Condition-based maintenance in hydroelectric plants: A systematic literature review

Barbosa de Santis, Rodrigo and Silveira Gontijo, Tiago and Azevedo Costa, Marcelo (2021): Condition-based maintenance in hydroelectric plants: A systematic literature review. Published in: Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part O: Journal of Risk and Reliability , Vol. 236, No. 5 (27 July 2021): pp. 631-646.

Abstract

Industrial maintenance has become an essential strategic factor for profit and productivity in industrial systems. In the modern industrial context, condition-based maintenance guides the interventions and repairs according to the machine’s health status, calculated from monitoring variables and using statistical and computational techniques. Although several literature reviews address condition-based maintenance, no study discusses the application of these techniques in the hydroelectric sector, a fundamental source of renewable energy. We conducted a systematic literature review of articles published in the area of condition-based maintenance in the last 10 years. This was followed by quantitative and thematic analyses of the most relevant categories that compose the phases of condition-based maintenance. We identified a research trend in the application of machine learning techniques, both in the diagnosis and the prognosis of the generating unit’s assets, being vibration the most frequently discussed monitoring variable. Finally, there is a vast field to be explored regarding the application of statistical models to estimate the useful life, and hybrid models based on physical models and specialists’ knowledge, of turbine-generators.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Condition based maintenance; hydroelectric; fault diagnostics; fault isolation; fault monitoring; fault prognostics; system health management
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C0 - General; L - Industrial Organization > L6 - Industry Studies: Manufacturing; Z - Other Special Topics > Z0 - General; Z - Other Special Topics > Z0 - General > Z00 - General

References

1. Cachada A, Barbosa J, Leitn˜o P, et al. Maintenance 4.0: Intelligent and predictive maintenance system architecture. In: 2018 IEEE 23rd international conference on emerging technologies and factory automation (ETFA). 4 September 2018, vol. 1. pp.139–146. New York: IEEE.

2. Sahal R, Breslin JG and Ali MI. Big data and stream processing platforms for industry 4.0 requirements mapping for a predictive maintenance use case. J Manuf Syst 2020; 54: 138–151.

3. Jardine AKS, Lin D and Banjevic D. A review on machinery diagnostics and prognostics implementing condition-based maintenance. Mech Syst Signal Process 2006; 20(7): 1483–1510.

4. Bousdekis A, Magoutas B, Apostolou D, et al. Review, analysis and synthesis of prognostic-based decision support methods for condition based maintenance. J Intell Manuf 2018; 29(6): 1303–1316.

5. Peng Y, Dong M and Zuo MJ. Current status of machine prognostics in condition-based maintenance: a review. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2010; 50(1-4): 297–313.

6. Si XS, Wang W, Hu CH, et al. Remaining useful life estimation – aa review on the statistical data driven aproaches. Eur J Oper Res 2011; 213(1): 1–14.

7. Lei Y, Li N, Guo L, et al. Machinery health prognostics: a systematic review from data acquisition to RUL prediction. Mech Syst Signal Process 2018; 104: 799–834.

8. Zhao R, Yan R, Chen Z, et al. Deep learning and its applications to machine health monitoring. Mech Syst Signal Process 2019; 115: 213.

9. Thome´ AMT, Scavarda LF and Scavarda AJ. Conducting systematic literature review in operations management. Prod Plan Control 2016; 27(5): 408–420.

10. Denyer D and Tranfield D. Producing a systematic review. 2009.

11. Glock CH and Hochrein S. Purchasing organization and design: a literature review. Bus Res 2011; 4(2): 149–191. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/ BF03342754

12. Hochrein S and Glock CH. Systematic literature reviews in purchasing and supply management research: a tertiary study. Int J Integr Supply Manag 2012; 7(4): 215–245.

13. Mateja K, Dejan Z and Andrej K. Vibrations of a hydropower plant under operational loads. J Civ Struct Health Monit 2020; 10(1): 29–42.

14. Hamzic A, Avdagic Z and Besic I. Multistage cascade predictor of structural elements movement in the deformation analysis of large objects based on time series influencing factors. ISPRS Int J Geo Inf 2020; 9: 47.

