Accepted Manuscript

Hydro turbine failure mechanisms: An overview

Ugyen Dorji, Reza Ghomashchi

PII: S1350-6307(14)00127-7
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2014.04.013
Reference: EFA 2292

To appear in: Engineering Failure Analysis

Received Date: 12 December 2013

Revised Date: 3 April 2014
Accepted Date: 9 April 2014

Please cite this article as: Dorji, U., Ghomashchi, R., Hydro turbine failure mechanisms: An overview, Engineering
Failure Analysis (2014), doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2014.04.013

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers
we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and
review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process
errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 Hydro turbine failure mechanisms: An overview

Ugyen Dorji* and Reza Ghomashchi

School of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia

Corresponding Author Email: reza.ghomashchi@adelaide.edu.au

*Current address, Tala Hydropower station, Bhutan

Abstract:
Turbine failure not only increases the plant down-time and brings about revenue losses but also
poses a serious threat to the life of the operational and maintenance personnel especially when
the power house is underground. There are basically four main failure modes identified in open
literature. The current article presents an overview of these four hydro turbine failure modes
based on an extensive literature review and also field observation from the Tala Hydropower
Plant, Bhutan. Moreover, the report provides information about different turbine parts that are
more likely to be liable to damage under these failure modes. It also attempts to elucidate some
recommended methods to prevent/mitigate against these failure modes.

Key words: hydro turbines, cavitation, erosion, material defects, fatigue

Introduction
Hydropower is currently the most important renewable source of the worlds electricity supply
and there is still a considerable untapped potential in many areas. Continued exploitation of this
resource is likely as a response to the worlds demand for energy. Environmental legislation such
as the Kyoto Protocol is putting increasing pressure on all governments to generate clean energy
from sustainable sources. Hydropower is amongst the key answers to the environmental issues.
According to the report on the structure of renewable energy resources harnessed as of 2008,
indicates 86.31% of the renewable energy is generated by hydropower plant, [Lejeune & Hui,
2012]. Table 1 provides a comparative indication of the renewable energy sources tapped as of
2008.

Source TWH %
Hydropower 3247.3 86.31
Biomass 223.5 5.94
Wind power 215.7 5.73
Geothermal 63.4 1.69
Solar including photovoltaic 12.1 0.32
Marine energies 0.54 0.014
Total 3762.54 100

Table 1: Worlds renewable energy harnessed as of 2008, [Lejeune & Hui, 2012].

The values in Table 1 confirm the importance of hydropower development against the other
renewable methods of producing energy such as biomass, wind, geothermal, solar and marine
energies. However, hydropower plant may be subject to a number of constructional, operational
and maintenance problems that could reduce the plant electricity generation capacity. Moreover,
the plant may suffer huge revenue losses due to several teething problems which ultimately
increase the down time of the plant. One such problem is the hydro turbine and its components

1
failure. In this report, an overview of the turbine types and their failure mechanisms will be
presented briefly.

Types of Hydro-Turbines
For hydroelectric power stations, the amount of electrical energy that can be generated from a
water source depends primarily on two main parameters:

The distance the water has to fall

The quantity of water flow

As the water source varies according to the geographical location of the plant, water turbines are
designed subsequently to suit these different locations. The design and selection of water turbine
is mainly based on the principle of energy conversion, available water head on the machine, the
specific speed of the turbine and the quantity of water that can be utilised for continuous power
generation. Accordingly these turbines are grouped under two main categories, [Kjolle, 2001].

Impulse turbines - For example: Pelton and Turgo turbines

Reaction turbines - For example : Francis, Kaplan and Bulb turbines

The classification of turbines is essential to differentiate the failure mechanism that the turbine
may experience. Depending on the type of turbine used for converting mechanical energy into
electrical energy, in general, the four failure modes of cavitation, erosion, fatigue and material
defect may affect the impulse and reaction turbine differently, [Padhy et al., 2007]. For example,
a reaction turbine is likely to fail mostly due to cavitation while an impulse turbine is most
probable to fail due to erosion, [Padhy et al., 2007, Kjolle, 2001, Neopane et al., 2011].
Moreover the failure due to material fatigue and material defect may depend on the operating
condition of the power plant. So, it is essential to give a brief account of most widely used
hydropower turbines before concentrating on different failure mechanisms.

