Unveiling the crucial factors and coating mitigation of solid particle erosion in steam turbine blade failures: A review

Zainuddin, Nur Syahirah; Zamri, Wan Fathul Hakim W.; Omar, Mohd Zaidi; Din, Muhamad Faiz bin Md; Pauzi, Ahmad Afiq bin

doi:10.1515/rams-2025-0089

Figures & Tables

Rotor of the combined HP-IP and LP sections of a large impulse-type steam. Reproduced from Dick [9].

Number of publications for SPE between 2013 and 2023 based on Elsevier database.

The flowchart of literature used for the trend on SPE.

Common failure modes in steam turbine blades are depicted: (a) crack localization on last stage LP turbine blades, (b) fracture surface of rotor blade, (c) erosion on HP turbine rotor blade, (d) fractured blade failure in LP last stage, (e) pitting along the leading edge of turbine blade, (f and g) corrosion and fracture on blade surface, and (h) fracture surface of cracked steam turbine blade. Reproduced from [14,15,16,17,18,19].

Distribution of type failure in steam turbine blade from 2013 to 2023.

Erosion wear due to SPE. Reproduced from the study of Shitole et al. [36].

Comparative erosion rates of copper utilizing quartz, SiC, and alumina (d = 362.5 µm, v = 4 m·s−1, c
w = 10%). Source: by Shitole et al. [36]. — Comparative erosion rates of copper utilizing quartz, SiC, and alumina (d = 362.5 µm, v = 4 m·s−1, c w = 10%). Source: by Shitole et al. [36].

Compares SPE in steam turbine blades before and after modification using the particle trajectory method. (a) Original IP stage 1 SPE damage (6 years) and (b) modified IP stage 1 SPE damage (4 years). Source: from Chen et al. [43].

Key contributing factors to SPE on steam turbine blade [47].

Particle materials and shapes of SPE used in studies. (a) 500 µm sand [50], (b) 150 µm semirounded sand [36,51], (c) 300 µm sharp sand [36], (d) SiC [37], (e) quartz [36], (f) alumina [36], (g) 150 µm glass beads [51], (h) 50 µm Al2O3 [52], and (i) 50 µm SiO2 [52]. Reproduced from [36,37,50,51,52].

Optical photograph of typical erosion scar shape for uncoated and different coated specimens. Reproduced from Alajmi and Ramulu [83].

Erosion morphology of IN 738 coating at 700°C: (a and b) 30°, (c–e) 90° impact, and (f) EDX analysis. Source: by Padmini et al. [84].

Maximum erosion rates after cavitation erosion test. Source: Matikainen et al. [68].

Distribution of research on SPE factors in steam turbine blades (2013–2023).

Coating process distribution analysis for SPE (2013–2023).

