Open AccessArticle
Life Damage Online Monitoring Technology of a Steam Turbine Rotor Start-Up Based on an Empirical-Statistical Model
by
Wenhe Liu, Baoguo Liang, Xuhui Wu, Mengmeng Yang, Zhihe Sun, Yucong Li, Mingze Yao, Zhanyang Xu and Feng Zhang
Technologies 2025, 13(9), 417; https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies13090417 (registering DOI) - 15 Sep 2025
Abstract
In order to achieve fast and accurate life damage online monitoring of the steam turbine rotor, it was significant to propose an empirical-statistical model using a machine learning algorithm instead of finite element simulation to improve the effect of operation. The finite element
[...] Read more.
In order to achieve fast and accurate life damage online monitoring of the steam turbine rotor, it was significant to propose an empirical-statistical model using a machine learning algorithm instead of finite element simulation to improve the effect of operation. The finite element method was used to calculate the maximum stress during the start-up schedule. The linear CDM (Continuum Damage Mechanics) and nonlinear CDM were applied to assess the creep-fatigue damage of the steam turbine rotor. A empirical-statistical model of a 600 MW steam turbine rotor was established by using temperature change rate and maximum stress according to the finite element result samples, which is proposed by compared R2 of SVR (Support Vector Regression), LSTM (Long Short-Term Memory) and RRM (Ridge Regression Method), which was also verified by finite element simulation under a random start-up parameters. The results showed that the creep-fatigue damage could be calculated by nonlinear CDM for more safety rather than linear CDM. The R2 of SVR (Support Vector Regression), LSTM (Long Short-Term Memory) and RRM were 0.9377, 0.9647 and 0.999, respectively. RRM was more suitable for the empirical-statistical model establishment of the steam turbine rotor. By comparing the empirical-statistical model result and finite element result under random parameters of the start-up schedule, the error is 0.51%.
Full article
►▼
Show Figures