It also is important to emphasize that material defects refer to defects generated in the turbine
components during the installation process and not during the manufacture of turbine. It is
assumed that once the hydro turbine left the manufacturing site, it is fully checked and all quality
specifications and requirements are met and satisfied.

Pelton Turbines
The Pelton turbine as shown in Figure 1 is used where there is a small water discharge with a
large available water head on the turbines. It is similar to the water wheels used in the past.
Pelton turbines constitute a series of runners/buckets aligned around the rim of the shaft. Water
from the dam is fed through the nozzles at high speed, hitting the blades of the turbine, converts
potential energy of the water in mechanical energy (Shaft rotation), which is ultimately
transformed into electrical energy through generator.

Francis turbines
The Francis turbine is used where a large flow and a high or medium head of water is involved.
Figure 2 given below shows a Francis turbine mechanism used in a hydropower station. The
Francis turbine is also similar to a waterwheel, as it looks like a spinning wheel with fixed blades

2
in between two rims. This wheel is called a runner. A circle of guide vanes surround the runner
and control the amount of water driving it. Water is fed to the runner from all sides by these
vanes causing it to spin.

As reported by Hart and Whale [2007], Francis turbine operates with a water head of 30-60
meters. The Francis turbine runner has a high operating efficiency (approximately 90%) over a
wide range of head heights and flow rates. The size of a Francis turbine runner can range from
less than one metre to over fifteen metres in diameter. A typical size used in New Zealand hydro-
stations would be three metres.

Figure 1: Pelton type hydropower station set up (Source: Western Power Corporation)
and a photo of Pelton wheel (http://www.kelvin.it)

Kaplan turbines
Propeller type turbines, such as Kaplan turbines are designed to operate where a small head of
water is involved. For Kaplan turbines as shown in Figure 3, the angle (or pitch) of the blades
can be altered to suit the water flow. The adjustable pitch feature of Kaplan turbines allows these
types of turbines to operate efficiently at a wider range of water head, allowing a provisional
variation in the water level in the dam. Kaplan turbines can be used in sites having a typical head
range of 2m to 40m with 15% to 100% efficiency at full discharge for double regulated type and
about 30% to 100% at maximum discharge for single regulated types, (Dixon 1998 and Gordon
2001).

3
 Figure 2: Francis type hydropower station set up (Source: Western Power Corporation)
and a photo of Francis turbine (http://grz.g.andritz.com

Figure 3: Kaplan type hydropower station set up (Source: Western Power Corporation) and
a photo of Kaplan turbine (http://www.tbhic.cn)

4
Cavitation
The water enters hydraulic turbines is subjected to changes in pressure and velocity. Such
variations may result in changes in flow characteristics with consequences on turbine
performance and useful life. Cavitation failure could be one of the outcomes of such changes
affecting turbine useful life. Cavitation is due to the formation of vapour bubbles and the burst of
such bubbles as a result of changes in the fluid pressure at the vicinity of moving vapour bubbles
falling below the vapour pressure of the fluid. This is the case for flowing fluids over the surface
of a machine component where the dynamic component of the fluid pressure increases due to
fluid velocity suppressing the static component. The static pressure governs the process of
vapour bubble formation or boiling. The bubble burst generates an extremely high local pressure
creating cavities on the surface of machine parts such as hydro-turbine components. Therefore,
cavitation may occur near the fast moving blades of hydro-turbines or near the exit of the turbine
where there are large differences between the static and dynamic components of fluid pressure.
Recent studies evaluated the magnitude of this high local pressure to be approximately 700 atm
(~70 MPa), [Khurana et al., 2012]. Repeated formation and collapse of these vapour bubbles
during the fluid flow deteriorates the surface of the machine components due to pitting action,
[Kjolle, 2001]. It has been reported that cavitation causes surface penetration damage of up
to 10 mm per year to critical components such as impellors, turbine blades, and casings
[Simoneau, 1984]. Figure 4 gives a typical example of cavitation which has resulted in surface
pitting of a Kaplan turbine [Repair Engineering, 2012]. The cavitation eroded zone of a runner
blade of a Kaplan turbine is given in Figure 5.

