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.
CachadaABarbosaJLeitñoP, 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.
SahalRBreslinJGAliMI. Big data and stream processing platforms for industry 4.0 requirements mapping for a predictive maintenance use case. J Manuf Syst2020; 54: 138–151.
3.
JardineAKSLinDBanjevicD. A review on machinery diagnostics and prognostics implementing condition-based maintenance. Mech Syst Signal Process2006; 20(7): 1483–1510.
4.
BousdekisAMagoutasBApostolouD, et al. Review, analysis and synthesis of prognostic-based decision support methods for condition based maintenance. J Intell Manuf2018; 29(6): 1303–1316.
5.
PengYDongMZuoMJ. Current status of machine prognostics in condition-based maintenance: a review. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2010; 50(1-4): 297–313.
6.
SiXSWangWHuCH, et al. Remaining useful life estimation – aa review on the statistical data driven aproaches. Eur J Oper Res2011; 213(1): 1–14.
7.
LeiYLiNGuoL, et al. Machinery health prognostics: a systematic review from data acquisition to RUL prediction. Mech Syst Signal Process2018; 104: 799–834.
8.
ZhaoRYanRChenZ, et al. Deep learning and its applications to machine health monitoring. Mech Syst Signal Process2019; 115: 213.
9.
ThoméAMTScavardaLFScavardaAJ. Conducting systematic literature review in operations management. Prod Plan Control2016; 27(5): 408–420.
10.
DenyerDTranfieldD. Producing a systematic review. 2009.
HochreinSGlockCH. Systematic literature reviews in purchasing and supply management research: a tertiary study. Int J Integr Supply Manag2012; 7(4): 215–245.
13.
MatejaKDejanZAndrejK. Vibrations of a hydropower plant under operational loads. J Civ Struct Health Monit2020; 10(1): 29–42.
14.
HamzicAAvdagicZBesicI. Multistage cascade predictor of structural elements movement in the deformation analysis of large objects based on time series influencing factors. ISPRS Int J Geo Inf2020; 9: 47.
15.
SCImago. 2020.
16.
ShinJHJunHB. On condition based maintenance policy. J Comput Des Eng2015; 2(2): 119–127.
17.
van EckNJWaltmanL. Software survey: Vosviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics2010; 84(2): 523–538.
18.
GreggSWSteeleJPHVan BossuytDL. Feature selection for monitoring erosive cavitation on a hydroturbine. Int J Progn Health Manag2020; 8(1): 1–22.
19.
EgusquizaMEgusquizaEValeroC, et al. Advanced condition monitoring of Pelton turbines. Measurement2018; 119(October2017): 46–55.
20.
ValentínDPresasAEgusquizaM, et al. Transmission of high frequency vibrations in rotating systems. Application to cavitation detection in hydraulic turbines. Appl Sci2018; 8(3): 1–18.
21.
Abdel AzizMSElsamahyMMoustafa HassanMA, et al. A novel study for hydro-generators loss of excitation faults detection using ANFIS. Int J Model Simul2017; 37(1): 36–45.
22.
ShiZ. Investigation on generator loss of excitation protection in generator protection coordination, 2010.
23.
WeijianW. Principle and application of electric power equipment protection. Beijing: China Electric Power Press, 2002
24.
LiYWangLMaM. Diagnosis of rotor winding inter-turn short-circuit of hydro-generator based on no-load curve reverse calculation. IEEJ Trans Electr Electron Eng2019; 14(1): 130–137.
25.
KanegamiMMiyazakiSMiyakeK. Partial discharge detection with high-frequency Band through resistance-temperature sensor of hydropower generator stator windings. Elect Eng Jpn2016; 195(4): 9–15.
26.
OliveiraRMSDModestoJFMDmitrievV, 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 Appl2016; 15(3): 170–190.
27.
BorghettoJCavalliniAContinA, et al. Partial discharge inference by an advanced system. Analysis of online measurements performed on hydrogenerator. IEEE Trans Energy Convers2004; 19(2): 333–339.
28.
XuBChenDZhangH, et al. Shaft mis-alignment induced vibration of a hydraulic turbine generating system considering parametric uncertainties. J Sound Vib2018; 435: 74–90.
29.
WuYLiZLiB, et al. Vibration monitoring approach in integrated system of hydroelectric generating sets for smart power stations. Int J Power Energy Syst2016; 36(4): 147–155.
