Article

Taxonomy of Gas Turbine Blade Defects

Jonas Aust and Dirk Pons *
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch 8041, New Zealand;
jonas.aust@pg.canterbury.ac.nz
* Correspondence: dirk.pons@canterbury.ac.nz; Tel.: +64-33-695-826

Received: 4 April 2019; Accepted: 17 May 2019; Published: 21 May 2019

Abstract: Context—The maintenance of aero engines is intricate, time-consuming, costly and has
significant functional and safety implications. Engine blades and vanes are the most rejected parts
during engine maintenance. Consequently, there is an ongoing need for more effective and efficient
inspection processes. Purpose—This paper defines engine blade defects, assigns root-causes, shows
causal links and cascade effects and provides a taxonomy system. Approach—Defect types were
identified from the literature and maintenance manuals, categorisations were devised and an
ontology was created. Results—Defect was categorised into Surface Damage, Wear, Material
Separation and Material Deformation. A second categorisation identified potential causes of Impact,
Environmental causes, Operational causes, Poor maintenance, Poor manufacturing and Fatigue.
These two categorisations were integrated with an ontology. Originality—The work provides a
single comprehensive illustrated list of engine blade defects, and a standardised defect terminology,
which currently does not exist in the aviation industry. It proposes a taxonomy for both engine blade
defects and root-causes, and shows that these may be related using an ontology.

Keywords: aero engine; blade defects; blade failure; gas turbine; NDI; NDT; MRO; ontology; visual
inspection

1. Introduction
The operation of modern gas turbines demands ever higher temperatures, pressures and
rotational speeds to increase power and improve efficiency [1]. This ultimately creates a strenuous
environment for engine parts, particularly engine blades. Those blades are subject to high stress
resulting from exposure to extreme operating conditions, such as high centrifugal loads, high
temperatures, high pressures and vibration [2–5]. Blade failure and severe damage to the engine and
airframe can be caused by each of those factors, and can even result in death of passengers [6]. Most
recently, a Southwest Airline flight ended in a fatal accident, when a broken fan blade initiated a
series of events that caused failure of the left engine and ultimately led to the death of a passenger
[7].
To prevent such aircraft accidents or incidents, engine maintenance is essential. This is crucial
for securing aircraft availability and passenger safety. Engine maintenance is provided by
maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) service facilities. They typically apply a reliability-centred
maintenance (RCM) methodology, whereby they seek to identify and manage failures to preserve the
technical functionality, and hence safety and airworthiness of the engine. Most defects that can lead
to failures are detected during maintenance inspection before any negative effects appear on flight
operations. Early failure detection ensures low engine failure rates during flight operation [2,8]. The
maintenance inspection is primarily by visual means [9–11]. The most rejected engine parts are blades
and vanes from compressor and turbine sections [8]. During engine maintenance, the first step of the
inspection process comprises that all blades are visually inspected for defects or indications of
damages. Borescopes are the most important optical aid to visually inspect the inside of the engine,

Aerospace 2019, 6, 58; doi:10.3390/aerospace6050058 www.mdpi.com/journal/aerospace

Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 2 of 35

which is otherwise inaccessible. It can be performed in-situ on-wing or at the MRO facility, followed
by complete disassembly of the engine module and on-bench piece part inspection, if any indication
for a surface defects or structural damage was found during the borescope inspection [12].
The inspector has to examine the blades and identify surface discontinuities, deviations or
anomalies, and quantify their intensity. In order to make a final decision on whether a part is
serviceable, repairable or has to be replaced, subsequent inspection steps are often required and
comprises other non-destructive testing (NDT) or inspection (NDI) methods. For example, infrared
thermography, magnetic particle, eddy current, ultrasonic, radiographic and penetrant inspection are
used to supplement visual inspection and to support detecting any subsurface flaws (e.g., inclusions,
micro cracks, etc.) that cannot be detected by pure visual means. Nonetheless, visual inspection
comprises the bulk of the defect-detection and initial quality inspections for engine repair.
After engine problems, such as compressor surge, unusual vibration or loss of performance,
visual borescope inspection is performed to determine whether the engine is to be dismantled from
the wing and sent to an MRO shop for more detailed inspection. Further, the findings of the induction
borescope inspection at the MRO shop determines whether or not to commit to a costly disassembly
of the engine. The maintenance of aero engines is intricate and time-consuming and even one
maintenance episode (shop visit) may be an appreciable proportion of the engine list price [10,13].
Consequently, there is an ongoing need for more effective and efficient inspection processes.
Engine blades and vanes are the most expensive and highly stressed parts, and thus the most
rejected parts during engine maintenance [8]. Engine vanes are similar to blades to the extent that
both have an airfoil design and are made out of similar materials and coatings [8]. Thus, the defects
found on engine vanes are identical to those on blades. For simplification, hereinafter the term ‘blade’
is used for both blades in the compressor and turbine section, and for turbine vanes.
The specific area under examination in this paper is the visual inspection of engine blades and
vanes. This paper focuses on defining engine blade defects, highlighting the differences between
them and providing a taxonomy system. Moreover, it proposes a method to link potential causes to
the defects, and show the inter-relationships and cascade effects. The main audience to whom the
work is directed are MRO service providers, but the results may also be applicable to engine
developers and accident investigators.

2. Background Literature

2.1. Defect Perspectives

In the aircraft maintenance discipline, the term ‘defect’ is used to represent a component failure
mode, which arises either from an intrinsic defect or an external event, and which becomes evident
over time.
Different people have different definitions of engine blade defects. For instance, a pilot would
describe a blade as defective when it has a negative impact on the aircraft operation and may have
led to engine failure, shutdown or damage.
From the perspective of an MRO, a defect is a damage that may or may not exceed the tolerances
set in the engine manual and may or may not be removed from service for repair or replacement. In
most cases, it is detected early enough to not compromise the function, failure resistance or safety of
the engine or aircraft yet. However, it may have resulted in operational variations, such as higher
fuel consumption due to deterioration of the airflow.
A defect that has been identified and assessed by an inspection, and where its magnitude is still
within specified limits (determined in the engine manual), is called an Acceptable Deferred Defect
(ADD), also referred to as a Carried Forward Defect (CFD).