Figure 4: Cavitation pitting damage occurs as a result of repeated fluid impact on the surface of a Kaplan
turbine due to gas bubble collapse. [http://www.repairengineering.com/cavitation.html]

Cavitation Causes and types

The main causes of cavitation in hydraulic turbine may be due to the following conditions,
[Raghuvir et al (2012]:

Design profile of the turbine

The frequent change in the operating condition of the plant to meet various load
requirements.

5
 Figure 5: Detail view of the cavitation eroded zone on a Kaplan runner blade [Frunzaverde etal 2006]

Based on the analysis of structural vibrations, acoustic emissions and hydrodynamic pressures
measured, the likelihood of cavitation may be evaluated in hydraulic turbines and the formation
of cavities detected experimentally, [Escalera et al., 2008]. Accordingly, cavitation in case of
Francis turbine initiates as a result of the changes in the fluid flow velocity as it encounters the
blades. The fluid flow which is usually turbulent in nature becomes even more turbulent as the
velocity and pressure change over the turbine blades. The increase in velocity changes the level
of dynamic pressure and creates different flow patterns over the surface of the turbine blades
with respected cavitation damage of, [Kumar et al., 2010];

Fluid flow pattern over the leading edge of the turbine blade
Fluid flow pattern over the trailing edge of the turbine blade
Formation of swirl in the draft tube once the fluid leaves the trailing edge of turbine blade
Formation of inter-blade vortex

The four types of cavitation detected in Francis turbine are shown in Figure 6 which
demonstrates how leading edge cavitation, trailing edge cavitation, draft tube swirl and inter
blade vortex cavitation can damage the Francis turbine. The leading edge cavitation as shown in
Figure 6(a) can be the serious issue that is likely to erode the blades deeply. It is on account of
liquid flow obstruction and change in water pressure at the point of contact and subsequent water
bubbles formation. For the trailing edge cavitation, Figure 6(b), it is a noisy type of cavitation
that minimizes the machine performance and initiates blade erosion. Draft tube swirl, Figure
6(c), can produce low frequency pressure pulsation resulting into hydraulic resonance causing
high amplitude vibration on the turbine components, which could potentially disturb the whole
power house structure. Inter-blade vortex cavitation as depicted in Figure 6(d) or sometimes
known as the Von Karman vortex cavitation is a phenomenon that can occur mostly on the
trailing edge of the turbine components, [Kumar et al, 2010].

Cavitation susceptible turbine parts

The turbine parts which are most susceptible to cavitation vary with the type of turbines and the
plant operating conditions as summarised in the following Table 2.

The cavitation action in case of Francis turbine may be severe in the blade leading area and the
trailing edge as shown in Figure 7. Other associated components such as draft tube, guide vanes

6
and wicket gates experience lesser cavitation damages compared to the blade. Moreover in most
of the literatures, the cavitation defects for Francis turbines are illustrated only on the blades,
[Kumar et al., 2010, Khurana et al., 2012 and Padhy et al., 2007].

a) Leading edge b) Trailing edge

cavitation cavitationn

c) Draft tube d) Inter-blade

Figure 6: Cavitation damages in Francis turbine (a) leading edge cavitation, (b) trailing edge cavitation, (c)
draft tube swirl (d) inter-blade vortex cavitation, [Kumar et al., 2010].