30.
SelakLButalaPSlugaA. Condition monitoring and fault diagnostics for hydropower plants. Comput Ind2014; 65(6): 924–936.
31.
GuoJLiuYXuX, et al. Integrated distributed bond graph modeling and neural network for fault diagnosis system of hydro turbine governors. Kybernetes2010; 39(6): 925–934.
32.
JosephAChelliahTRSelvarajR, et al. Fault diagnosis and fault-tolerant control of megawatt power electronic converter-fed large-rated asynchronous hydrogenerator. IEEE J Emerg Sel Top Power Electron2019; 7(4): 2403–2416.
33.
YuRBreikinT. Hybrid neural network-based fault diagnosis and fault-tolerance design with application in electro-hydraulic Servovalve. Open Autom Control Syst J2009; 2(2): 62–68.
34.
MazzocchiEPachoudAJFarhatM, et al. Signal analysis of an actively generated cavitation bubble in pressurized pipes for detection of wall stiffness drops. J Fluid Struct2016; 65: 60–75.
35.
ChengJZhuCFuW, et al. An imitation medical diagnosis method of hydro-turbine generating unit based on Bayesian network. Trans Inst Meas Contr2019; 41(12): 3406–3420.
36.
JongCGLeuSS. Bayesian-network-based hydro-power fault diagnosis system development by fault tree transformation. J Mar Sci Technol2013; 21(4): 367–379.
37.
MelaniAHASilvaJMde SouzaGFM, et al. Fault diagnosis based on Petri Nets: the case study of a hydropower plant. IFAC-PapersOnLine2016; 49(31): 1–6.
38.
ValaviMJorstadKGNysveenA. Electromagnetic analysis and electrical signature-based detection of rotor inter-turn faults in salient-pole synchronous machine. IEEE Trans Magn2018; 54(9): 1–9.
39.
GriscenkoMElmanis-HelmanisR. Eccentricity of slow-speed salient-pole generator: analysis based on air gap spectrum. Latv J Phys Tech Sci2015; 52(1): 26–37.
40.
BabićBMMilićSDRakićAŽ. Fault detection algorithm used in a magnetic monitoring system of the hydrogenerator. IET Electric Power Appl2017; 11(1): 63–71.
41.
DiraniHCMerkhoufAGirouxAM, et al. Impact of real air-gap nonuniformity on the electromagnetic forces of a large hydro-generator. IEEE Trans Ind Electron2018; 65(11): 8464–8475.
42.
Ramírez-NiñoJPascacioAMijarezR, et al. On-line fault monitoring system for hydroelectric generators based on spectrum analysis of the neutral current. IET Gener Transm Distrib2015; 9(16): 2509–2516.
43.
BlanquezFRArandaMRebolloE, et al. New fault-resistance estimation algorithm for rotor-winding ground-fault online location in synchronous machines with static excitation. IEEE Trans Ind Electron2015; 62(3): 1901–1911.
44.
BlanquezFRPlateroCARebolloE, et al. Novel rotor ground-fault detection algorithm for synchronous machines with static excitation based on third-harmonic voltage-phasor comparison. IEEE Trans Ind Electron2016; 63(4): 2548–2558.
45.
PardoMBlánquezFRPlateroCA, 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 Res2016; 140: 303–311.
46.
DallasSESafacasANKappatouJC. Interturn stator faults analysis of a 200-MVA hydrogenerator during transient operation using FEM. IEEE Trans Energy Convers2011; 26(4): 1151–1160.
47.
CarvalhoATLimaACSCunhaCFF, et al. Identification of partial discharges immersed in noise in large hydro-generators based on improved wavelet selection methods. Measurement2015; 75: 122–133.
48.
SalomonCPFerreiraCSant’AnaWC, et al. A study of fault diagnosis based on electrical signature analysis for synchronous generators predictive maintenance in bulk electric systems. Energies2019; 12(8): 1506.
49.
XuY. Intelligent fault diagnosis of house transformer simulation system in hydro-electricity factory by fuzzy reasoning. Int J Internet Manuf Serv2013; 3(2): 87–98.
50.
BlanckeOTahanAKomljenovicD, et al. A holistic multi-failure mode prognosis approach for complex equipment. Reliab Eng Syst Saf2018; 180: 136–151.