15. SCImago. 2020.

16. Shin JH and Jun HB. On condition based maintenance policy. J Comput Des Eng 2015; 2(2): 119–127.

17. van Eck NJ and Waltman L. Software survey: Vosviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics 2010; 84(2): 523–538.

18. Gregg SW, Steele JPH and Van Bossuyt DL. Feature selection for monitoring erosive cavitation on a hydroturbine. Int J Progn Health Manag 2020; 8(1): 1–22.

19. Egusquiza M, Egusquiza E, Valero C, et al. Advanced condition monitoring of Pelton turbines. Measurement 2018; 119(October 2017): 46–55.

20. Valentı´n D, Presas A, Egusquiza M, et al. Transmission of high frequency vibrations in rotating systems. Application to cavitation detection in hydraulic turbines. Appl Sci 2018; 8(3): 1–18.

21. Abdel Aziz MS, Elsamahy M, Moustafa Hassan MA, et al. A novel study for hydro-generators loss of excitation faults detection using ANFIS. Int J Model Simul 2017; 37(1): 36–45.

22. Shi Z. Investigation on generator loss of excitation protection in generator protection coordination, 2010.

23. Weijian W. Principle and application of electric power equipment protection. Beijing: China Electric Power Press, 2002

24. Li Y, Wang L and Ma M. Diagnosis of rotor winding inter-turn short-circuit of hydro-generator based on noload curve reverse calculation. IEEJ Trans Electr Electron Eng 2019; 14(1): 130–137.

25. Kanegami M, Miyazaki S and Miyake K. Partial discharge detection with high-frequency Band through resistance-temperature sensor of hydropower generator stator windings. Elect Eng Jpn 2016; 195(4): 9–15.

26. Oliveira RMSD, Modesto JFM, Dmitriev V, et al. Spectral method for localization of multiple partial discharges in dielectric insulation of hydro-generator coils: simulation and experimental results. J Microw Optoelectron Electromagn Appl 2016; 15(3): 170–190.

27. Borghetto J, Cavallini A, Contin A, et al. Partial discharge inference by an advanced system. Analysis of online measurements performed on hydrogenerator. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2004; 19(2): 333–339.

28. Xu B, Chen D, Zhang H, et al. Shaft mis-alignment induced vibration of a hydraulic turbine generating system considering parametric uncertainties. J Sound Vib 2018; 435: 74–90.

29. Wu Y, Li Z, Li B, et al. Vibration monitoring approach in integrated system of hydroelectric generating sets for smart power stations. Int J Power Energy Syst 2016; 36(4): 147–155.

30. Selak L, Butala P and Sluga A. Condition monitoring and fault diagnostics for hydropower plants. Comput Ind 2014; 65(6): 924–936.

31. Guo J, Liu Y, Xu X, et al. Integrated distributed bond graph modeling and neural network for fault diagnosis system of hydro turbine governors. Kybernetes 2010; 39(6): 925–934.

32. Joseph A, Chelliah TR, Selvaraj R, et al. Fault diagnosis and fault-tolerant control of megawatt power electronic converter-fed large-rated asynchronous hydrogenerator. IEEE J Emerg Sel Top Power Electron 2019; 7(4): 2403–2416.

33. Yu R and Breikin T. Hybrid neural network-based fault diagnosis and fault-tolerance design with application in electro-hydraulic Servovalve. Open Autom Control Syst J 2009; 2(2): 62–68.

34. Mazzocchi E, Pachoud AJ, Farhat M, et al. Signal analysis of an actively generated cavitation bubble in pressurized pipes for detection of wall stiffness drops. J Fluid Struct 2016; 65: 60–75.

35. Cheng J, Zhu C, Fu W, et al. An imitation medical diagnosis method of hydro-turbine generating unit based on Bayesian network. Trans Inst Meas Contr 2019; 41(12): 3406–3420.

36. Jong CG and Leu SS. Bayesian-network-based hydropower fault diagnosis system development by fault tree transformation. J Mar Sci Technol 2013; 21(4): 367–379.

37. Melani AHA, Silva JM, de Souza GFM, et al. Fault diagnosis based on Petri Nets: the case study of a hydropower plant. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2016; 49(31): 1–6.