Classification of Type of turbine Parts that are susceptible to cavitation

turbine
Bucket:
Actually the shape of the Pelton bucket is cavitation-free geometry.
However, the bucket tend to suffer cavitation due to initiation of
Pelton rough surface on the bucket by repeated impingement of erosive
Impulse material from the river, Khurana et al (2012)
Blades
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulation result for flow
Bulb turbine through the bulb turbine showed cavitation may occur on the blade
surface indirectly affecting the efficiency of the plant,
Francis Leading edge of the blade, trailing edge of the blade, draft tubes,
Reaction guide vanes, wicket gates
Kaplan Blades, guide vanes

Table 2: Turbine parts which are more susceptible to cavitation. [Khurana et al 2012, Spannhake, 1932,
Kjolle, 2001, Raghuvir et al, 2012].

7
 Figure 7: Cavitation details in the runner blade of the Francis turbine. [Kumar et al., 2010].

Cavitation prevention:
A review of the literature and hands on experience of the first author indicated that cavitation
phenomenon may not be completely avoidable in all turbines. The problem of cavitation in
hydropower plant could be minimized if the load fluctuation is kept to a minimum or avoided
completely. However, Spannhake [1932], did suggest that the problem of cavitation may be
avoided completely if:

To design the turbine to operate with forward whirl in the draft tube
Improve the distribution of pressure along the back side of the turbine blades
Change the blade profile such that it will have forward edge shape

Continued research into the above-mentioned three possible methods of avoiding cavitation is
still on-going by using the latest predictive tools such as Computational Fluid dynamics (CFD)
techniques to study the fluid flow along the surface of the machine components, [Kumar et al.,
2009]. On the operational level however, there are procedures to monitor the effect of cavitation
damage on the hydraulic turbines such as online vibration monitoring. In addition, proper use of
cavitation resistance materials for blades, draft tubes, wicket gates etc and the injection of air
into the draft tube are successfully adopted in the hydropower plants to mitigate cavitation
problem, [Padhy et al., 2007]. A brief account of the methods to minimize cavitation is
elaborated below.

Online vibration monitoring

8
Online vibration monitoring devices which detects abnormal vibration during plant operation is
the most effective and common method of controlling cavitation in hydropower plants. The
turbine section which experiences cavitation as a result of explosion-collapse of vapour bubbles
induces abnormal vibration to the machine, [Kjolle, 2001 and Neopane,2010]. The online
vibration measurements are compared to the standard permissible vibration limit of the turbine
section. Any abnormal vibration beyond the permissible limit is internally linked to the machine
control system that commands machine shut down to prevent further damage and also for the
safety of the operational and maintenance officials in the power house.

Use of cavitation resistant materials

Proper selection of the turbine material and manufacturing route is an essential preventative step
to combat cavitation damages. According to Bhagat [1987], it is necessary to understand the
effect of materials properties on the cavitation incubation time and rate, since materials with
greater cavitation incubation rate will have higher cavitation erosion rate. It is shown the
cavitation incubation time increases logarithmically with materials microhardness which means
harder materials should be less prone to cavitation damages, see Figure 8.

Figure 8: Effect of alloy microhardness on its cavitation incubation time [Bhagat 1987].

However, cavitation resistance is also dependent on the ductility and toughness of the materials
to enable them to absorb the cavitation energy. As a result, non-strain rate sensitive materials
with higher number of slip systems and greater ability to undergo plastic deformation are more
resistant to cavitation, such as Co and austenitic stainless steel. Bhagat [1987] also indicated that
metals with lower stacking fault energy and greater work hardening rate are more resistant to
cavitation. However, properties such as hardness and toughness and ductility usually have
opposing effects on materials resistance to fracture. Therefore, a combination of high hardness
and ductility and toughness may be achieved with composite materials with proper selection of
matrix and reinforcing agent. As points out by Bhagat [1987] a composite may be more resistant
to cavitation if both matrix and fibre are selected to be;

work hardenable (low stacking fault energy) materials,

low strain-rate sensitivity (no ductile-to-brittle transition),
relatively large diameter fibre which may undergo plastic deformation without fracturing,
moderate fibre volume fraction to allow larger interfibre distance,
fibres normal to the surface, and

9
 good interfacial bonding to allow subsurface micro-buckling of fibres.

