
Component Potential Causes of Failure (O) Potential Effects of Failure (S) (D) RPN
Function Failure Mode
 Solid particles in the steam
 Performance drop
Erosion  Formation of Droplets in the 3 2 2 12
 Leakage
Labyrinth Mechanical steam
seals Sealing  Expos ion to corrosive substances  Performance drop
Corrosion 1 1 3 3
in the steam  Leakage
Rubbing  Misalignment of rotor 1  High wear rate 2 2 4
 Penetration of solid particles &  High wear rate, vibration, fractures,
Erosion 3 4 3 36
Convert thermal droplets from steam breaking of nozzles
energy to  Too dry steam
 Efficiency drop, vibration, clogging
Diaphragm kinetic energy Scaling  High amount of substances in 2 3 3 18
of steam path
by accelerating steam
steam  Exposure to corrosive substances
Corrosion 1  Wear 2 3 6
in the steam
 Penetration of solid particles &
Erosion 2  Vibration, fracture, high wear rate, 4 3 24
Convert kinetic droplets from the steam
Rotor energy to Cracking  Fatigue, Vibration 1  Breaking of blades 5 4 20
Blades mechanical  Too dry steam
 Efficiency drop, mass flow drop,
energy Scaling  High amount of substances in 2 3 2 12
vibration, clogging of steam
steam
Wear Aging 1  Vibration 2 1 2
Support the
Bearings Fracture  Fatigue
rotor 1  Damage to bearings 2 4 8
formation  Vibration
 Penetration of solid particles &  High wear rate, Vibration,
Erosion 3 2 3 18
droplets from the steam  Unbalanced rotor,
Transfer
 Exposure to corrosive substances
mechanical Corrosion 2  Wear 2 3 12
Rotor in the steam
energy to
Misalignme-nt  Generator & Turbine supports are
generator 1  Vibration 4 2 8
of rotor skewed
Fatigue  Aging 1  Fracture of blade attachments 2 4 8
 Penetration of solid particles &  High wear rate of diaphragms and
Erosion 4 2 3 24
droplets from the steam drain holes
Protects the
 High amount of substances in the
Casing rotor and forms Scaling 3  Clogging of drain holes 2 3 18
steam, Too dry steam
the steam path
 Exposure to corrosive substances
Corrosion 2  wear of casing 1 3 6
in the steam

From the above table-04, the maintenance personals will and repair information amid future operational years will
attain the turbine component first, which has maximum RPN allow more solid estimation of the turbines reliability.
and will follow it by decreasing order. So when the Preparing and retraining of technical human resources on the
preventive maintenance/overhauling will be taken place by major equipments, well planning and more regular
the maintenance personals, they will attain diaphragm first. scheduled maintenance can enhance the reliability files of
And Labyrinth seals will be attained last. the plant. Meanwhile, in light of the FMEA method, fault
method of steam turbine components was examined in
5. Conclusion detail. Some profitable conclusions were achieved, including
the fault symptoms, fault consequence and impact, fault
The reliability characteristics of any overwhelming causes, preventive activities and other data of steam turbine.
obligation steam turbine relies on the different factor, for
example, on on-site installation process, skills of operators, References
training of maintenance team, natural factors and steam
quality. The proposed strategy can characterizes [1] Stamatis, D. H., Failure mode and effect analysis:
quantitatively the system reliability and accessibility. The FMEA from theory to execution. Milwaukee, WI:
system reliability can be inspected through utilizing of time ASQC QualityPress, 1995.
to failure and time to repair database. The examination [2] Kwai-Sang Chin, Ying-Ming Wang, Gary KaKwai
depends on the most recent five year operational data base. Poon, Jian-Bo Yang, “Failure mode and effects analysis
The advancement of chronicled database with extra failure
Volume 7 Issue 6, June 2018
www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: ART20182675 DOI: 10.21275/ART20182675 21
 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN (Online): 2319-7064
Index Copernicus Value (2016): 79.57 | Impact Factor (2017): 7.296
by data envelopment analysis”, Decision Support
Systems, 2009, Vol.48, pp.246-256.
[3] Pillay, A., and Wang, J., “Modified failure mode and
effects analysis using approximate reasoning”,
ReliabilityEngineering & System Safety, 2003, Vol.79,
pp.69-85.
[4] Wang P., Billinton R. and Goel L. (2002), Unreliability
Cost Assessment of an Electric Power System using
Reliability Network Equivalent Approaches, IEEE
Trans. on Power System, Vol.17, no.3, pp 549 – 556.
[5] De Souza G.F.M. (2012), Thermal Power Plant
Performance Analysis, Springer Series in Reliability
Engineering, Springer-Verlag London Limited, ISBN
978-1-4471-2308-8.
[6] Wang P. and Billinton R. (2003), Reliability
Assessment of a Restructured Power System using
Reliability Network Equivalent Techniques, IEEE Proc.
Gener. Transm. and Distribution, Vol.150, no.5, pp 555
– 560.
[7] Gupta S.A. and Tewari C.P.C. (2009), Simulation
Model for Coal Crushing System of a Typical Thermal
Power Plant, Int. J. Eng. Technology, Vol.1, no.2, pp
156 – 163.
[8] Gupta S.A. and Tewari C.P.C. (2009), Simulation
Modeling and Analysis of a Complex System of a
Thermal Power Plant, J. Ind. Eng. Management, Vol.2,
no.2, pp 387– 406.
[9] Lakhoua M.N. (2009), Application of Functional
Analysis on a SCADA System of a Thermal Power
Plant, Advances in Electrical and Computer
Engineering,Vol.9, no.2, pp 90 – 98.
[10] GuYujiong, Theoretics and technology of state
maintenance for power plant equipment. Bei Jing:
Chinese Electric Power Press, 2009.
[11] G.Cassanelli, G.Mura, F.Fantini, M.Vanzi and
B.Plano,“Failure Analysis-assisted FMEA”,
MicroelectronicsReliability , 2006, Vol.46, pp.1795-
1799.
[12] GuYujiong, Theoretics and technology of state
maintenance for power plant equipment. Bei Jing:
Chinese Electric Power Press, 2009.
[13] Kwai-Sang Chin, Ying-Ming Wang and Gary
KaKwaiPoon, “Risk evaluation in failure mode and
effects analysis using fuzzy weighted geometric mean”,
Expert Systems with Applications, 2009, Vol.36,
pp.1195-1207.
[14] H. Arabian-Hoseynabadi, H. Oraee and P.J. Tavner,
“Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) for wind
turbines”, Electrical Power and Energy Systems, 2010,
Vol.32, pp.817-824.
[15] P. A. A. Garcia, R. Schirru and P. F. Frutuoso E MELO,
“A fuzzy data envelopment analysis approach for
FMEA”, Nuclear Energy, 2005, Vol. 46, No. 3-4,
pp.359-373.

Volume 7 Issue 6, June 2018

www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: ART20182675 DOI: 10.21275/ART20182675 22