38. Valavi M, Jorstad KG and Nysveen A. Electromagnetic analysis and electrical signature-based detection of rotor inter-turn faults in salient-pole synchronous machine. IEEE Trans Magn 2018; 54(9): 1–9.

39. Griscenko M and Elmanis-Helmanis R. Eccentricity of slow-speed salient-pole generator: analysis based on air gap spectrum. Latv J Phys Tech Sci 2015; 52(1): 26–37.

40. Babic´ BM, Milic´ SD and Rakic´ AZˇ. Fault detection algorithm used in a magnetic monitoring system of the hydrogenerator. IET Electric Power Appl 2017; 11(1): 63–71.

41. Dirani HC, Merkhouf A, Giroux AM, et al. Impact of real air-gap nonuniformity on the electromagnetic forces of a large hydro-generator. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2018; 65(11): 8464–8475.

42. Ramı´rez-Nin˜o J, Pascacio A, Mijarez R, et al. On-line fault monitoring system for hydroelectric generators based on spectrum analysis of the neutral current. IET Gener Transm Distrib 2015; 9(16): 2509–2516.

43. Blanquez FR, Aranda M, Rebollo E, et al. New faultresistance estimation algorithm for rotor-winding ground-fault online location in synchronous machines with static excitation. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2015; 62(3): 1901–1911.

44. Blanquez FR, Platero CA, Rebollo E, et al. Novel rotor ground-fault detection algorithm for synchronous machines with static excitation based on third-harmonic voltage-phasor comparison. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2016; 63(4): 2548–2558.

45. Pardo M, Bla´nquez FR, Platero CA, et al. Detection and location of a ground-fault in the excitation circuit of a 106 MVA synchronous generator by a new on-line method. Elect Power Syst Res 2016; 140: 303–311.

46. Dallas SE, Safacas AN and Kappatou JC. Interturn stator faults analysis of a 200-MVA hydrogenerator during transient operation using FEM. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2011; 26(4): 1151–1160.

47. Carvalho AT, Lima ACS, Cunha CFF, et al. Identification of partial discharges immersed in noise in large hydro-generators based on improved wavelet selection methods. Measurement 2015; 75: 122–133.

48. Salomon CP, Ferreira C, Sant’Ana WC, et al. A study of fault diagnosis based on electrical signature analysis for synchronous generators predictive maintenance in bulk electric systems. Energies 2019; 12(8): 1506.

49. Xu Y. Intelligent fault diagnosis of house transformer simulation system in hydro-electricity factory by fuzzy reasoning. Int J Internet Manuf Serv 2013; 3(2): 87–98.

50. Blancke O, Tahan A, Komljenovic D, et al. A holistic multi-failure mode prognosis approach for complex equipment. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 2018; 180: 136–151.

51. Xu B, Li H, Pang W, et al. Bayesian network approach to fault diagnosis of a hydroelectric generation system. Energy Sci Eng 2019; 7(5): 1669–1677.

52. Klun M, Zupan D, Lopaticˇ J, et al. On the application of laser vibrometry to perform structural health monitoring in non-stationary conditions of a hydropower dam. Sensors 2019; 19(17): 3811.

53. Milic SD, Zigic AD and Ponjavic MM. Online temperature monitoring, fault detection, and a novel heat run test of a water-cooled rotor of a hydrogenerator. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2013; 28(3): 698–706.

54. Lu S, Zhang X, Shang Y, et al. Improving Hilbert–Huang transform for energy-correlation fluctuation in hydraulic engineering. Energy 2018; 164: 1341–1350.

55. Wang W, Chen Q, Yan D, et al. A novel comprehensive evaluation method of the draft tube pressure pulsation of Francis turbine based on EEMD and information entropy. Mech Syst Signal Process 2019; 116: 772–786.

56. Peng WJ, Luo XQ, Guo PC, et al. Vibration fault diagnosis of hydroelectric unit based on LS-SVM and information fusion technology. Proc Chinese Soc Electr Eng 2007; 27(23): 86–92.

57. Cheng J, Ai L, Duan Z, et al. Fault classification of hydroelectric generating unit based on improved evidence theory. Open Fuels Energy Sci J 2014; 7(1): 78–83.

58. Zhu W, Zhou J, Xia X, et al. A novel KICA–PCA fault detection model for condition process of hydroelectric generating unit. Measurement 2014; 58: 197–206.