He suggested that a ductile matrix/ductile fibre composite material may have superior cavitation
damage resistance to that of the matrix material and maybe used to manufacture turbines and its
associated components. In contrast to Bhagat [1987] suggestion, Kjolle [2001] and Raghuvir et
al., [2012] showed that the best materials to combat severe cavitation damage are normally cast
alloy steel with 13%Cr and 4%Ni or 16% Cr and 5% Ni. In addition, these alloys have excellent
strength plus being adequately weldable.

Injection of air into the draft tube

The problem of cavitation in the draft tube arises as a result of flow separation that takes place at
the exit of the turbine blades, [Khurana et al., 2011]. Accordingly, the flow separation at the exit
of the turbine blade induces vibration of high amplitude to the machine components with
undesirable effect to the turbine assembly. Studies and the experimental result of a prototype
Francis and Kaplan turbine showed that an injection of air into the draft tube region dampens the
vibration and also stabilizes the flow, [Neopane et al., 2011]. As a result of these findings,
todays draft tube for Francis and Kaplan turbines are submerged below the level of the water in
the tailrace as shown in Figure 9.

Figure 9: A schematic diagram showing the fully submerged daft tube in the tail race water, [Kjolle, 2001].

Erosion
Erosion is the process of gradual removal of material from the surface of a component as a result
of repeated deformation and cutting action, [Padhy et al., 2007]. The erosive wear of turbine and
its components in hydropower plants occurs as a result of the flow of high velocity and
impingement of abrasive sediments on the surface of the turbines, [Neopane, 2010] - for example
the sediment that breaks down the oxide coating layer on the flow guiding surface. Instantaneous
breakage of the oxide layers leads to the formation of surface irregularities in the flow guiding
surfaces initiating cavitation type effects on the turbine unit, [Kjolle, 2001]. The photograph of
the nozzle and the seal ring assembly, Figure 10, of the Tala Hydropower plant, a 1020 MW

10
electricity generating plant in Bhutan, shows significant damage as a result of sand erosion.
This photograph was taken on 29th October 2009 when one of the unit noted abnormal vibration
and noise during full load with 10% overload operation strategy to meet the load requirement of
the plant. The blades of the Pelton turbine unit along with the seal ring were damaged completely
as a result of operating the plant with higher concentration of silt on the previous day before the
failure. Inspection of the failed components and common experience in the hydropower turbine
maintenance concluded that the failure is due to a combination of sand erosion, localised change
in materials property during installation and extra load beyond the designed and recommended
limits of operation of the plant. According to Frunzaverde et al. [2010], the chances of damage to
hydro turbines by operating the plant at partial and over load condition is because of pressure
fluctuation and subsequent vortex formation in the draft tube cone. In addition to this pressure
fluctuation, the draft tube surge as a result of vortex formation causes vibration and noise in the
machineries and enhances the possibility of turbine failure.

Broken tip nozzle

Surface irregularities on
the seal ring

Figure 10: A nozzle and seal ring failed due to excessive sand erosion,
Tala hydropower Plant, Bhutan.

Moreover, a study to evaluate the effect of sand particles on the turbines have indicated that the
erosive wear of turbine and its components is directly proportional to the sediment size and its
mineral content, [Neopane et al., 2011]. Similar results were also indicated by Kjolle [2001]
wherein the erosion rate is directly determined by the sediment types and their characteristics
properties such as shape, size and quantities.