51.
XuBLiHPangW, et al. Bayesian network approach to fault diagnosis of a hydroelectric generation system. Energy Sci Eng2019; 7(5): 1669–1677.
52.
KlunMZupanDLopatičJ, et al. On the application of laser vibrometry to perform structural health monitoring in non-stationary conditions of a hydropower dam. Sensors2019; 19(17): 3811.
53.
MilicSDZigicADPonjavicMM. Online temperature monitoring, fault detection, and a novel heat run test of a water-cooled rotor of a hydrogenerator. IEEE Trans Energy Convers2013; 28(3): 698–706.
54.
LuSZhangXShangY, et al. Improving Hilbert–Huang transform for energy-correlation fluctuation in hydraulic engineering. Energy2018; 164: 1341–1350.
55.
WangWChenQYanD, 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 Process2019; 116: 772–786.
56.
PengWJLuoXQGuoPC, et al. Vibration fault diagnosis of hydroelectric unit based on LS-SVM and information fusion technology. Proc Chinese Soc Electr Eng2007; 27(23): 86–92.
57.
ChengJAiLDuanZ, et al. Fault classification of hydroelectric generating unit based on improved evidence theory. Open Fuels Energy Sci J2014; 7(1): 78–83.
58.
ZhuWZhouJXiaX, et al. A novel KICA–PCA fault detection model for condition process of hydroelectric generating unit. Measurement2014; 58: 197–206.
59.
XiaXZhouJLiC, et al. A novel method for fault diagnosis of hydro generator based on NOFRFs. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst2015; 71: 60–67.
60.
XiaXNiW. A novel failure analysis and diagnosis method for hydraulic-turbine generator unit. J Vibroengineering2016; 18(6): 3568–3580.
61.
XiaXNiWSangY. A novel analysis method for fault diagnosis of hydro-turbine governing system. Proc IMechE J Risk Reliability2017; 231(2): 164–171.
62.
ChengJDuanZXiongY. Cuckoo search algorithm with quantum mechanism and its application in the fault diagnosis of a hydroelectric generating unit. Recent Pat Comput Sci2018; 11(1): 70–76.
63.
FuWWangKZhangC, 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 Contr2019; 41(15): 4436–4449.
64.
LuoZZhouJXiangX, et al. A new method for automatically identifying the shaft orbit moving direction of hydroelectric generating set. Sens Rev2010; 30(3): 197–203.
65.
PinoGRibasJRGuimarãesLF. Bearing diagnostics of hydro power plants using wavelet packet transform and a hidden Markov model with orbit curves. Shock Vib2018; 2018: 1.
66.
AnXPanLYangL. Condition parameter degradation assessment and prediction for hydropower units using Shepard surface and ITD. Trans Inst Meas Contr2014; 36(8): 1074–1082.
67.
XueXZhouJZhangY, et al. An improved ensemble empirical mode decomposition method and its application to pressure pulsation analysis of hydroelectric generator unit. Proc IMechE J Risk Reliability2014; 228(6): 543–557.
68.
QiaoLChenQ. Forecasting models for hydropower unit stability using LS-SVM. Math Probl Eng2015; 2015: 1.
69.
ZhangXZhouJGuoJ, et al. Vibrant fault diagnosis for hydroelectric generator units with a new combination of rough sets and support vector machine. Expert Syst Appl2012; 39(3): 2621–2628.
70.
AnXPanLZhangF. Analysis of hydropower unit vibration signals based on variational mode decomposition. J Vib Control2017; 23(12): 1938–1953.
71.
AnXYangWAnX. Vibration signal analysis of a hydropower unit based on adaptive local iterative filtering. Proc IMechE J Mech Eng Sci2017; 231(7): 1339–1353.
72.
ZhouKBZhangJYShanY, et al. A hybrid multi-objective optimization model for vibration tendency prediction of hydropower generators. Sensors2019; 19(9): 2055.
73.
ZhangXZhangXSuB. Vibrant fault diagnosis for hydro-turbine generating unit using minmax kernel k-means clustering algorithm. Power Syst Protect Control2015; 43(5): 27–34.
74.
XiaoZHeXFuX, et al. ACO-Initialized wavelet neural network for vibration fault diagnosis of hydroturbine generating unit. Math Probl Eng2015; 2015: 1.
75.