2.2. Engine Blade Defects

There have been several studies in the literature investigating failures of gas turbine blades after
an incident or accident by applying metallurgical [2,6,14,15], mechanical [14,16] or chemical analysis
[17] or other analytical methods [3,4]. These investigations focus on specific engine blade stages
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 3 of 35

[2,3,15,17] or a single, often fractured blade [6,16] that caused the event to happen. Only a few
attempts have been made to analyse all possible failures of engine blades. This includes research by
Rao [4] and Carter [8], which takes different failure modes [8] and failure mechanisms [4] into
account, but does not further describe the defects. In fact, only a high-level overview of six failure
modes is presented. Some causes have been illustrated but not categorised or linked to a specific type
of defect [8].
More recently, a lexicon with typical damages to components of turbine engines has been created
[18]. This includes all defects that can be found on engines in general and therefore lists also defects
that do not apply to engine blades. By definition, a lexicon is in alphabetical order and contains a
brief description of each defect. The research by Laskowski presents the direct cause for the defect
only, but does not show the root-causes and how these interact and aggravate each other.
Aviation authorities, engine manufacturers and maintenance providers have created their own
documentation on engine defects. The ‘FAA Aviation Maintenance Technician Handbook’ [19]
provides a short list with 14 engine blade defects, which are listed in alphabetical order. This list is
incomplete and shows none or at the most only one cause for some but not all of the defects, even
though there are multiple causes that can potentially lead to the same defect. The defect description
is short and perfunctory, which makes it difficult to differentiate some of the defects from each other.
Pratt and Whitney uses a ‘Standard Practices Manual for Visual Inspection’ [20] and the ‘IAE
V2500 Maintenance Manual’ [21] that provide a similar list of defects. The list is more comprehensive
than the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) handbook as it contains all potential defects that can
be found on an aircraft. These defects are not limited to the engine but further include damages to
the airframe, landing gear, electronics and control units. When performing borescope inspection of
engine blades, most of the defects are not applicable.

2.3. Variability in Practices

Engine manufacturers and MRO service providers use different terminologies to describe the
same type of defect. Even within the same organisation different terminologies are used depending
on the purpose of communication. For instance, the engine operator is only interested in what caused
the damage to the engine as this determines whether the maintenance costs are covered by their
insurance. That is the case if a foreign object damages the engine, but the insurance is not reliable if
the cause can be traced back to an operational error, such as an overloaded aircraft. In contrast, an
MRO inspector needs more specific information about the defect to make a decision on the part
condition, that is, whether a part is to be repaired or replaced with a new one. Moreover, there is a
likelihood of confusion between cause and defect descriptions. For example, it was found that several
inspectors use the term ‘Overheated’ instead of ‘Burn’ and ‘Foreign Object Damage (FOD)’ instead
of ‘Crack’, ‘Nick’ or ‘Breaking’.
A precise defect description is often not possible due to other factors, such as the cleanliness or
discolouration of the part, the experience of the inspector and the limitation of visual inspection,
without additional inspection aids [22]. Additionally, some defects are closely related and only differ
in dimension, for example, their degree of depth, length or curve radius. This is the case for scratches,
scores and grooves. These all describe material deformation and removal by mechanical means but
differ in the degree of allowed damage and acceptable number of defects per (i) stage, (ii) engine
section and (iii) airfoil zones.
Beside nonconformities in terminology, there are defect definitions that contradict each other.
For example, there is inconsistency about whether material is removed and displaced [19] or only
displaced [21].
Experts disagree about whether or not the engine or certain parts shall be cleaned prior to visual
inspection [19]. One perspective is that indications of failure, such as cracks, may often be better
detectable as they are intensified by the deposits on the part. Other defects may be more apparent
when the deposits are removed, e.g., surface damage.
In summary, the classification systems for blade defects show a great deal of variability in the
types of defect and their description. There are also inconsistencies between lists.
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 4 of 35

2.4. Defect Categorisation and Representation

The literature review revealed that most studies present the defects in alphabetical order and do
not provide a categorisation system. Moreover, they analyse engine blade failures after a particular
event has occurred. There appears to be no existing work that systematically describes root-causes of
blade defects and the interrelations. Some initial work in this direction is [8], but there is a need to
provide a more comprehensive treatment. This is worth doing for the potential to assist the
consistency and robustness of the maintenance activity. This is the motivation behind the present
study.

3. Methodology

3.1. Purpose
The purpose of this research was to identify defects on aero engine blades, assign possible root-
causes, show their inter-relationships, causal links and cascade effects and present it in a coherent
manner.

3.2. Approach
Our approach was to identify all defects on aero engine blades that can be found during visual
inspection only. The procedure is shown in Figure 1. First, we examined the open literature on engine
defects and failures, with a particular focus on engine blades. Additionally, we reviewed engine and
maintenance manuals from engine manufacturers, such as Pratt and Whitney, Rolls Royce and
International Aero Engine (a multinational joint venture engine consortium). Part of the literature
review was also the examination of handbooks published by aviation authorities, such as the Federal
Aviation Administration.
Then, we integrated our findings in an initial single comprehensive defect list. This list was
further enhanced by our own insights gained from observation and personal communication with
industry experts. For greater clarity and ease of understanding, we added our own defect images,
taken during visual inspection of engine blades at an MRO facility.
Next, we evaluated different classification systems and categorised the defects based on the type
of damage. The defect categories include ‘Surface Damage, Wear, Material Separation and Material
Deformation’.
In parallel, we developed a second categorisation of potential causes grouped by the nature of
the root cause from the operator perspective (e.g., hail, ice, rain, etc.), as well as by similar defect
consequence for the blade (equi-finality). This list includes such items as ‘Environmental Impact,
Operational Failure and Fatigue’.
Finally, we assigned the causes to the resulting defects. This was challenging as causes can lead
to one or multiple defects, resulting in a complex intertwined network. The goal was to present it in
an integrated and coherent manner. As there are multiple categorisations, we applied the ontology
methodology to develop a logical representation structure. The benefit of an ontology is to visually
present the relationships between different defects, causes and contributing factors in an appealing
and easy-to-absorb way. In comparison to other causal mapping tools, such as cause–consequence
diagrams, an ontology is able to show cross-links not only between cause and consequences, but also
within the same class, that is, between a cause and another one, as well as between different types of
defects [23,24]. Another benefit of the ontology is that it provides means of knowledge storage in a
computer readable way [25]. No application of ontologies to blade defects is apparent in the literature.
The specific ontology software used was ‘Protégé’ [26].
Ontologies have a wide range of applications and have been successfully applied to measure
health and safety risks [27], engineer healthcare and workforce management systems [28], develop
software server architectures [29] and emergency event models [30], as a database for gene clustering
[31], and to represent multimedia data [32]. No application of blade defects is apparent in the
literature.
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 5 of 35

Figure 1. Research approach.

4. Results

4.1. Blade Defect List and Taxonomy

Defects on engine blades were identified based on the existing literature and engine manuals.
The initial result was an unstructured collection of defect terminologies with duplicated information,
that is, different terms describing the same type of defect. These terminologies are labelled ‘equally
used terms’ and can be used interchangeably.
To structure our defect collection, we looked into a possible classification system. There are
several ways of categorising defects, corresponding to the lenses or perspectives of the audiences, as
shown in Table 1. Each of them is valid and used for different purposes. For example, for investigators
of an incident or accident, it is essential to know the root-cause and how such an event can be
prevented in the future. In contrast, an MRO facility is interested in the location within the engine
where the defect is most likely to occur, to identify parts needing to be replaced and therefore to be
purchased.
Existing categorisations tend to focus on only one such perspective. We propose that a holistic
categorisation may require the following attributes:
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 6 of 35

Table 1. Damage attributes.