Comparative analysis of coating effects on erosion behavior

Ref.	Application (component)	Coating process	Coating material	Substrate	Coating thickness	Erosive particle	Particle hardness	Particle flow rate	Particle size	Temp. erosion test	Impact speed	Angle	Erosive rate	Observation
[72]	Gas turbines (blade and vanes)	TBS and APS	YPSZ and YAG	Nickel superalloy (Rene80)	250–750 µm	Alumina	—	1.7 g·min⁻¹	400 mesh fine: D ₁₀ = 10 µm, D ₅₀ = 16.7 µm, D ₉₀ = 27.8 µm	1,000°C	60 ± 3 and 104 ± 5 m·s⁻¹	90°	0.06–4.86 mm³·g⁻¹	▪ Higher erosion rates at 90° compared to 30° impingement angles. Additionally, porous TBCs exhibited higher erosion rates at elevated temperatures
									150 mesh coarse: D ₁₀ = 70 µm, D ₅₀ = 126 µm, D ₉₀ = 198 µm
									150 mesh coarse: D ₁₀ = 70 µm, D ₅₀ = 126 µm, D ₉₀ = 198 µm					▪ A new bilayer coating with a unique microstructure showed promising erosion resistance, especially against fine particles. Double-layer TBCs exhibited varying erosion rates due to differences in solid particle resistance between layers
[65]	Steam turbine (turbines and boiler tubes)	APS and HVOF	WC-Cr₃C₂-Ni	Stainless steel 316 L	APS 345 mm, and HVOF 387 mm	Alumina	27 GPa	—	50 µm	500 and 650°C	—	30 and 90°	0.22 ± 0.06–1.60 ± 0.09 × 10³ (g·g⁻¹)	▪ The erosion resistance of WC-Cr₃C₂-Ni coatings, applied via APS and HVOF processes, was two to four times higher than that of uncoated specimens at elevated temperatures, with erosion rates for coated specimens being directly proportional to the impact angle
[65]	Steam turbine (turbines and boiler tubes)	APS and HVOF	WC-Cr₃C₂-Ni	Stainless steel 316 L	APS 345 mm, and HVOF 387 mm	Alumina	27 GPa	—	50 µm	500 and 650°C	—	30 and 90°	0.22 ± 0.06–1.60 ± 0.09 × 10³ (g·g⁻¹)	▪ Factors such as temperature, impact angle, material hardness, porosity, splat adhesion, decarburization, and inter-splat sintering influenced the erosion behavior, with hard carbides in the coatings contributing to their improved resistance compared to uncoated specimens
[93]	Gas turbine (turbine blades and vanes)	TBS and APS	CoNiCrAlY and YPSZ	Inconel 718	—	Alumina	—	13 g·s⁻¹	76.25 µm	25°C	27 m·s⁻¹	30° 60 and 90°	0.28–0.60 × 1,000 (mg·g⁻¹)	▪ The maximum erosion rates were observed at a 60° impingement angle, indicating a semi-ductile/semi-brittle erosion behavior
[93]	Gas turbine (turbine blades and vanes)	TBS and APS	CoNiCrAlY and YPSZ	Inconel 718	—	Alumina	—	13 g·s⁻¹	76.25 µm	25°C	27 m·s⁻¹	30° 60 and 90°	0.28–0.60 × 1,000 (mg·g⁻¹)	▪ The surface roughness values and topographies of the eroded specimens varied depending on the impingement angle, with deeper and wider erosion craters formed at a 60° impact angle
[94]	—	FCVA technique	TiN/Ti (MLG-TiN/Ti)	Ti6Al4V alloy	TiN/Ti (MLG-TiN/Ti) 10.35 mm to 10.81 mm and MLG-4 12.09 μm	Sand SiO₂	—	2 g·min⁻¹	100–300 μm	—	130 m·s⁻¹	45°	0.085–0.3 mg·g⁻¹	▪ The MLG-4 coating, with a thickness of 12.09 μm and composed of TiN layers, Ti layers, and gradient layers, exhibited the lowest erosion rate among both MLG-TiN/Ti and ML-TiN/Ti coatings
[94]	—	FCVA technique	TiN/Ti (MLG-TiN/Ti)	Ti6Al4V alloy	TiN/Ti (MLG-TiN/Ti) 10.35 mm to 10.81 mm and MLG-4 12.09 μm	Sand SiO₂	—	2 g·min⁻¹	100–300 μm	—	130 m·s⁻¹	45°	0.085–0.3 mg·g⁻¹	▪ MLG-TiN/Ti coatings demonstrated superior resistance to crack and erosion damage compared to ML-TiN/Ti coatings, with the latter showing a slight initial decrease in erosion rates before increasing with more layers, peaking at 0.085 mg·g⁻¹ for the four-layer variant