Sediment erosion susceptible Turbine parts

Numerical simulation using computational Fluid dynamics were carried out at Cahua Power
Plant to study the impact of the characteristic features of the sediments on turbines wear. It
concluded the following turbine parts are more susceptible to sand erosion, [Neopane, 2010]:

Stay vanes
Guide vanes Parts of a Francis turbines
11
 Runner vanes
Turbine blades
Bucket,
Nozzle Parts of a Pelton turbines
Seal rings
Deflectors

Accordingly, the flow simulation result showed that the fluid flow attained highest velocities and
acceleration at the outlet of the turbine blade resulting in the prediction of highest erosive wear at
the outlet of the blade and the lower cover, [Neopane, 2010]. Additionally, the study also showed
unexpected sediment erosion occurring on the suction side of the guide vanes.

The erosion of the turbine parts reduces the efficiency of the turbines which directly affects the
total generation of the plant. In addition to this reduced performance, the turbine component may
break down during any time of its service life causing danger to operational and maintenance
crews. Figure 11 shows the damage on the nozzle and the bucket of the Khimti Hydropower
Plant in Nepal. The photograph also shows maximum sediment erosion on the location where
there is direct impingement of the sediment particle in case of Pelton turbine. Similarly, in case
of Francis turbines, the leading and the trailing edge of the blade experience the maximum
erosion, [Thapa et al., 2004].

(a) (b
Figure 11: Eroded Pelton turbine component of Khimti hydropower plant, Nepal (a) Nozzle,
(b) Bucket. [Thapa et al., 2004].

Sediment erosion prevention

There are different methods of combating sediment erosion in hydropower plants, [Kjolle, 2001].
Damage due to sand erosion portrays serious issues in hydropower plants due to increased shut
down time during maintenance and subsequent revenue losses as a result of the damage,
[Neopane et al., 2011]. However, the impact of sediment on turbine blades and its components
can be minimised to an acceptable limit by:

Constructing civil structure such as Dam and De-silting chambers

Monitoring the concentration of sediment flow to power house
Coating to improve resistance against erosion

12
 Proper selection of turbine and its component materials

Dam and de-silting chambers

Dams are civil structures that are constructed across the river flow direction in order to store the
water for many other purposes. In general, most dams are constructed to store water for
electricity generation, control flood, and also a mechanism to reduce the velocity of the flow so
that sediments may be deposited in the reservoir.

As a result of sedimentation process in the reservoir, flow of erosive sediments to power house
may be minimised to an acceptable level. A de-silting chamber is a civil structure constructed in
line with the dam whereby the velocity of the flow is further reduced to eliminate much finer
erosive materials flowing into the power house. Consequently, clean water after the de-silting
chamber is supplied to the power house for electricity generation and therefore the damage of
turbine as a result of sediment flow is minimised.

Sediment concentration
Another method of preventing expensive turbines from damage is to monitor the concentration
of the sediment particles. An online silt measuring device (Part per million PPM) is installed to
measure silt content in the river. The online measured data is compared to the permissible silt
limit of the plant. If the silt limit is greater than the acceptable PPM value, the sensor directs
power house to shut down the machine automatically.

Coating
A general method of minimizing the effect of sediment erosion may be done by applying hard
surface coatings, [Thapa et al., 2007]. Coating such as ceramic pastes, ceramic paints, and hard
facing alloys are some of the general and standard coating materials used in hydropower plants.
Recent studies in improving the coating quality and finish showed that applying tungsten carbide
based composites such as 86WC-10Co-4Cr, have much improved resistance against sediment
erosion, [Thapa et al., 2007].

Materials selection
The most common materials to combat sand erosion and minimize erosion effect on hydro
turbines are the generally hardened stainless steel types with either 13% Cr and 4% Ni or 16% Cr
and 5% Ni, [Kjolle, 2001]. Consequently, turbine parts such as nozzles, buckets, seal rings of a
Pelton turbine are fabricated or cast from these stainless steels and heat treated (hardened) to
better resist sediment erosion.

Fatigue
Material fatigue is another form of turbine failure mode, [Frunzaverde et al., 2010]. The turbine
components which are subjected to repeated alternating or cyclic stress below the normal yield
strength fail progressively by cracking [Kjolle, 2001]. The turbine assembly constitute various
interconnected components and as a result, the vibration in one of the members is transferred to
others, ensuing deformation in all the components, [Momcilovic et al., 2012]. Furthermore, an
additional stress in the affected parts may result in abrupt failure of the component, [Kjolle
2001]. Analysis of water flow over the turbine surface showed formation of eddy current which
initiates vibration and stresses on turbine blades and to other components. Turbine materials

13
which are subjected to repeated hydraulic vibration may result into material failure due to
fatigue, [Frunverde et al., 2010].

As shown in Figure 12, a turbine shaft flange which has failed due to multiple fatigue cracks
initiated at the point of contact between the flange and turbine runner assembly, [Momcilovic et
al., 2012]. Similar fatigue initiation is also highly noticeable at the corners of the runner of
Francis turbines and Pelton buckets. To combat fatigue failure, turbine parts which experience
fatigue may be manufactured by nickel alloy steel with 13%Cr and 4%Ni for Pelton buckets and
with 16% Cr and 5% Ni for Francis runners, [Kjolle, 2001]. Fatigue failure in turbines may also
be minimised if the proper material selection material with good fatigue strength and
endurance limits and with sufficient factor of safety may be considered during the design stage.
Furthermore, fatigue failure can be avoided by monitoring the vibration level of the turbine unit,
[Kjolle, 2001].

a b

(A) (B)

Figure 12: (A) - a) Flange of turbine showing multiple fatigue cracks initiation sites, b) Stable fatigue
cracks and c) drilled holes. (B) - a schematic representation of the propagation of fatigue failure,
[Momcilovic et al., 2012].
Material defects
A review of available literature on turbine failure mechanism and several case studies of the
failed turbine parts in hydropower plants showed combined effect of sediment erosion and
cavitation are the main cause of turbine failure. The failures of turbine parts as a result of
material defects generated during installation stage are very rare in publication. Material defects
are essentially controlled during turbine and its components fabrication stage, so that the
fabricated turbine parts meet the standards as required by the hydropower plant. However, it is
necessary to keep the properties of the turbine parts intact during erection and installation stage.
Unnecessary tag welding and lugs on the surface of the turbines as support for lifting and
installing turbine parts may distort the material properties of the turbine as shown in Figure 13.

14
 Hooks welded as support

Figure 13: Welded hooks on the surfaces of the nozzle for support during installation,
Tala hydropower Plant, Bhutan
Conclusions
The turbine failure and its subsequent impact on the power house structure and the threat it may
impose to the operational and maintenance crews needs due attention to improve the
performance of the turbines and safeguard the power plant. This can only be achieved through
understanding of the turbine failure mechanisms, and particularly identify turbine parts that are
most susceptible to specific type of failure. Four types of failure, namely cavitation, erosion,
fatigue and materials failure due to improper installation procedure have been identified as the
main cause of failure for most turbines. Attempts were also made to highlight the relationship
between the type of turbine (Pelton, Francis and Kaplan) and the most vulnerable part of the
turbine to a specific failure. Also some suggestions were made to mitigate turbine failure.

References
Bhagat, Ram B. (1987), Cavitation erosion of composites - a materials perspective, Journal of
Materials Science Letters, Vol. 6, 1473-75.

Dixon, SL(1998), `Fluid mechanics and thermodynamics of turbomachinery, Butterworth-

Heinemann, Burlington, USA

Escalera,X Egusquiza, E Farhat, M Avellan, F Coussirat , (2008),` Detection of cavitation in

hydraulic turbines, Mechanical System Signal Process , vol. (20), page - 9831007.

Frunzaverde D., and others, Metallographic, Investigations on Anti-Cavitation Lips of Kaplan Blades,
23rd IAHR SYMPOSIUM on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems, Yokohama, Japan, October 2006, ISBN
4-8190-1809-4.

Frunzaverde, D Muntean, S Marginean, G Campian, V Marsavina, L Terzi, R and Serban, V

(2010),` Failure analysis of a Francis turbine runner, 25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic
Machinery and System, IOP Publications, Romania.

15
Gordon, JL (2001), Hydraulic turbine efficiency, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering ,
Volume 28, Number 2, Pp 238-253, April 2001 .

Hart D., and Whale D., A review of cavitation erosion resistant weld surfacing alloys for
hydroturbines, Eutectic Australia Pty. Ltd., Sydney, 2007; (http://www.environmental-
expert.com/Files%5C19758%5Carticles%5C10738%5CCaviTec.pdf)

Kumar, P and Saini, R P(2010),` Study of cavitation in hydro turbines- a review, Renewable and
Sustainable Energy review, Alternate Hydro Energy Centre, India, Vol(14), Pp 374-383.

Khurana, S Navtej, Singh, H (2012),` Effect of cavitation on hydraulic turbines a review,

International Journal of current engineering and technology, vol2, Pp 172 -177.

Kjolle, A (2001),` Hydropower in Norway Mechanical Equipment, Norwegian University of

Science and Technology, chapter 14, Norway.

Lejeune, A and Hui, SL (2012),` Hydropower: A multi benefit solution for renewable energy,
Comprehensive Renewable Energy, Vol(6), Pp 15 47.

Momcilvic, D Odanovic, Z Mitrovic, R Atanasovska,I and Vuherer, T (2012),` Failure analysis

of hydraulic turbine shaft, Engineering Failure Analysis, vol-20, pp- 54 to 66.

Momcilovic, D Motrovic, R Antanasovska, I Vuherer, T (2012),` Methodology of determination

the influence of corrosion pit on the decrease of hydro turbine shaft fatigue failure, Machine
Design, Vol 4(2012) No4, ISSN 1821-1259 Pp 231 236.

Neopane, H Dahlhuag, O Cervantes, M (2011),` Sediment erosion in hydraulic turbines, Global

Journal in Engineering, Vol. 9(6), University of Technology, Sweden.

Neopane, H Sujkhu, Shrestha, S Subedi, K Basnet, A (2011),` Study of sediment erosion in

hydraulic turbines using rotating disc apparatus, Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Kathmandu University, Nepal.

Neopane, H (2010), ` Sediment Erosion in Hydro turbines, Faculty of Engineering Science and
Technology, Fluid Engineering, NTNU, ISBN- 978-82-471-2173-3, Norway.

Padhy, M K and Saini, R P (2007),`A review on silt erosion in hydro turbines, Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews, Alternate Hydro Energy Centre, Indian Institute of Technology,
Roorkee, issue 12, Pp 1975-1986.
Raghuvir, S Tiwari, SK Mishra, SK (2012),` Cavitation Erosion in hydraulic turbine components
and mitigation by coating: Current status and future needs, Journal of Material Engineering and
Performance, vol 21(7), Pp 1531- 1551.

Repair Engineering, http://www.repairengineering.com/cavitation.html

16
Simoneau, R. The optimum protection of hydraulic turbines against cavitation erosion.12th
IAHR Symposium, Stirling, UK, Aug, 1984

Spannhake (1932),` Causes and Effect of Cavitation in hydraulic turbines, viewed on

16.04.2013 and available on
http://www.frenchriverland.com/causes_&_efeects_of_cavitation_in_hydraulic_turbines.htm

Thapa, B Shrestha, R Dhakal, P Thapa, BS (2004),` Sediment in Nepalese hydropower projects,

Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.

Thapa, B Dahlhaug, O Timsina, M Upadhyay, P Basnet, R (2007),` HVOF coating for erosion
resistance of hydraulic turbines: Experiences of Kaligandaki(A), Hydropower plant, Norwegian
University of Science and Technology, Norway.

17