Class Damage Attribute Description

A Damage type Surface damage, wear, material separation, material deformation.
B Influence Thermal influence, mechanical influence and chemical influence [33].
C Result of Production faults, improper repair or operational errors [3,34].

D Consequences Reduced fatigue life, engine blow-ups, engine shutdown, increased fuel
consumption due deterioration of airflow and efficiency, etc.
E Engine section Low-pressure turbine (LPT), Low-pressure compressor (LPC), High-pressure
turbine (HPT), High-pressure compressor (HPC), combustion chamber [35].
F Location on part Blade zones (A, B, C), blade side (convex or concave), edge (leading or tailing).
G Serviceability Non-serviceable/non-repairable, repairable/serviceable.
H Detectability Grouped by the amount of disassembly and non-destructive testing (NDT) or
inspection (NDI) detection technology required during maintenance
procedures [13].
I Severity Allowable damage (may go undetected), damage detected by scheduled or
directed field inspections at specified intervals, obvious damage detected
within a few flights, discrete source damage immediately known by pilot to
limit flight manoeuvres, severe damage created by anomalous ground or flight
events (that are outside design considerations) [36].
J Damage location ‘External and internal surface damage (corrosion, oxidation, cracks, erosion,
etc.) and internal damage of microstructure (phase coarsening or rafting, grain
growth, grain boundary creep voiding, carbide precipitation and phase
formation)’ [2].
K Frequency General indication of likelihood of occurrence, common/rare, or conditional
probability.

While the above may be ideal, for the purpose of this paper we only adopted the first attribute,
that of damage type. The other attributes are left for potential future work. We then further refined
that category. Four main damage categories were identified:
• Surface damage: Surface damages describes deviations from the nominal surface, such as
roughness, waviness, lay and flaws [20]. This may include material separation and/or loss
of base material or coating [19,21]. It is often aggravated by high air temperature, humidity,
moisture and contaminated environments, such as salt from sea or de-icing treatments. [8]
• Wear: The material removal from the part by mechanical means is called wear [20]. This can
be caused by foreign object impact, such as grit, sand or ground debris [37,38].
• Material separation: This describes a condition whereby material is split but not removed.
An example for this damage are cracks. Material separation is often caused by foreign object
impact [38] and operational means leading to overheating or loss of cooling [20].
• Material deformation: Material deformation is notable by significant change of the original
contour of the part. The deformation can be caused by mechanical or thermal means [21].
We propose that potential causes vary for different types of defects. For example, we divided
‘Corrosion’ further into three subcategories, namely oxidation, pitting and sulfidation.
The resulting categorised defects are listed in Table 2. We informally validated this list by
discussion with expert maintenance practitioners. This list is considered to be comprehensive for all
engine blades, independent of the blade type, engine model and manufacturer. A detailed description
of each defect is provided in Appendix Table A1.
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 7 of 35

Table 2. Engine Blade Defects categorised by the Type of Damage.

Blade Defect List

1. Surface Damage (Material separation and/or loss)
1.1. Corrosion
1.1.1. Oxidation
1.1.2. Pitting
1.1.3. Sulfidation
1.2. Burns
1.3. Blistering
1.4. Erosion
1.4.1. Guttering
1.5. Deposits (No material separation or loss, but additional particles on surface)
2. Wear (Material removal)
2.1. Abrasion
2.2. Gouge
2.3. Groove
2.4. Score
3. Material separation
3.1. Chipping
3.2. Crack
3.3. Breaking
3.4. Nick
3.5. Tear
4. Material Deformation (Change of contour)
4.1. Bent
4.2. Bow
4.3. Bulge
4.4. Burr
4.5. Battered
4.6. Creep
4.7. Curl
4.8. Dent
4.9. Peening
4.10. Scratch
4.11. Waviness

4.2. Six Main Categories of Causes

Potential causes were collected based on literature, e.g., [8,39], aviation authority documents
[19,38,40] and aircraft manufacturer [37]. There is a myriad of potential items that can cause a defect,
and such lists, including our own, tend to lose coherence as more items are added. Single lists scale
poorly as they grow. Therefore, a second classification system, orthogonal to the first, was introduced
to represent the causes. This groups the items based on their nature and effect of the cause, i.e., similar
items that lead to the same defect were grouped together.
We propose that six main cause categories are sufficient: Impact, Environmental causes,
Operational causes, Poor maintenance, Poor manufacturing and Fatigue. The structured cause list is
shown in Table 3.
The completeness of this list is limited to the second level as the number of items (causes) in
lower levels would increase considerably and would go beyond what can be communicated in this
paper. A few items were listed for the third level as representative of similar items. For example,
‘Left-behind Items’ represents everything in or close to the air-intake that can become FOD when
inadvertently left behind. This includes but is not limited to such items as aircraft and engine
fasteners, personal belongings, catering supplies, cabin cleaning, baggage, cargo, coins or operation
vehicles, which are not listed individually [38,41]. The exceptions are maintenance tools and
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 8 of 35

equipment [37] that are left behind during maintenance tasks, which are instead listed in the ‘Poor
Maintenance’ section.

Table 3. List of Potential Causes.

Potential Causes
1. Impact
1.1. Foreign Object Damage (FOD)
1.1.1. Grit
1.1.2. Fine sand
1.1.3. Dust
1.1.4. Ground debris
1.1.5. Left-behind items
1.2. Known Object Damage (KOD)
1.2.1. Broken off pieces from upstream engine parts
1.2.2. Abrasion from worn parts
1.3. Organic
1.3.1. Birds
1.3.2. Wildlife
1.4. Weather
1.4.1. Ice
1.4.2. Hail
2. Environmental
2.1. Intake air contaminants
2.1.1. Polluted air
2.1.2. Volcanic ash
2.1.3. Deposited salts from sea or runway de-icing
2.1.4. Agricultural chemicals
2.1.5. Moisture
2.2. Accelerated by:
2.2.1. Warm air temperatures
2.2.2. Acids
3. Operational
3.1. Overheating
3.1.1. Abnormal flame pattern
3.1.2. Incorrect burning process
3.1.3. Lack of lubrication
3.1.4. Improper clearance
3.1.5. Complex thermal and mechanical loads
3.1.6. Overload
3.1.7. Heavy landings
3.1.8. Turbulences
3.1.9. Compressor surge
3.1.10. Aggressive environment
3.2. Loss of cooling
3.2.1. Blocked cooling passages
3.2.2. Blockage or malfunction of the cooling airflow
3.3. Sulphur deposits
3.3.1. Sulphurous jet fuel
3.3.2. Sulphur oxides from combustion or airborne salts
3.4. Damaged bonding caused by:
3.4.1. Aggressive gases
3.4.2. Pressure
3.4.3. Excessive heat
3.5. KOD as by-products of operation
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 9 of 35