[77]	Steam turbine (blades and nozzles)	Arc ion plating (AIP)	TiN and TiAlN	12Cr steel	>20 μm	Alumina	20 GPa	—	300 µm	25, 600 and 700°C	50 m·s⁻¹	30 and 90°	—	▪ The TiAlN coating exhibited high-temperature stability, resistance to SPE, and maintained substrate material’s high-temperature fatigue and creep properties, making it suitable for steam turbine applications
[77]	Steam turbine (blades and nozzles)	Arc ion plating (AIP)	TiN and TiAlN	12Cr steel	>20 μm	Alumina	20 GPa	—	300 µm	25, 600 and 700°C	50 m·s⁻¹	30 and 90°	—	▪ It demonstrated excellent performance on steam turbine blades, with no delamination or chipping at the blade trailing edge, and retained high hardness at elevated temperatures, ensuring erosion resistance during operation
[78]	Steam turbine (blades)	Cathodic arc ion plating	Titanium Aluminum Nitride (TiAlN)	WC-Co WC -cobalt mix, and 17-4 PH stainless steel	5–10 mm	Alumina	20 GPa	—	40 µm	25°C	100 m·s⁻¹	90°	0.036–2.7 μm·min⁻¹	▪ The study found that TiAlN coatings with an aluminum ratio of up to 0.58 exhibited optimal erosion resistance. Coatings with higher aluminum ratios experienced accelerated wear due to structural changes. Coatings with balanced hardness and Young’s modulus showed slower wear
[8]	First-stage steam turbine (blade and rotor)	—	Ceramic	Metal	—	—	—	—	7.5, 15, 25, 40, and 75 µm	—	277–322 m·s⁻¹	20–35°	3.930 × 10⁻⁰⁰⁶ kg·(m⁻² s⁻¹)–1.332 × 10⁻⁰⁰³ kg·(m⁻² s⁻¹)	▪ The nozzle experiences minimal wear from 7.5 mm particles at 3.930 × 10⁻⁰⁰⁶ kg·(m⁻² s⁻¹), while the rotor blade faces significantly higher wear from 75 mm particles at 1.332 × 10⁻⁰⁰³ kg·(m⁻² s⁻¹)
[8]	First-stage steam turbine (blade and rotor)	—	Ceramic	Metal	—	—	—	—	7.5, 15, 25, 40, and 75 µm	—	277–322 m·s⁻¹	20–35°	3.930 × 10⁻⁰⁰⁶ kg·(m⁻² s⁻¹)–1.332 × 10⁻⁰⁰³ kg·(m⁻² s⁻¹)	▪ As particles increase in size, their movement shifts, causing more damage to steam turbine parts. Wear is most pronounced in the middle to back of the nozzle and the front edge and middle to back of the rotor blade, exacerbated by higher turbine speeds. Minimizing particle impact angles between 20 and 35° can prolong turbine lifespan and enhance performance
[95]	Jet engine (blade)	Environmental barrier coating EBC (PS-PVD)	Ytterbium disilicate (Yb2Si2O7)	SiC	225–275 µm	Alumina (Al₂O₃)	—	—	27, 60 and 150 µm	1,200°C	135 m·s⁻¹	30, 60, and 90°	10.72–21.75 mg·g⁻¹	▪ When particles hit at 90°, more coating material was lost compared to angles like 30°. The coatings’ initial surface roughness affected its rate of wear
[95]	Jet engine (blade)	Environmental barrier coating EBC (PS-PVD)	Ytterbium disilicate (Yb2Si2O7)	SiC	225–275 µm	Alumina (Al₂O₃)	—	—	27, 60 and 150 µm	1,200°C	135 m·s⁻¹	30, 60, and 90°	10.72–21.75 mg·g⁻¹	▪ The study examined the wear of a specialized coating under hot, engine-like conditions, finding its wear pattern similar to other engine coatings. Particle speed, angle of impact, and coating roughness were identified as factors influencing wear rate. Lower angles resulted in grooves or scars on the coating, contributing to its wear