59. Xia X, Zhou J, Li C, et al. A novel method for fault diagnosis of hydro generator based on NOFRFs. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 2015; 71: 60–67.

60. Xia X and Ni W. A novel failure analysis and diagnosis method for hydraulic-turbine generator unit. J Vibroengineering 2016; 18(6): 3568–3580.

61. Xia X, Ni W and Sang Y. A novel analysis method for fault diagnosis of hydro-turbine governing system. Proc IMechE J Risk Reliability 2017; 231(2): 164–171.

62. Cheng J, Duan Z and Xiong Y. Cuckoo search algorithm with quantum mechanism and its application in the fault diagnosis of a hydroelectric generating unit. Recent Pat Comput Sci 2018; 11(1): 70–76.

63. Fu W, Wang K, Zhang C, et al. A hybrid approach for measuring the vibrational trend of hydroelectric unit with enhanced multi-scale chaotic series analysis and optimized least squares support vector machine. Trans Inst Meas Contr 2019; 41(15): 4436–4449.

64. Luo Z, Zhou J, Xiang X, et al. A new method for automatically identifying the shaft orbit moving direction of hydroelectric generating set. Sens Rev 2010; 30(3): 197–203.

65. Pino G, Ribas JR and Guimara˜es LF. Bearing diagnostics of hydro power plants using wavelet packet transform and a hidden Markov model with orbit curves. Shock Vib 2018; 2018: 1.

66. An X, Pan L and Yang L. Condition parameter degradation assessment and prediction for hydropower units using Shepard surface and ITD. Trans Inst Meas Contr 2014; 36(8): 1074–1082.

67. Xue X, Zhou J, Zhang Y, et al. An improved ensemble empirical mode decomposition method and its application to pressure pulsation analysis of hydroelectric generator unit. Proc IMechE J Risk Reliability 2014; 228(6): 543–557.

68. Qiao L and Chen Q. Forecasting models for hydropower unit stability using LS-SVM. Math Probl Eng 2015; 2015: 1.

69. Zhang X, Zhou J, Guo J, et al. Vibrant fault diagnosis for hydroelectric generator units with a new combination of rough sets and support vector machine. Expert Syst Appl 2012; 39(3): 2621–2628.

70. An X, Pan L and Zhang F. Analysis of hydropower unit vibration signals based on variational mode decomposition. J Vib Control 2017; 23(12): 1938–1953.

71. An X, Yang W and An X. Vibration signal analysis of a hydropower unit based on adaptive local iterative filtering. Proc IMechE J Mech Eng Sci 2017; 231(7): 1339–1353.

72. Zhou KB, Zhang JY, Shan Y, et al. A hybrid multiobjective optimization model for vibration tendency prediction of hydropower generators. Sensors 2019; 19(9): 2055.

73. Zhang X, Zhang X and Su B. Vibrant fault diagnosis for hydro-turbine generating unit using minmax kernel kmeans clustering algorithm. Power Syst Protect Control 2015; 43(5): 27–34.

74. Xiao Z, He X, Fu X, et al. ACO-Initialized wavelet neural network for vibration fault diagnosis of hydroturbine generating unit. Math Probl Eng 2015; 2015: 1.

75. Plazenet T, Boileau T, Caironi C, et al. A comprehensive study on shaft voltages and bearing currents in rotating machines. IEEE Trans Ind Appl 2018; 54(4): 3749–3759.

76. Trivedi C, Gandhi B and Michel CJ. Effect of transients on Francis turbine runner life: a review. J Hydraul Res 2013; 51(2): 121–132.

77. Bakken BH and Bjorkvoll T. Hydropower unit start-up costs. In: IEEE power engineering society summer meeting, Chicago, IL, 21 July 2002, vol. 3, pp.1522–1527. New York: IEEE.

78. Nilsson O and Sjelvgren D. Hydro unit start-up costs and their impact on the short term scheduling strategies of swedish power producers. IEEE Trans Power Syst 1997; 12(1): 38–44.

79. Xu Y, Li Z and Lai X. Dynamic model for hydro-turbine generator units based on a database method for guide bearings. Shock Vib 2013; 20(3): 411–421.