PlazenetTBoileauTCaironiC, et al. A comprehensive study on shaft voltages and bearing currents in rotating machines. IEEE Trans Ind Appl2018; 54(4): 3749–3759.
76.
TrivediCGandhiBMichelCJ. Effect of transients on Francis turbine runner life: a review. J Hydraul Res2013; 51(2): 121–132.
77.
BakkenBHBjorkvollT. 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.
NilssonOSjelvgrenD. Hydro unit start-up costs and their impact on the short term scheduling strategies of swedish power producers. IEEE Trans Power Syst1997; 12(1): 38–44.
79.
XuYLiZLaiX. Dynamic model for hydro-turbine generator units based on a database method for guide bearings. Shock Vib2013; 20(3): 411–421.
80.
LucifrediAMazzieriCRossiM. Application of multiregressive linear models, dynamic kriging models and neural network models to predictive maintenance of hydroelectric power systems. Mech Syst Signal Process2000; 14(3): 471–494.
81.
XiaoHZhouJXiaoJ, 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 Reliability2014; 228(3): 291–300.
82.
VachtsevanosGLewisFLRoemerM, et al. Intelligent fault diagnosis and prognosis for engineering systems. Hoboken: Wiley, 2006.
83.
LianJLiHZhangJ. ERA modal identification method for hydraulic structures based on order determination and noise reduction of singular entropy. Sci China Ser E Technol Sci2009; 52(2): 400–412.
84.
ZhangLWuQMaZ, et al. Transient vibration analysis of unit-plant structure for hydropower station in sudden load increasing process. Mech Syst Signal Process2019; 120(79): 486–504.
85.
XueXSundararajanVGonzalez-ArguetaL. Sensor fusion for machine condition monitoring. Sens Smart Struct Technol Civ Mech Aerosp Syst2008; 6932(September): 69321D.
86.
WuGTongJZhangL, et al. Framework for fault diagnosis with multi-source sensor nodes in nuclear power plants based on a Bayesian network. Ann Nucl Energy2018; 122: 297–308.
87.
KedadoucheMThomasMTahanA. A comparative study between empirical wavelet transforms and empirical mode decomposition methods: application to bearing defect diagnosis. Mech Syst Signal Process2016; 81: 88–107.
88.
LiaoGPGaoWYangGJ, et al. Hydroelectric generating unit fault diagnosis using 1-D convolutional neural network and gated recurrent unit in small hydro. IEEE Sens J2019; 19(20): 9352–9363.
89.
ChengJWangLXiongY. An improved cuckoo search algorithm and its application in vibration fault diagnosis for a hydroelectric generating unit. Eng Optim2018; 50(9): 1593–1608.
90.
ChengJWangLXiongY. Cuckoo search algorithm with memory and the vibrant fault diagnosis for hydroelectric generating unit. Eng Comput2019; 35(2): 687–702.
91.
Mino-AguilarGMuñoz-HernándezGAGuerrero-CastellanosJF, et al. Alternative soft fault model of the cross-coupling effect correlated at hydroelectric power energy system. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst2014; 58: 274–280.
92.
Brito JuniorGCMachadoRDChaves NetoA. Using simplified models to assist fault detection and diagnosis in large hydrogenerators. Int J Rotating Machinery2017; 2017: 1–18.
93.
XuBYanDChenD, et al. Sensitivity analysis of a Pelton hydropower station based on a novel approach of turbine torque. Energy Convers Manag2017; 148: 785–800.
94.
XuBChenDBehrensP, et al. Modeling oscillation modal interaction in a hydroelectric generating system. Energy Convers Manag2018; 174(August): 208–217.
95.
XuBChenDPatelliE, et al. Mathematical model and parametric uncertainty analysis of a hydraulic generating system. Renew Energy2019; 136: 1217–1230.
96.
LiHChenDToloS, et al. Hamiltonian formulation and analysis for transient dynamics of multi-unit hydropower system. J Comput Nonlinear Dyn2018; 13(10): 1–10.
97.
FuWWangKLiC, 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 Technol2019; 30: 015012–016463.
98.
ZemouriRLevesqueMAmyotN, et al. Deep convolutional variational autoencoder as a 2D-visualization tool for partial discharge source classification in hydrogenerators. IEEE Access2020; 8: 5438–5454.
99.
BhattUXiangASharmaS, 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.