[85]	Airplane (compressor blades, vanes, and impellor blisk wheels)	Cathodic arc deposition	CrAlTiN and AlTiN	17-4PH stainless steel	16–21 µm	Alumina (Al₂O₃)	—	1 g·min⁻¹	50 µm	25°C	84 m·s⁻¹	30 and 90°	76.4 mg·g⁻¹ and 164.1 mg·g⁻¹	▪ CrAlTiN coatings significantly outperformed basic CrN coatings in erosion resistance, with one type showing only 25 and 16% of CrN’s erosion rate at 30° and 90°, respectively; the multilayered CrAlTiN-AlTiN coating with 15 layers each exhibited the lowest erosion rates
[85]		Cathodic arc deposition	CrAlTiN and AlTiN	17-4PH stainless steel	16–21 µm	Alumina (Al₂O₃)	—	1 g·min⁻¹	50 µm	25°C	84 m·s⁻¹	30 and 90°	76.4 mg·g⁻¹ and 164.1 mg·g⁻¹	▪ Special thin-layered coatings were more effective than conventional CrN coatings in protecting engine parts from wear, with increased layer numbers enhancing strength and optimal protection achieved through precise layer composition
[34]	Turbomachinery (fans and compressor blades)	Plasma-enhanced magnetron sputtering	mix of chromium (Cr), silicon (Si), carbon (C), and nitrogen (N)	stainless steel 17-4 PH	20 µm	Alumina (Al₂O₃)	—	1.5 g·min⁻¹	50 µm	—	60 m·s⁻¹	30 and 90°	0.01–0.07 mg·g⁻¹	▪ Coatings with higher hardness and resistance to bending had lower erosion rates at shallow angles (30°), while those less brittle and more resistant to cracking performed better at steep angles (90°)
[34]	Turbomachinery (fans and compressor blades)	Plasma-enhanced magnetron sputtering		stainless steel 17-4 PH	20 µm	Alumina (Al₂O₃)	—	1.5 g·min⁻¹	50 µm	—	60 m·s⁻¹	30 and 90°	0.01–0.07 mg·g⁻¹	▪ The CrSiCN(2) coating, with lower brittleness, showed the lowest erosion rate at angles above 60°, indicating erosion rates vary based on impact angle and properties like hardness, brittleness, and cracking resistance
[96]	Steam turbine (blades)	HVOF and boride coating (solid power boronization)	Cr₃C₂, FeB, and Fe2B phases	Metal	—	Iron oxide, Fe₃O₄ and Fe₂O₃	5.5 Mohs scale	10 Nm³·min⁻¹	150 mesh size	811 and 839 K	210 or 350 m·s⁻¹	12, 24, 30, 36, 45, 60, 75, and 90°	0.01–2.70 mg·g⁻¹	▪ Boride coatings exhibit significantly lower erosion rates compared to HVOF Cr₃C₂ coatings, ranging from 30 to 50% under identical test conditions. Even at higher particle velocities (350 m·s⁻¹), boride coatings still demonstrate superior resistance, with erosion rates approximately 70% of those observed for HVOF Cr₃C₂ coatings
[86]	Gas turbine (Blade)	HVOF	Stellite-6, Alumina-CoCrAlTaY and Cr₃C₂-NiCrNiCrAlY	Titanium alloy (Ti-6Al-4V), Cobalt-based superalloy	—	Silica sand	880Hv	5 g·min⁻¹	125–180 µm	25°C	40 m·s⁻¹	30, 60, and 90°	(0.1–20 cm²·g⁻¹) × 10⁻⁵	▪ Stellite-6 showed superior resistance to wear at a 30° particle impact angle compared to other coatings tested, suggesting its effectiveness in mitigating damage
[86]	Gas turbine (Blade)	HVOF	Stellite-6, Alumina-CoCrAlTaY and Cr₃C₂-NiCrNiCrAlY	Titanium alloy (Ti-6Al-4V), Cobalt-based superalloy	—	Silica sand	880Hv	5 g·min⁻¹	125–180 µm	25°C	40 m·s⁻¹	30, 60, and 90°	(0.1–20 cm²·g⁻¹) × 10⁻⁵	▪ Erosion rates varied based on particle size and impact speed, with larger and faster particles causing more damage. Additionally, the impact angle influenced erosion rates, with coatings’ composition affecting resistance differently at low and high angles