3.5.1. Excessive oil burn

3.5.2. Carbon particles
3.5.3. Particles of ceramic thermal barrier coatings
3.5.4. Fuel (ash content)
3.5.5. Particles resulting from wear
3.6. Vibrations
3.6.1. Improper operation
3.6.2. Hard landing
3.7. Aggravated by massive air flow
3.7.1. Hot gases
3.7.2. Corroding liquids
3.7.3. Dirt-laden oil
3.7.4. Turbulences
4. Poor Maintenance
4.1. Improper assembly or disassembly
4.2. Careless handling of part or tools
4.3. Left behind hand tools or parts in engine
4.4. Disregard of (inspection) procedures
4.4.1. Use of prohibited metallic pencils (for markings)
4.4.2. Missed tip clearance check
4.4.3. Not performed or improper repair
4.5. Use of corrosive agent
4.5.1. Fire extinguisher agents
5. Poor Manufacturing
5.1. Improper bond
5.2. Incomplete bonding
5.3. Defective coating
5.4. Internal stresses (from machining)
5.5. Defective (raw) material (This could be a material defect, e.g., wrong alloy, composition,
microstructure or inclusions, or a faulty process, such as casting or forging or heat treatment.)
5.6. Missed or improper deburring after machining
6. Fatigue
6.1. Random stress fluctuations
6.2. Stress concentrations
6.3. Surface finish
6.4. Residual stresses
6.5. High cycle fatigue
6.6. Thermal fatigue
6.7. Life time of part exceeded
6.8. Shorten lifecycle caused by operational means

4.3. Integrated Cause–Defect Relationship

The inter-relations were then identified and the causes assigned to the defects. Identification of
the cause–defect relationship was done by analysis of the research literature, discussion with expert
maintenance practitioners, reference to the maintenance manuals [19–21] and general engineering
principles. Hence, this set of relationships has a degree of validation, and provides a sufficient
representation of the complexity of the real situation.
The links and inter-relations are complex. This is because a defect can result from multiple
causes, and a cause can lead to multiple defects. Furthermore, a defect can cause another defect in
combination with other factors that aggravate and accelerate the defect development. It is possible to
show cascade failures using this tabular data, as shown in the next section.
However, we do not claim that the list is perfectly comprehensive, nor entirely validated. It
merely represents what is commonly known about the cause–defect relationship. While it may be
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 10 of 35

ideal that each of these relationships be verified, that would require new research and a changed level
of record-keeping in the industry (see Discussion). Nor have we addressed the other ‘Damage
Attributes’ identified above. Nonetheless, in principle, such additional data could be added to the
table as additional fields.
The cause–defect list is believed to be adequate for the maintenance audience since it was
validated in that field, but we caution that it may not be sufficiently exhaustive for the accident
investigation audience.
This tabular representation of cause–defect relationships is a key output of this paper. There
appears to be no comparable list in either the research or practitioner literature. The full list is shown
in Table A1. An extract from that list is shown in Table 4 below.

Table 4. Extract of Cause–Defect List. For full list see Table A1.

German Defect Source of

Defect Synonym Cause Image
Translation Description Cause
Breaking • Broken • Bruch Complete Resulting from Cracks, nicks,
• Breakage • Abbruch separation of a pre-existing dents, notches
• Break-off • Fraktur blade into two or defects often
• Fracture more large-sized in combination
• Cut pieces by external with:
• Burst force or internal 1. Impact 1.1. FOD
• Rupture stresses. Different 1.2. KOD
defects, such as 1.3. Organic
cracks, nicks, Impact
dents and notches, Broken-off
HPC blade
often precede and 2. Fatigue 2.1. Thermal or
lead in mechanical
combination other creep
causes to material
separation and a 3. Operational 3.1. Stresses
broken engine caused by
blade. heat
3.2. Sudden
overload

4.4. Representing Defect Development with an Ontology

Blade defects are often caused by occurrence and a combination of different damage
mechanisms, such as fatigue, creep, corrosion, erosion, sulfidation, foreign object damage and
vibration [2]. For example, a foreign object impact, such as a bird, can cause a nick that breaks the
material flow and concentrates stresses, which initiates the development of a crack. The crack in turn
can result in material lift-up or breaking away of a significant piece of the blade.
This chain of defect development can be further accelerated and aggravated by several factors, such
as environmental conditions, fuel quality, operating settings, cyclic loads and engine and
maintenance history. In the case of crack development, contributing factors include salty air and
vibrations, whereby hail could be the initiator for the breaking of blade material. This type of defect
development is unable to be represented by simple lists.
The inter-relations, causal links and cascade effects lead to a complex network of defects and
causes. This is difficult to visualise. We applied an ontological method to express this complex
network of information. The ontology provides a rich conceptual framework that allows causes to be
assigned to defects in a systematic and coherent process.
We used Web Ontology Language (OWL) and Protégé software to build a knowledge base and
express relationships, hierarchies and object properties, and applied mapping analysis to visualise
the network. The ontology was developed based on the cause–defect table as shown in Table A1. For
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 11 of 35

the purpose of this paper, and to avoid an overloaded ontology, we only mapped causes up to the
second level. However, in the software, the ontology can be fully expanded to show all details and
inter-relations.
A simplified extraction of the ontology explaining the above case scenario is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Extract from the ontology.

In rare, but possible cases the effects can even flow upstream and damage upstream engine
sections. This can be seen in burned-out engines, whereby a broken-off compressor blade gets
shredded and the small titanium pieces catch fire, which ignites an upstream blade fire.
The full ontology mapping is shown in Figures 3 and 4.
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 12 of 35

Figure 3. Full ontology without causation links. See supplementary materials for full resolution
image.
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 13 of 35

Figure 4. Ontology with second-level causation links. See supplementary materials for full resolution
image.
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 14 of 35

5. Discussion

5.1. Summary of Outcomes

This work makes several novel contributions. First, it provides a single comprehensive collection
of engine blade defects. This may support standardisation and enable ease of communication by
providing a defect definition and description. This list summarises different terminologies for the
same defect and provides a German translation. This may be helpful for the avoidance of confusion
as many engine manufacturers and MRO service providers are based in Germany.
Second, we proposed a new classification system for both engine blade defects and root-causes.
The defects were categorised based on the type of damage, and the causes based on their nature and
resulting damage. These two categorisations were combined into a blade defect–cause taxonomy.
This appears to be the first systematic taxonomy for blade defects based on the type of damage. In
contrast, existing literature [18], engine manuals [20,21] and aviation handbooks [19] list the defects
alphabetically, which of course is language-specific.
Third, the defects are described in more detail than previous publications. This has the potential
to enable a better understanding, and distinguish different defects from another. Furthermore, in
addition to the defect description, a representative image was taken for each defect and added to the
list. This helps to better retrieve visually the differences between the defects, and may be useful for
MRO quality systems.
Fourth, we applied an ontology to link the potential causes to the defects and show the inter-
relations, causal links and cascade effects. This represented the complex relations and interactions
between defects, causes and temporal progression of events. This has potential to support aircraft
engine inspectors to guide their maintenance tasks, as well as investigators to identify the root-causes
after a defect leads to severe damage.

