You are on page 1of 3

7EA state-of-the-engine report for 2014 focuses on

compressor clashing, blade tip distress


Posted on November 11, 2014 by Team CCJ

A timely opening presentation by an engaging speaker is critical to the success of most


meetings, at least based on the editors experience. If the audience connects well with the first
presenter, adrenaline flows and the days discussion likely will be robust and the give-and-take
at breaks and lunch productive. The steering committee of the 7EA Users Group knows this,
which probably is why President Rod Shidler and Service Manager Mike Hoogsteden of Advanced
Turbine Support LLC are invited to jump-start the organizations annual meeting each year.
Their state-of-the-engine report is front-page news, zeroing in on the companys findings
compiled from more than 1000 annual gas-turbine inspections. While the 2014 report,
presented on October 21, offered no surprises in terms of new damage mechanisms identified in
the past year, it did point to a year-over-year increase in fleet-wide findings.
Hoogsteden focused his remarks on Technical Information Letter 1884, 7EA R1/S1 Inspection
Recommendations, April 2013, and TIL 1854, Compressor Rotor Stages 2 and 3 Tip Loss,
August 2012both of great importance to 7EA owner/operators.
The service manager opened the 1884 portion of his presentation with a slide that screamed,
Clashing woes continue, then migrated to the timeline (below) of important events from when
the mechanism was first identified. Given the high percentage of first-timers at the conference,
Hoogstedens summary enabled those unfamiliar with the clashing phenomenon of great
concern to 7EA users to come up to speed quickly.

The timeline:
2006. Clashingthe word adopted to describe the contact that
occurs when the tip of a stationary vane moves forward and contacts
passing rotating blades near their platformswas first identified in
the first stages of multiple 7EA compressors. Years later it would be
found in 7FA and 6B compressors as well.

2008. Advanced Turbine Support began using visible dye in its


inspections. Back then, relatively few in the industry, including the
OEM, appeared concerned about clashing.

2009-2010. There was a noticeable increase in the number of units


affected by clashing. Also during this period, improvements in
borescope technology allowed Advanced Turbine Support to add
measurements to its documentation.

2011-2012. Inspectors noted increased damage, year-over-year, to


airfoils in some engines that had experienced clashing.
Documentation was upgraded to include trending data, and eddy-
current inspections were implemented because of the elevated level
of risk.

2013. The OEMs first technical information letter addressing clashing


was issued in April. TIL 1884 identified a so-called area of interest on
the suction side of Row 1 stator blades that should be inspected for
cracking in units having experienced clashing.

Recopilado por: Ing. Ismal J. Adrian N.; Pgina 1 de 3


May 2014. Inspectors from Advanced Turbine Support found two
cracked S1 vanes in a single unit in the area of interest while
performing a dye penetrant inspection. Those cracks were verified
with eddy current. Yet another vane with multiple cracks in the area
of interest was identified during eddy current testing of the entire
Row 1. Those cracks, which had a maximum depth of 0.022 in., were
retested with red dye and yielded no indications. A check of unit
records revealed that from the time clashing first occurred in 2006
until cracking was found in 2014, the 7EA had operated only 3500
fired hours with 850 fired starts (round numbers).

October 2014. Technicians from Advanced Turbine Support identified


cracking in the area of interest of an S1 vane in a second machine
while performing a dye penetrant inspection.

During the OEM presentations at the 2014 meeting, attendees


learned that one of the 7EAs inspected by GE technicians also
revealed an S1 vane crack in the area of interest.
Hoogsteden continued with dramatic pictures of trailing-edge damage on first-stage rotor blades
attributed to clashing. The severe damage had occurred in only two years from when clashing
first occurred (a nominal 250 fired hours and 50 fired starts later), surprising many attendees.
He closed out this portion of his presentation with recommendations for clashing inspections of
7EAs and the companys clashing history up until the time of the 2014 meeting.
Inspection guidelines. The speaker recommended that owner/operators perform in-situ red
dye penetrant inspections on all affected vanes and rotating blades each peak-run season, or
every six months. He urged checking the trailing edges of all rotor-blade platforms, leading-
edge tips, and the entire area of interest of S1 stator vanes that have contacted blade
platforms. Suspect indications should be re-inspected with eddy current.
To sum up, Advanced Turbine Support inspectors have identified R1/S1 clashing in more than
100 7EAs and R2/S2 clashing in over 25 engines. They have found cracks in the area of interest
in four vanes resident in two units and tears in the trailing edges of three R1 blades.
Early detection. Late on Day One, the steering committees Pat Myers, plant manager of AEPs
Ceredo Generating Station, reported on the results of user efforts to identify both the root cause
of clashing and a method for warning of its occurrence. This is the focus of the lead article in
next weeks CCJ ONsite Issue 2 from the 7EA meeting.
After his remarks regarding TIL 1884, Hoogsteden briefly mentioned some other compressor
issues Advanced Turbine Support inspectors were finding regularly, including these:

S5 vane rock. One way users can mitigate this is by pinning vanes.

Multiple stages with stator-vane rolled metal.

Trailing-edge clashing damage on second-stage stator blades in 7E


compressors; plus, leading-edge tip clashing damage on S2 airfoils.
No TIL has been issued yet to guide owner/operators dealing with
this issue.
Shifting to TIL 1854, the speaker said the purpose of this advisory is to inform users about
the recommended R2 and R3 blade blending and tipping to mitigate the impact of tip loss on
availability and reliability. He mentioned three things that concern him about TIL 1854:

Recopilado por: Ing. Ismal J. Adrian N.; Pgina 2 de 3


It does not address R1 blade tips.

It does not recommend in-situ inspections.

It considers tip losses low risk to unit operation and reliability.


Tip distress on first-, second-, and third-stage rotor blades generally is caused by casing rubs
during operation, Hoogsteden continued. Identifying characteristics include tip discoloration or a
heat-affected zone, and rolled metal. Recommendations from Advanced Turbine Support, based
on more than 600 in-situ 7EA R1-R3 inspections since 2009 that have identified more than 50
cracked rotor blades and found more than a dozen and a half tip liberations, include the
following:

For R1 and R2 blades with signs of tip distress, conduct visible dye-
penetrant inspections to determine if radial cracks have initiated.
These should be done up to four times at 25-start intervals, followed
by two inspections at 50-start intervals, and then after every 100
startsor annually.

For R3 blades showing signs of tip distress, do a minimum 360-deg


roll inspecting all blade tips close up and at the same intervals.
The take-away from this portion of the presentation: Rubs cause blade distress and may lead to
metal liberation and collateral damage. In-situ inspections can point to corrective action
required to mitigate damage.

Recopilado por: Ing. Ismal J. Adrian N.; Pgina 3 de 3

You might also like