80. Lucifredi A, Mazzieri C and Rossi M. Application of multiregressive linear models, dynamic kriging models and neural network models to predictive maintenance of hydroelectric power systems. Mech Syst Signal Process 2000; 14(3): 471–494.

81. Xiao H, Zhou J, Xiao J, et al. Identification of vibration–speed curve for hydroelectric generator unit using statistical fuzzy vector chain code and support vector machine. Proc IMechE, Part O: J Risk and Reliability 2014; 228(3): 291–300.

82. Vachtsevanos G, Lewis FL, Roemer M, et al. Intelligent fault diagnosis and prognosis for engineering systems. Hoboken: Wiley, 2006.

83. Lian J, Li H and Zhang J. ERA modal identification method for hydraulic structures based on order determination and noise reduction of singular entropy. Sci China Ser E Technol Sci 2009; 52(2): 400–412.

84. Zhang L, Wu Q, Ma Z, et al. Transient vibration analysis of unit-plant structure for hydropower station in sudden load increasing process. Mech Syst Signal Process 2019; 120(79): 486–504.

85. Xue X, Sundararajan V and Gonzalez-Argueta L. Sensor fusion for machine condition monitoring. Sens Smart Struct Technol Civ Mech Aerosp Syst 2008; 6932(September): 69321D.

86. Wu G, Tong J, Zhang L, et al. Framework for fault diagnosis with multi-source sensor nodes in nuclear power plants based on a Bayesian network. Ann Nucl Energy 2018; 122: 297–308.

87. Kedadouche M, Thomas M and Tahan A. A comparative study between empirical wavelet transforms and empirical mode decomposition methods: application to bearing defect diagnosis. Mech Syst Signal Process 2016; 81: 88–107.

88. Liao GP, Gao W, Yang GJ, et al. Hydroelectric generating unit fault diagnosis using 1-D convolutional neural network and gated recurrent unit in small hydro. IEEE Sens J 2019; 19(20): 9352–9363.

89. Cheng J, Wang L and Xiong Y. An improved cuckoo search algorithm and its application in vibration fault diagnosis for a hydroelectric generating unit. Eng Optim 2018; 50(9): 1593–1608.

90. Cheng J, Wang L and Xiong Y. Cuckoo search algorithm with memory and the vibrant fault diagnosis for hydroelectric generating unit. Eng Comput 2019; 35(2): 687–702.

91. Mino-Aguilar G, Mun˜oz-Herna´ndez GA, Guerrero-Castellanos JF, et al. Alternative soft fault model of the cross-coupling effect correlated at hydroelectric power energy system. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 2014; 58: 274–280.

92. Brito Junior GC, Machado RD and Chaves Neto A. Using simplified models to assist fault detection and diagnosis in large hydrogenerators. Int J Rotating Machinery 2017; 2017: 1–18.

93. Xu B, Yan D, Chen D, et al. Sensitivity analysis of a Pelton hydropower station based on a novel approach of turbine torque. Energy Convers Manag 2017; 148: 785–800.

94. Xu B, Chen D, Behrens P, et al. Modeling oscillation modal interaction in a hydroelectric generating system. Energy Convers Manag 2018; 174(August): 208–217.

95. Xu B, Chen D, Patelli E, et al. Mathematical model and parametric uncertainty analysis of a hydraulic generating system. Renew Energy 2019; 136: 1217–1230.

96. Li H, Chen D, Tolo S, et al. Hamiltonian formulation and analysis for transient dynamics of multi-unit hydropower system. J Comput Nonlinear Dyn 2018; 13(10): 1–10.

97. Fu W, Wang K, Li C, et al. Vibration trend measurement for a hydropower generator based on optimal variational mode decomposition and an LSSVM improved with chaotic sine cosine algorithm optimization. Meas Sci Technol 2019; 30: 015012–016463.

98. Zemouri R, Levesque M, Amyot N, et al. Deep convolutional variational autoencoder as a 2D-visualization tool for partial discharge source classification in hydrogenerators. IEEE Access 2020; 8: 5438–5454.

99. Bhatt U, Xiang A, Sharma S, et al. Explainable machine learning in deployment. In: Proceedings of the 2020 conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency. New York, pp.648–657.New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery.