Gas path analysis (GPA) is a powerful tool to predict gas turbine degradations based on measurement parameters of gas turbine engines. Accordingly, prudent measurement selections are crucial to ensure accurate GPA predictions. This paper is intended to investigate the influence of measurement parameter selection toward the effectiveness of GPA algorithm. An analytical methodology for measurement selection, combined with measurement subset concept, is developed to properly select measurements for multiple component fault diagnosis. The effectiveness of GPA using the measurement sets selected with the introduced measurement selection method are then compared with the results of using standard measurements installed on existing gas turbine engines. A case study applying the new measurement selection method to GPA diagnostic analysis is demonstrated on a three-shaft aeroderivative industrial gas turbine model based on similar unit installed onboard an offshore platform operated by PETRONAS. The engine is modeled and simulated using PYTHIA, a gas turbine performance and diagnostics analysis tool developed by Cranfield University. To validate the findings, nonlinear GPA prediction errors are evaluated in various cases of single and multicomponents faults. As a result, the selected measurements have successfully produced much superior diagnostics accuracies in the fault cases when compared with the standard measurements. These findings proved that proper measurement selection for better GPA diagnostic analysis can be achieved by using the proposed analytical methods. Several engine sensor enhancements are also discussed to accommodate the unique sensor requirements for health diagnostics using GPA.

1.
Urban
,
L. A.
, 1969,
Gas Turbine Engine Parameter Interrelationships
, 2nd ed.,
HSD UTC
,
Windsor Locks, CT
.
2.
Urban
,
L. A.
, 1980,
Gas Path Analysis—A Tool for Engine Condition Monitoring
,
Flight Safety Foundation
,
Christchurch, New Zealand
.
3.
Volponi
,
A. J.
, 1982, “
Gas Path Analysis: An Approach to Engine Diagnostics
,”
35th Symposium Mechanical Failure Prevention Group
, Gaithersbury, MD.
4.
Li
,
Y. G.
, 2002, “
Performance-Analysis-Based Gas Turbine Diagnostic: A Review
,”
Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part A: Journal of Power and Energy
0957-6509,
216
, pp.
363
377
.
5.
Mathioudakis
,
K.
,
Kamboukos
,
P.
, and
Stamatis
,
A.
, 2004, “
Gas Turbine Component Fault Detection From a Limited Number of Measurements
,”
Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part A: Journal of Power and Energy
0957-6509,
218
(
8
), pp.
609
618
.
6.
Mushini
,
R.
, and
Simon
,
D.
, 2005, “
On Optimization of Sensor Selection for Aircraft Gas Turbine Engines
,”
18th International Conference on Systems Engineering (ICSEng 2005)
, pp.
9
14
.
7.
Ogaji
,
S. O. T.
,
Sampath
,
S.
,
Singh
,
R.
, and
Probert
,
S. D.
, 2002, “
Parameter Selection for Diagnosing a Gas Turbine Performance-Deterioration
,”
Appl. Energy
0306-2619,
73
, pp.
25
46
.
8.
Arora
,
J. S.
, 2006,
Introduction to Optimum Design
,
McGraw-Hill
,
New York
.
9.
Sowers
,
T. S.
,
Kopasakis
,
G.
, and
Simon
,
D. L.
, 2008, “
Application of the Systematic Sensor Selection Strategy for Turbofan Engine Diagnostics
,” ASME Paper No. GT2008-50525.
10.
Stamatis
,
A.
,
Mathioudakis
,
K.
, and
Papailiou
,
K.
, 1992, “
Optimal Measurement and Health Index Selection for Gas Turbine Performance Status and Fault Diagnosis
,”
ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power
0742-4795,
114
(
2
), pp.
209
216
.
11.
Provost
,
M. J.
, 1994, “
The Use of Optimal Estimation Techniques in the Analysis of Gas Turbines
,” Ph.D. thesis, Cranfield University, UK.
12.
Cotae
,
P.
,
Yalamnchili
,
S.
,
Philip Chen
,
C. L.
, and
Ayon
,
A.
, 2008, “
Optimization of Sensor Locations and Sensitivity Analysis for Engine Health Monitoring Using Minimum Interference Algorithms
,”
EURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing
,
2008
, pp.
1
9
.
13.
Borguet
,
S.
, and
Leonard
,
O.
, 2008, “
The Fisher Information Matrix as a Relevant Tool for Sensor Selection in Engine Health Monitoring
,”
Int. J. Rotating Mach.
1023-621X,
2008
, pp.
1
10
.
14.
Mathioudakis
,
K.
, and
Kamboukos
,
P.
, 2006, “
Assessment of the Effectiveness of Gas Path Diagnostic Schemes
,”
ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power
0742-4795,
128
(
1
), pp.
57
63
.
15.
Li
,
Y. G.
, and
Singh
,
R.
, 2005, “
An Advanced Gas Turbine Gas Path Diagnostic System—PYTHIA
,”
17th International Symposium on Airbreathing Engines
, Munich, Germany, Paper No. ISABE-2005-1284.
16.
Li
Y. G.
, 2010, “
Gas Turbine Performance and Health Status Estimation Using Adaptive Gas Path Analysis
,”
ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power
0742-4795,
132
(
4
), p.
041701
.
17.
Golub
,
H. G.
, and
Van Loan
,
C. F.
, 1996,
Matrix Computations
, 3rd ed.,
John Hopkins University Press
,
Baltimore
.
18.
Urban
L. A.
, 1975, “
Parameter Selection for Multiple Fault Diagnostics of Gas Turbine Engines
,”
ASME J. Eng. Power
0022-0825,
97
(
2
), pp.
225
230
.
19.
Jasmani
,
M. S.
, 2009, “
Systematic Measurement Selections for Gas Path Diagnostics of Industrial Gas Turbines
, MSc. thesis, Cranfield University, UK.
20.
Aretakis
,
N.
,
Mathioudakis
,
K.
, and
Stamatis
,
A.
, 2003, “
Nonlinear Engine Component Fault Diagnosis From a Limited Number of Measurements Using a Combinatorial Approach
,”
ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power
0742-4795,
125
(
3
), pp.
642
650
.
You do not currently have access to this content.