[67]	Various industries (impeller blade)	APS	NiCr (Nickel Chromium) and Cr₃C₂	FV520B martensitic stainless steel,	15–45 μm and 45–75 μm	AluminaAl₂O₃	2,361 Hv	4 g·min⁻¹	7, 10, and 14 µm	25°C	240 m·s⁻¹	12, 45, 60, and 90°	0.3–1.6 mg·g⁻¹	▪ Coating erosion rates follow a pattern of initial increase and subsequent decrease with solid particle size increase, with maximum erosion rates at specific particle sizes relative to impact angles, indicating a variable range of erosion rates dependent on both factors
[67]	Various industries (impeller blade)	APS	NiCr (Nickel Chromium) and Cr₃C₂	FV520B martensitic stainless steel,	15–45 μm and 45–75 μm	AluminaAl₂O₃	2,361 Hv	4 g·min⁻¹	7, 10, and 14 µm	25°C	240 m·s⁻¹	12, 45, 60, and 90°	0.3–1.6 mg·g⁻¹	▪ NiCr-Cr₃C₂ coatings show varying resistance levels to particle-induced damage at different NiCr contents and impact angles, with increased NiCr content potentially compromising hardness but enhancing impact absorption, highlighting the need for optimized coating compositions based on impact angle and particle speed
[68]	Industrial applications.	HVOF and HVAF	Cr₃C₂-25NiCr Cr₃C₂-50NiCrMoNb Cr₃C₂-37WC-18NiCoCr WC-10Co4Cr	low carbon steel	—	Quartz sand (SiO₂)	—	25 g·min⁻¹	0.1–0.6 mm	ambient conditions	80 m·s⁻¹	30 and 90°	0.3–2.3 mm³·kg⁻¹	▪ Coatings with higher carbide content and microhardness exhibited lower erosion rates, particularly evident at a 90° impact angle, emphasizing resistance to particle penetration
														▪ Increasing carbide content reduced the difference in erosion rates between 30 and 90°, highlighting the significant impact of particle angle on material loss
														▪ HVAF demonstrated superior erosion resistance compared to HVOF indicating potential for increased durability against high-speed particle impacts
[81]	Gas turbines and other critical power generation components	APS	Cr₃C₂ and nickel-chromium (NiCr) composite	stainless steel SS 304-L and SS-316-L	150–250 µm	Alumina	15 GPa	30 g·min⁻¹	50 µm	23°C	—	45°	8.27–9.59 mm³·min⁻¹	▪ Enhanced coating S5 showed significantly lower erosion rates (8.27 mm³·min⁻¹) compared to the base coating S1 (10.06 mm³·min⁻¹), indicating increased erosion resistance
[81]	Gas turbines and other critical power generation components	APS	Cr₃C₂ and nickel-chromium (NiCr) composite	stainless steel SS 304-L and SS-316-L	150–250 µm	Alumina	15 GPa	30 g·min⁻¹	50 µm	23°C	—	45°	8.27–9.59 mm³·min⁻¹	▪ Incorporating hard particles like Cr₂O₃ and B₄C into Cr₃C₂-NiCr coatings improves wear resistance, with coatings containing a 10% weight fraction of Cr₂O₃ demonstrating superior performance, reduced wear rates, and enhanced resistance to abrasion
[69]	Industries steam turbine	HVOF	Mix SiC, WC, and Cr₃C₂ powders	AISI 304 stainless steel	240 µm	Silica sand	—	—	312 µm	25°C	—	—	—	▪ The erosive rate rises with longer exposure to particles, indicating increased material wear over time. SiC-WC-Cr₃C₂ multilayer coatings exhibit superior wear resistance compared to uncoated samples, effectively protecting the underlying material from erosion
[69]	Industries steam turbine	HVOF	Mix SiC, WC, and Cr₃C₂ powders	AISI 304 stainless steel	240 µm	Silica sand	—	—	312 µm	25°C	—	—	—	▪ The SiC-WC-Cr₃C₂ multilayer coating significantly enhances AISI 304 stainless steel hardness, increasing its resistance to high-speed particle wear. With longer exposure to erosive particles, both coated and uncoated samples exhibit increased material wear, but coated samples sustain less damage
[73]	Hardmetal coatings to protect components,	HVOF and HVAF	WC with cobalt and chromium and Cr₃C₂ with nickel and chromium	Low carbon steel (S235) and stainless steel (AISI 316 L)	—	Quartz sand	1,100 HV	—	0.1–0.6 mm	—	80 m·s⁻¹	30, 60, and 90°	0.3–1.8 mm³·kg⁻¹	▪ HVAF sprayed WC-10Co4Cr coatings exhibited significantly lower cavitation erosion rates (0.4 μm·h⁻¹) compared to HVOF sprayed coatings (1.5–3.7 μm·h⁻¹), highlighting HVAF effectiveness in reducing wear
[73]	Hardmetal coatings to protect components,	HVOF and HVAF		Low carbon steel (S235) and stainless steel (AISI 316 L)	—	Quartz sand	1,100 HV	—	0.1–0.6 mm	—	80 m·s⁻¹	30, 60, and 90°	0.3–1.8 mm³·kg⁻¹	▪ In slurry erosion tests with fine quartz sand (0.1–0.6 mm), both HVAF and HPHVOF sprayed WC-10Co4Cr coatings showed minimal volume losses, demonstrating high wear resistance, with HVAF coatings maintaining superior performance even with larger quartz particle sizes (2–3 mm)
[97]	Steam turbine blades	HVOF	Hard-metal layer of Cr₃C₂ with nickel chromium	304 stainless steels	300 µm	Alumina	—	150 g·min⁻¹	250 µm	25°C	keep constant	90°	—	▪ Coating erosion resistance decreases as the stoichiometry factor increases, with optimal erosion resistance observed at stoichiometry factors around 1 or lower, correlating with lower porosity and higher mechanical properties like hardness and toughness
[97]	Steam turbine blades	HVOF	Hard-metal layer of Cr₃C₂ with nickel chromium	304 stainless steels	300 µm	Alumina	—	150 g·min⁻¹	250 µm	25°C	keep constant	90°	—	▪ Adjusting oxygen and ethanol mix influences coating structure and performance, with stoichiometry factors below 1 leading to superior mechanical properties and erosion resistance, highlighting the importance of fuel mixture for high-quality coatings
[83]	—	Multiple graphene-based	Graphene-based materials H-146 and IA-700, Carbothane 134 HG	—	25, 75, 50,125 mm	silica sand (SiO₂)	—	0.067 g·s⁻¹	206 µm	—	20 m·s⁻¹	30–90°	0.001 × 10⁺⁰⁰–7.00 × 10⁻⁰⁵ g·g⁻¹	▪ Different coatings affect material wear rates differently, with H-146 graphene and multiple layers of polyurethane showing improved wear reduction, up to 19 and 38%, respectively
[83]	—	Multiple graphene-based		—	25, 75, 50,125 mm	silica sand (SiO₂)	—	0.067 g·s⁻¹	206 µm	—	20 m·s⁻¹	30–90°	0.001 × 10⁺⁰⁰–7.00 × 10⁻⁰⁵ g·g⁻¹	▪ Coating effectiveness is influenced by the angle of attack, erosion duration, and surface smoothness, highlighting the importance of these factors in providing protection against particle impact
[84]	Power generation industry (turbiine blade)	HPCS	Inconel 738	T11 boiler steel	126-9 µm	Alumina (Al₂O₃)	14 GPa	2 g·min⁻¹	50 µm	700°C	30 m·s⁻¹	30 and 90°	0.3–27 × 10⁻⁴ g·g⁻¹	▪ The study found that Inconel 738 coated specimens exhibit significantly lower erosion rates compared to uncoated T11 steel at 700°C, offering better protection against high-temperature erosion. Specifically, at 30 and 90° impact angles, the coating shows approximately three- and two-times higher erosion resistance, respectively, than T11 steel
[84]	Power generation industry (turbiine blade)	HPCS	Inconel 738	T11 boiler steel	126-9 µm	Alumina (Al₂O₃)	14 GPa	2 g·min⁻¹	50 µm	700°C	30 m·s⁻¹	30 and 90°	0.3–27 × 10⁻⁴ g·g⁻¹	▪ The erosion rate of coated specimens is higher at a 30° impact angle than at a 90° angle, indicating the angle’s influence on material wear

Comparison of coating processes for SPE resistance [79]

Aspect	HVOF	APS	PVD
Coating material	Metals, alloys, ceramics	Metals, alloys, ceramics	Metals, alloys, ceramics
Process temperature	Medium to high	High	Low to medium
Particle velocity	High	Medium	Low to medium
Adhesion strength	High	Medium	High
Coating thickness	Thick (100–500 μm)	Thick (100–500 μm)	Thin (1–10 μm)
Porosity	Low	Medium to high	Low
Surface finish	Rough	Rough	Smooth
Application	Wear and corrosion resistance	Wear and corrosion resistance	Hard coatings, decorative finishes
Advantages	Strong adhesion, dense coating	Versatile, can coat complex shapes	Excellent control over coating composition and thickness
Disadvantages	Equipment cost, surface roughness	Higher porosity, lower adhesion	Limited to line-of-sight deposition, higher cost
Effectiveness against SPE	High	Medium	Medium to high

Properties influencing SPE in steam turbine blades

		(a) Effect of velocity	(b) ImpiNgEment angle	(c) Substrate material		(d) Erosive particle			(e) Effect of temp.
Ref.	Aim of study	Impact speed (m·s⁻¹)	Angle	Substrate material	Substrate hardness (HV)	Erosive particle	Particle size (µm)	Particle flow rate	Temp.	Duration	Erosive rate	Erosive result
[36]	The study examines how different solid particles affect erosion on ductile materials using a slurry pot tester. Focusing on copper, it considers particle properties like shape and density at various angles, particularly when exposed to quartz, SiC, and alumina particles	5.50	30–90°	Copper	120	Quartz, SiC, and alumina	362.5	—	—	15–40 min	8–18 g·g⁻¹ × (10⁻⁸)	Maximum erosion occurred at shallow angles (30° for quartz and SiC, 22.5° for alumina). Particle angularity affected erosion rates, with higher angularity causing deeper craters and more mass loss. Dense and angular particles showed notably higher erosion rates, emphasizing the link between particle shape and erosion.
[37]	The study aimed to evaluate the SPE performance of AISI 304, 316, and 420 stainless steels. It assessed erosion behavior under varying impact angles and abrasive flow rates, identifying wear mechanisms and damage characteristics. Comparison of erosion resistance aimed to determine the most resistant material. Additionally, roughness changes on surfaces were analyzed using atomic force microscopy	24 ± 2	30, 45, 60, and 90°	AISI 304, 316, and 420	AISI 304: 160, AISI 316: 150, and AISI 420: 200–240	SiC	420–450	150 ± 0.5 g·min⁻¹	35 and 40°C	10 min	3.75 × 10⁻⁰⁴ g·g⁻¹–6.74 × 10⁻⁰⁵ g·g⁻¹	AISI 304 and 316 had higher erosion rates at 60°, while AISI 420 exhibited the highest erosion damage at 30°. AISI 420 displayed superior performance with ductile behavior, while AISI 316 and AISI 304 showed brittle behavior, reaching maximum erosion rates at 60°. Wear scars increased in size at lower impact angles (30 and 45°) and decreased at 60 and 90°, with elliptical shapes at 30 and 45°, and roughly circular shapes at 60 and 90°.
[49]	The study investigates salt particle behavior on steam turbine blades using computer models. Understanding particle formation, growth, aggregation, and dispersion aids in optimizing turbine efficiency and longevity by mitigating salt-induced damage	—	—	—	—	Salt (sodium chloride)	—	—	Superheated	Time step 8.9 × 10⁻⁷ s	—	The erosive rate is higher where the steam is more turbulent, which means where it’s moving in a more chaotic way, because this causes more collisions between the particles and the blades
[39]	The study aims to understand how small, hard particles cause damage to compressor blades, a major cause of failure. It employs a specialized computer model to analyze how factors like impact angle, particle speed, and size affect damage at varying temperatures. This aids in designing more durable compressor blades by predicting potential damage locations and patterns over time	75	15–75°	Titanium alloy Ti-6Al-4V	—	Alumina	80–120	—	298, 473, and 623 K.	4 h	0.1–0.3 mm³·g⁻¹	Erosive rate varies with impact angle, with the lowest rate at 15° and the highest around 42° at 298 K. Additionally, higher particle velocity correlates with faster erosion, with rates of 2.5 at 298 K, 2.8571 at 473 K, and 2.3333 at 623 K. Particle size also influences erosion, particularly evident at higher temperatures like 623 K.
[40]	The study identified AA7075-T651 aluminum as the most resilient to damage from small, hard particles on airplane wing fronts. Wear increases with faster particle speeds and peaks at a 30° angle. Computer simulations revealed a slight increase in wear when the wing part is turned 5°	70, 114, 165, 130, 192, and 250	30 and 60°	Aluminum alloys: AA2024-T351, AA6061-T651, and AA7075-T651	AA2024-T351: 120, AA6061-T651: 95, AA7075-T651: 145	SiC	106–150	5.8 g·cm⁻²	—	—	112.23–2940.25 mm³·kg⁻¹	A study found that AA7075-T651 aluminum was the most durable and showed the least wear when struck by small, hard particles on an airplane wing’s leading edge. In contrast, AA6061-T651 aluminum experienced the most wear. The wear increased with particle speed and was most pronounced at a 30° angle. SiC particles were used in the tests
[8]	▪ The study aims to comprehend the erosion caused by solid particles on critical components of a large steam engine, impacting efficiency and maintenance costs. Using computer simulations, researchers investigate the influence of particle size and engine part speed on wear, particularly in the control section. They seek to identify the most affected engine parts and understand the movement and impact of solid particles on these components	322	0–90°	—	—	—	7.5, 15, 25, 40 and 75	0.00024–0.06751 kg·s⁻¹	—	—	3.930 × 10⁻⁰⁰⁶ kg·(m⁻²s⁻¹)–6.755 × 10⁻⁰⁰⁴ kg·(m⁻²s⁻¹)	▪ The study found that smaller particles at smaller angles cause less damage, while larger particles at larger angles cause more erosion. A shaded area in the figure indicates the optimal erosion angle, where larger particles (75 µm) cause significant damage. Larger particles also lead to greater weight loss, with the back part of the blades experiencing the most erosion. Small particles (7.5 µm) have a low erosive rate of approximately 3.930 × 10⁻⁰⁰⁶ kg·(m⁻²s⁻¹), causing minimal damage, while large particles (75 µm) have a much higher erosive rate of around 6.755 × 10⁻⁰⁰⁴ kg·(m⁻²s⁻¹), resulting in rapid wear of turbine parts.
[48]	The study investigates the erosion of turbine blades made of 1Cr12W1MoV steel by tiny, high-speed particles. Researchers analyze how particle shape, size, and speed influence blade damage rates, aiming to enhance blade durability and performance in dusty environments	150, 210, and 350	24–30 and 45–60°	Martensitic steel 1Cr12W1MoV	—	Iron oxide	10–80	—	566°C	—	0.1–2.4 cm³kg ⁻¹	▪ Erosive rate rises with higher impact speeds. Flaky particles peak at 24°-30° angles, while spherical particles peak at 45°-60°. At 210 m·s⁻¹ impact speed, flaky particles reach maximum erosion within the 24°-30° range. At 350 m·s⁻¹, spherical particles exhibit slightly higher erosion rates than flaky ones. Erosive rates vary based on particle shape, size, impact velocity, and angle
[38]	The study investigated the impact of axial clearance on two aspects of a steam turbine: SPE rate and turbine efficiency. Researchers examined how altering the clearance affects blade wear and turbine performance	—	—	—	—	—	7.5, 15, 25, 40, and 75	0.00024–0.06751 kg·s⁻¹	593°C	—	0.0002043–0.001742 kg·m⁻²s⁻¹	▪ Blade erosion varies with the space between blades and other parts. A larger space reduces wear, lowering erosion rates by approximately 59.2%. The highest wear rate was 0.001742 kg·m⁻²s⁻¹ in a detailed simulation, while the lowest was 0.0002043 kg·m⁻²s⁻¹ in a simpler simulation.
[41]	The study aimed to analyze erosion on SS-316 steel caused by water-rock slurry impact, seeking optimal conditions to minimize damage in applications like power plants and engines	14.7 and 30.6	30–90°	Stainless steels (SS 316)	152	Sand (SiO₂)	<300	—	25°C	10 min	1.45–1.97 mg·min⁻¹	▪ At a 90° angle and 14.7 m·s⁻¹ velocity, erosion rates were 1.45 mg·min⁻¹ at 0.5% slurry concentration and slightly higher at 2.28%. At a 30° angle and 30.6 m·s⁻¹ velocity, erosion rate increased to 1.97 mg·min⁻¹ at 0.5% slurry concentration

Unveiling the crucial factors and coating mitigation of solid particle erosion in steam turbine blade failures: A review

Figures & Tables

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

Figure 9

Figure 10

Figure 11

Figure 12

Figure 13

Figure 14

Figure 15

Comparative analysis of coating effects on erosion behavior

Comparison of coating processes for SPE resistance [79]

Properties influencing SPE in steam turbine blades

Paradigm

My account