5.2. Implications for Practitioners

The defect list offers a precise definition and description of visually detectable damages. The
taxonomy of blade defect-causes may be practically useful because it offers a standardised defect
terminology, which currently does not exist in the industry. This has the potential to support MRO
quality systems, reduce confusion between different defects, avoid confounding defects with causes
and provide a common technical communication language between different departments, suppliers,
manufacturers, maintenance providers and customers. An example of a possible practical use of the
taxonomy by the MRO industry could be to provide the basis for training maintenance staff to
understand the differences between various defects. This is a key factor in quality systems,
minimisation of non-value-added time and responsiveness to clients.
The taxonomy could be applied in other ways too. It may be of relevance when investigations
are performed to find the root-cause after an aircraft incident or accident. If the defect is known, then
the ontology could reveal all potential causes and cascading effects that may have led to the defect.
Another potential application is for the ontology to be used as an inspection support tool to
analyse engine and maintenance history for unexpected events. For example, if it were known that
an engine had suffered a bird ingestion, then the ontology could be interrogated to identify the
possible defects. This may support the inspection task by guiding the worker during the inspection
process, and help prioritise such inspections as may be necessary to determine the health of the
engine.

5.3. Limitations of the Work

This work has several limitations. First, the depth of causation is limited to the second level as
shown in Figure 3. This is also the reason why the links in the ontology between causes and defects
were only displayed to the second level of causation (Figure 4). The third level is only representative
as there are, for example, hundreds of objects that may cause a dent. We felt it was not useful to list
all those items, which only results in a massive ontology. Likewise, we did not further split up root-
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 15 of 35

causes in subcategories. For example, for bird ingestion, we did not differentiate between say a
sparrow and an albatross as the expected type of defect remains the same; only the extent of damage
increases with increasing size of the ingested item.
The second limitation is that the defect list has been created for visual inspection only. It does
not include any defects or damages that can be detected by applying other NDT methods commonly
used in aviation maintenance, such as ultrasonic, radiography, eddy current, three-dimensional (3D)
laser or infrared thermography [42].
The third limitation is that even though the ontology can show all potential causes and loops of
causalities, it cannot describe to what extent each factor contributes towards the defect. Likewise, the
likelihood is not shown. This is due to the lack of data and limitations of the ontology itself.

5.4. Limitations of the Ontological Approach

It was interesting to apply the ontological approach to the problem of turbine blades. The
ontology was successful in representing the convolution of the two categories, defect versus cause.
This is a difficult situation to represent due to the many-to-many causalities, and the temporal and
cascade effects. However, ultimately, we were dissatisfied with the ontology, because of the intrinsic
limitations of the method, or perhaps of the software. There are multiple limitations. The first is that
the ontology cannot handle mathematic calculations or probability representation. This is because
the OWL is based on first-order logic and does not have any inherent mechanisms for logic [43].
Moreover, the ontology cannot express logical gates, which is relevant to define whether one or
multiple causes or conditions must be present before a damage may occur. It is therefore not possible
to differentiate between a cause that lead to a defect on its own, and contribution factors that only
accelerate the defect development but cannot cause the defect independently.
Second, the ontology does not provide an easy mechanism for forward or backward chaining,
which is needed for the prediction and diagnosis activities. A related limitation of the ontology is its
limited export options. We could not find software, such as an expert system, that was able to further
process the data without additional extensive code writing.
Third, the ontology provides a limited user interface for inserting and extracting data. In the
present work, the ontology is not fully automated; instead, it requires manual input via a spreadsheet
and manual knowledge extraction via the ontology graph. The manual nature of the interaction
creates the risk that the ontology sets the focus on the most likely defect. In some cases, this might
not be the present or only defect that occurred. It is important to understand the ontology as a support
tool and not as a means to skip the inspection for any other defect type. Consequently, the ontology
approach is not yet robust enough that it could be given to maintenance technicians to use.

5.5. Implications for Further Research

A number of possible lines of further research are suggested.
In principle, this work is expandable to other parts of gas turbine engines, such as annulus fillers,
cases, discs, rotors, air seals, bearings, shafts, drums, liners, fuel nozzles and ducts. It is conceivable
that the introduced defect list and ontology is further applicable to other industries where turbines
with blades are deployed, such as marine craft propulsion [4], steam or hydropower generation
[44,45] and even wind power systems [46,47]. The work was developed for the aviation maintenance
industry, in particular for the visual inspection of gas turbine engine blades, but it may be possible
to apply more widely.
Another potential research question would be to extend the taxonomy to include likelihoods of
causes and defects. Engine data of unexpected events are available, but there are several limitations
with assigning frequencies to different defects. One of the challenges with this is the need to collect
more precise data. At present, MRO shops do collect information, such as how many engines had an
engine visit due to FOD. However, current industry practices tend not to differentiate the
subcategories of defect, e.g., between a nick, dent, breaking, etc. Similarly, the data on where the
defect occurred are not commonly recorded, e.g., where on the blade edge or zone on the airfoil.
Another limitation is that only direct causes, if any, are reported unless the blade defect caused an
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 16 of 35

incident or accident and a root-cause investigation is performed. However, as those events are
relatively rare, there is not much data available and this makes it difficult to assign probabilities to
root-causes and contribution factors. The data gathering is further complicated by a manual data
extracting process from several databases, making it a search-intensive and time-consuming task.
Consequently, the quantification of likelihoods would require (a) adoption of a common taxonomy
of defects, and (b) changes in MRO practices to defect recording. The current work offers a solution
to the first part, and hence it is not impossible that progress may be made on the quantification issue.
For the practical applicability and further enhancement of the system, we recommend the collection
of sufficient defect data in collaboration with industry experts. Frequencies would need to be
assigned to each cause and defect, as well as the associated defect location on the airfoil.
There is also potentially a computer science research strand. We have shown that ontologies
provide an option for storing a knowledge base. However, the ontology prototype revealed that there
are many limitations. The pressing need is for inclusion of an expert system. Several researchers have
explored the feasibility of an ontology-based expert system for ‘pest and disease management’
[48,49], ‘analysis of coffee beans’ [50], ‘suspicious transactions detection’ [51], ‘process planning’ [52],
‘product consultation’ [53], ‘financial rating’ [54] and ‘medical diagnosis’ [55–57]. For the
development of an expert system, we recommend to first determine the data properties and
restrictions and create rules using Semantic Web Rule Language (SWRL). The rules need to be added
to the ontology and support complex mathematical expressions. Next, a semantic reasoner, that is
Hermit, Pellet, Racer, Jess, etc. [51] might be used to evaluate the rules for consistency and derive
new, non-explicitly expressed knowledge [51,58]. Last, an easily accessible user interface needs to be
developed to query information from the ontology. The user interface could be in form of a web-
based homepage or offline application programmed in C++, Java, HTML, Visual Basic, etc. [49,58,59].
A final research suggestion is the development of an automated inspection support tool.
Research could explore the potential of a smart inspection system, whereby the defects are
automatically detected, evaluated, and appropriate maintenance actions proposed based on the
inspection findings and historical data of the engine. It may be possible to use artificial intelligence
(AI) for the image processing, and then an expert-system ontology for the logical processing. Ideally,
this would also have access to quantitative data on defect likelihood. This could potentially improve
the inspection and parts procurement process, enable early determination of the level of disassembly
and required repair actions, reduce engine downtime and ultimately reduce costs for both the MRO
provider and airline.

6. Conclusions
This paper defines engine blade defects, assigns root-causes, shows causal links and cascade
effects and provides a taxonomy system. Defect types were identified from the literature and
maintenance manuals, and categorised into Surface Damage, Wear, Material Separation and Material
Deformation. A second categorisation identified potential causes of Impact, Environmental causes,
Operational causes, Poor maintenance, Poor manufacturing and Fatigue. These two categorisations
were integrated with an ontology.
The work provides a single comprehensive illustrated list of engine blade defects, and a
standardised defect terminology, which currently does not exist in the industry. It proposes a
taxonomy for both engine blade defects and root-causes, and shows that these may be related using
an ontology.
This has potential to support aircraft engine inspectors to guide their maintenance tasks, as well
as investigators to identify the root-causes after a defect may lead to severe damage.
Several potential research directions are suggested whereby the principles established here
might be enhanced and developed into a smart inspection support tool with the potential to optimise
visual inspection processes, thereby contributing positively to maintenance planning and
procurement and quality.
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 17 of 35

Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at www.mdpi.com/xxx/s1, Figure S1: Ontology
without causation links, Figure S2: Ontology with second-level causation links, File S3: Ontology OWL file.

Author Contributions: J.A. and D.P. conceptualised the overall framework. The data collection, categorization
and visualisation was undertaken by J.A. Supervision and project direction was provided by D.P. The original
draft was written by J.A. and all authors contributed to the subsequent editing and review.

Funding: This research project was funded by the Christchurch Engine Centre (CHCEC), a maintenance, repair
and overhaul (MRO) facility based in Christchurch and a joint venture between the Pratt and Whitney (PW)
division of United Technologies Corporation (UTC) and Air New Zealand (ANZ).

Acknowledgments: We sincerely thank staff at the Christchurch Engine Centre for their support and providing
insights into visual inspection and blade defects. In particular, we want to thank Tim Coslett, Marcus Wade,
Jamie Murray, Matthew Austin, and Blair Robertson.

Conflicts of Interest: J.A. was funded by a PhD scholarship through this research project. The authors declare
no other conflicts of interest.
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 18 of 35

Appendix A: Root-Cause and Defect List

The defect definitions originate from different engine and maintenance manuals [20,21] and aviation authority documents [19,36,38].

Table A1. Full root-cause and defect list.

Equally Used German

Defect Description Potential Causes Sources of Cause Image
Terms Translation

1. Surface Damage Surface texture • Oberflächen- Deviations from the nominal surface, such as waviness,
beschädigung roughness, lay and flaws [60]. May include material
separation and/or loss of material or coating.

1.1. Corrosion - • Korrosion Definition: 1. Environmental 1.1. Intake air contaminants

Slow deterioration of part surface or its coating by a chemical 1.1.1. Pollution and soot from
or electrochemical reaction with atmospheric or hot gas industry or forest fires
contaminants in the working environment. Parts made of 1.1.2. Volcanic ash
aluminium and high strength alloys, as well as some stainless 1.1.3. Salt deposits from sea
steels can corrode when exposed to tensile stresses [18]. air or de-icing treatments
[17]
1.1.4. Agricultural chemicals
1.2. Accelerated by:
1.2.1. Warm temperatures
1.2.2. Salts Corrosion pitting and decolourisation
of LPT stage 4 vane
1.2.3. Acids

2. Poor Maintenance 2.1. Carbon alloy or

metallic pencils (used for
markings)
2.2. Corrosive agent
2.2.1. Fire extinguisher
agents

3. Operational 3.1. Higher burning

temperatures
3.1.1. Complex thermal and
mechanical loads
3.1.2. Overload
3.1.3. Aggressive
environment
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 19 of 35

1.1.1. Oxidation • Rusted • Oxidierung Definition: 1. Pre-existing damages 1.1. Missing coating
Chemical reaction between oxidants or other corrosive 1.1.1. Impact→See ‘Impact’
contaminants in the hot gases and the blade surface (coating),
or in its absences, with the base alloy. 2. Environmental 2.1. Salt deposited on the
surface reacts with
ferrous-based metals or
deposits when getting
into contact with
moisture-laden air
2.2. Chemical reactions of
the part with intake are Oxidised deposits on HPC blades

contaminants
1.1.2. Pitting • Pustules • Lochfraß Definition: 1. Pre-existing damages 1.1. Corrosion
• Lochfraß- Small, irregularly shaped cavities or hollows, usually dark 1.1.1. Breakdown of surface
korrosion bottomed, in the blade surface, herby material has been by oxidation
removed by corrosion or chipping. 1.1.2. Chemical reaction due
Sulphidation of pitting holes is called sulphidation pits or to corrosive contaminants
pustules.
2.1. Overloading
2. Operational 2.2. Inclusion removal in
operation mode
2.3. Presence of unwanted
particles Pitting on stage 2.5 stator vane airfoil

3.1. FOD
3. Impact 3.2. KOD
3.3. Organic damage

1.1.3. Sulfidation • Sulphidation • Sulfidierung Definition: 1. Environmental 1.1. Sulphur containments

Sulfidation, or sulphur corrosion describes a chemical process in intake air in form of:
whereby sulphur containments in the ingested air reacts with 1.1.1. Deposited salts
the coating and/or base material of engine blades under heat 1.1.2. Agricultural chemicals
influence. 1.1.3. Airborne particles from
This defect can be found in the engine’s turbine hot section forest fires
where temperatures are high. It appears as a greenish to pale 1.1.4. Polluted air
blue discolouration and as raised, blistered surface similar to
corrosion pits. 2. Operational 2.1. Sulphurous jet fuel
2.2. Sulphur oxides from
Sulfidation on LPT stage 4 blade root
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 20 of 35

combustion and airborne

salts, such as sodium,
react with water (by-
product of fuel
combustion) and creates a
sulfric acid.

1.2. Burns • Burnings • Verbren- Definition: 1. Operational 1.1. Excessive heat

• Charred nungen Surface and/or structural damage due to excessive heat, 1.1.1. Abnormal flame
• Overheated visible as stain or discolouration and, in severe cases, by loss pattern
or flow of material. 1.1.2. Incorrect burning
Often the term ‘overheated’ is misleadingly used as a defect. process or parameters
In fact, ‘overheated’ is the cause and ‘burns’ are one possible 1.1.3. Lack of lubrication
consequence of it. 1.1.4. Improper clearance
1.1.5. Overloaded
The V2500 Engine Manual further distinguishes between: 1.1.6. Hard landing
1 Burn through: Local burn area that has continued 1.2. Insufficient cooling
through the aerofoil surface. 1.2.1. Blocked cooling
2 Trailing edge burns: Burns or burn through that start at passages
the aerofoil trailing edge and continue forward to the 1.2.2. Blockage or
aerofoil leading edge. malfunction of the cooling
3 Lift-up: Surface on one side of the crack is higher than airflow

on the other side.

4 Coating damage: See: ‘1. Surface Damage’ 2. Environmental 2.1. Aggravated by high air

5 Connected loop crack: A crack or a group of cracks that temperature

show an isolated area of vane metal. 2.2. Aggravated by heat,

moisture, and
contaminated Burned HPT T1 blade with burn through

environment
1.3. Blistering • Exfoliation • Blasenbildung Definition: 1. Operational 1.1. Damaged bonding by:
• Flaking • Bläschen- Raised areas that indicate a separation of pieces of a coated 1.1.1. Aggressive gases
• Peeling bildung surface from a base metal, often evident as peeling and/or 1.1.3. Pressure
flaking. 1.1.3. Excessive heat→see
‘Burns’

2. Environmental 2.1. Contaminants in

airborne

3. Poor manufacturing 3.1. Improper bond

3.2. Incomplete bonding Blistering and loss of coating of LPT blade

3.3. Defective coating

Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 21 of 35

1.4. Erosion - • Abnutzung Definition: 1. Impact 1.1. FOD: Solid particle

• Erosion Erosion describes the surficial abrasion of material by the flow impacts
of fluids or gases and thus leads to wear and destruction of 1.1.1. Grit
engine parts. Heat or particles in the hot gases accelerates this 1.1.2. Fine sand
process. The impact of particles typically larger than 20 µm is 1.1.3. Dust
especially apparent on the leading edge of the blade. It is 1.1.4. Ground debris
visually recognisable by a rough surface with stripes or marks 1.2. KOD: Broken-off
in the direction of the particle; often in the air flow direction. pieces from upstream
The amount of particles entering the engine and leading to engine parts
Erosion on leading edge of fan blades
erosion is significantly higher during landing and take-off.
2. Environment 2.1. Moisture
2.1.1. Water droplets on inlet
edge of a rotating blade
2.2. Salty air
2.3. Polluted air

3. Operational 3.1. KOD: By-products of

operation
3.1.1. Excessive oil burn
3.1.2. Carbon particles (from
fuel injection)
3.1.3. Particles of ceramic
thermal barrier coatings
(detaching due to thermal
shock)
3.2. Aggravated by massive
air flow
3.2.1. Hot gases

3.2.2. Corroding liquids

3.2.3. Dirt-laden oil
3.2.4. Turbulences
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 22 of 35

1.4.1. Guttering - • Furchen Definition: 1. Enlargement of pre 1.1. Cracks

A deep, concentrated erosion that results from enlargement of existing defects by burning 1.2. Nicks
a crack, tear, or nick exposed to hot gases and/or concentrated 1.3. Tears
combustion chamber flames.

Erosion of a preceding crack at nozzle guide vane

1.5. Deposits • Contamin- • Ablagerungen Definition: 1. Environmental 1.1. Intake air contaminants
(No material ation Particles from foreign material, by-products during operation, 1.1.1. Polluted air
separation or • Foreign or material from upstream part separation that are collected 1.1.2. Volcano ash
loss, but material by centrifugal force and built up an extra layer on the casing, 1.1.3. Salty air
additional • Unwanted vanes and compressor blades. Foreign material can be 1.1.4. Particles in air near
particles on material apparent in solid or liquid state and may or may not be ground (dirt, oil, soot)
surface) adherent to the surface of an engine part. Non-adherent 1.2. KOD
particles are normally carted off by the air flow and may cause 1.3. Organic
no further damage to the engine. 1.3.1. Birds
1.3.2. Wildlife
Deposits on LPC stage 2.5 blades

2. Operational 2.1. KOD: By-products of

operation
1.2.1. Excessive oil burn
1.2.2. Fuel (ash content)

Deposits on LPT vane

Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 23 of 35

Deposits on HPC stage 3 blade

• Abnutzung
2. Wear Material removal from the part by mechanical means.
• Verschleiß

2.1. Abrasion • Chafing • Abnutzung Definition: 1. Operational 1.1. Wear

• Fretted • Abrieb Abrasion or galling describes a roughened area usually 1.1.1. Particles from abrasion
• Galling • Fressen caused by severe chafing or fretting action resulting from are self-accelerating
• Scuffed • Verschleiß slight relative movement of two surfaces under high contact 1.2. Abnormal relative
• Scraped durch Reibung pressure during engine operation. The damage characteristics movement of parts
• Verschleißen include microstructure changes of the part surface material or 1.3. Parts out of alignment
coating, surfaces debris, wear or material removal and
reduced fatigue capability [35]. The degree of abrasion varies 2. Environmental 2.1. FOD
from ‘light’ to ‘heavy’ depending upon the extent of 2.1.1. Unwanted material
reconditioning required to restore the worn surface. The between parts
Abrasion of HPC stage 6 blade cheeks
abrasion effect is accelerated by the presence of foreign
material in addition to the detached abrasion material.
Chafing is often used as synonym for the same defect
description. However, chafing shall be understood as action
resulting in deterioration of the surface condition rather than
as the description of the damage itself.

Note:
Not to be confused with scores, scratches or gouges.

Example:
• Relative motion between blade lock or lock nut and
dovetail slot. Also called ‘blade platform frettage’.
• Movement and rubbing of clappers.
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 24 of 35

2.2. Gouge • Gouging • Furche Definition: 1. Impact 1.1. FOD

• Rille A furrowing condition where material from the surface has 1.1.1. Large, sharp unwanted
been displaced and removed by cutting or tearing action. foreign object
1.2. KOD

2. Poor Maintenance 2.1. Improper (dis-)

assembly
2.2. Careless handling

Gouge on retaining slot of a HPC stage 5 blade

2.3. Groove • Fluted • Furche Definition: 1. Operational 1.1. Concentrated wear

• Furrowed • Kerbe A smooth, rounded furrows, such as tear marks, whose edges 1.2. Abnormal relative
• Rille have been polished due to concentrated wear. motion of parts
1.3. Parts out of alignment

Groove in retaining slot of a HPC stage 4 blade

2.4. Score - • Riefenbildung Definition: 1. Operational 1.1. KOD

• Riefen Multiple scratches of significant depth are called a score, 1.1.1. Presence of chips
which is often caused by sharp objects during engine between parts
operation. Contrary to scratches, scores show some removal
of material. 2. Poor maintenance 2.1. Careless assembly or
disassembly techniques

3. Impact 3.1. FOD

3.2. KOD
3.3. Organic damage
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 25 of 35

Fan blade scoring

3. Material • Material-
Material is split but not removed.
Separation trennung

3.1. Chipping • Spalling • Abblättern Definition: 1. Pre-existing defects 1.1. Excessive stress
• Abplatzen Chipping describes mechanical separation of small pieces of concentration
• Absplittern blade material or coating often apparent on edges, corners or 1.1.1. Nicks
surfaces leaving a sharply roughened area of irregular shape. 1.1.2. Surface cracks
Often apparent on clappers. 1.1.3. Scratches
1.1.4. Peening
Note: 1.2. Fatigue
Not to be confused with flaking. 1.3. Subsurface inclusions

2. Poor maintenance 2.1. Careless handling

2.2. Improper (dis-)assembly Clapper wear on HPC stage 3 rotor blade

3.1. FOD
3. Impact 3.2. KOD

3.2. Crack • Fissure • Einriss Definition: 1. Impact 1.1. FOD

• Riss A material separation or partial fracture of material evidenced 1.2. KOD
as a linear opening that can easily be seen and which can cause 1.3. Organic damage
the material to break. The depth can vary from a few
thousandths of the full part’s thickness to its full thickness. 2. Operational 2.1. Overheating
The latter usually leads to full breakage of the part into one or 2.1.1. Localised hot spots
more pieces. 2.1.3. Overload
A crack is often an expansion of a pre-existing defect such as 2.1.4. Hard landing
a nick, scratch or gouge. 2.2. Vibrations

HPT T2 blade cracked airfoil

Note: Not to be confused with a hairline crack, which cannot 3. Pre-existing defects 3.1. Corrosion
be detected by the naked eye and where special fluorescent or 3.2. Nicks
magnetic penetrants are required to detect the defect. 3.3. Scratches
3.4. Scores
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 26 of 35

3.5. Gouges

4. Fatigue 4.1. Random stress

fluctuations
4.2. Stress concentrations
4.3. Surface finish
4.4. Residual stresses
4.5. High cycle fatigue
4.6. Thermal fatigue

5. Poor maintenance 5.1. Careless handling of Crack in HPT T1 blade tip

parts or tools
5.2. Improper (dis-)
assembly
5.3. Left behind hand tools

6. Poor manufacturing 6.1. Internal stresses (from

machining)
6.2. Defective (raw)
material

3.3. Breaking • Burst • Abbruch Definition: Resulting from pre-existing Cracks, nicks, dents, notches →
• Breakage • Bruch Complete separation of a blade into two or more large-sized defects in combination with: See individual defect section for
• Break-off • Fraktur pieces by an external force or internal stresses. Different possible causes
• Broken defects, such as cracks, nicks, dents and notches, often precede
• Cut and lead in combination with one of the causes to material 1. Impact 1.1. FOD
• Fracture separation and a broken engine blade. 1.1.1. Left behind items

• Liberation 1.2. KOD

• Rupture 1.3. Organic impact

2. Fatigue 2.1. Thermo-mechanical

creep Broken off HPC blade

3. Operational 3.1. Stresses caused by heat

3.2. Sudden overload
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 27 of 35

3.4. Nick • Notch • Einkerbung Definition: 1. Impact 1.1. FOD

• Kerbe A small, sharp cut on the surface or edge of a part caused by 1.1.1. Sand
a striking object. A nick has a characteristic V-shaped bottom, 1.1.2. Fine unwanted
breaks the material flow and concentrates stresses. This weak particles
point may initiate the development of cracks, leading to a 1.2. KOD
decreased lifetime of the blade. The damage occurs often at or 1.3. Organic damage
close to the leading edge of a blade [61]. 1.3.1. Birds
1.3.2. Wildlife

Fan blade trailing edge nick

2. Poor maintenance 2.1. Careless handling of
parts or tools
2.2. Improper (dis-)assembly

HPC stage 8 blade

3.5. Tear - • Einriss Definition: May result from pre-existing Nicks

• Riss Separation of material by tensile stresses imposed by a sharp defects in combination with or
object. A nick may have been pre-existent and was enlarged by:
by a heavy impact. It is apparent by ragged or irregular edges.
1. Impact 1.1. FOD
1.1.1. Significant tough and
sharp foreign object
1.1.2. Left-behind items
1.2. KOD

HPC stage 5 blade tear after organic impact

4. Material • Material-
Deformation verformung Extensive change of the original contour of a part.
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 28 of 35

4.1. Bent • Creased • Biegung Definition: 1. Impact (lateral) 1.1. FOD

• Distorted • Krümmung Angular change from the original shape or contour usually 1.2. Organic impact
• Folded the cause is a lateral force. 1.2.1. Bird ingestion
• Kinked
• Leaning

HPC blade bent

HPC stage 8 blade bent

4.2. Bow • Bowed • Verbogen Definition: 1. Operational 1.1. Excessive heat

• Verzogen A bow is a stress-included bent or curve in the blade or vane 1.2. Uneven application of
• Verzug contour. In comparison to bent damage, bows are indicated heat
by larger curve radii. Additionally, the damage is caused by 1.3. Structural stresses
internal stresses arising from excessive heat, pressure, or 1.4. Thermal overload
forming, rather than by lateral impact resulting from foreign
object hits.

4.3. Bulge • Ballooned • Ausbeulung Definition: 1. Impact 1.1. FOD (dull objects)
• Bulged • Ausbuchtung An outward bending or swelling of displaced material 1.2. Organic impact
• Swelling without separation resulting from excessive heat. This defect
often occurs on the leading edge. 2. Operational 2.1. Excessive heat
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 29 of 35

4.4. Burr • Raised edge • Erhöhte Kante Definition: 1. Poor manufacturing 1.1. Missed or improper
• Raised • Grat A narrow ridge of material, roughed edge or imperfection on deburring after machining
imperfection the surface of a material raised above the general contour of
• Ridge the part. It is most likely appears along an edge. 2.1. Excessive wear
2. Environmental 2.2. Deposits

3.1. FOD
3. Impact (sharp hitting 3.1.1. Ice or hail
object during operation) 3.1.2. Sharp objects
3.1.3. Left-behind items
Burr on blade tip resulting from tip rub
3.2. KOD

4.5. Battered - • Abgenutzt Definition: 1. Impact 1.1. FOD

• Angeschlagen Damage on a part that is repeatedly hit and as a consequence 1.1.1. Hail
• Ramponiert severely deformed. 1.1.2. Ice
• Verbeult 1.1.3. Ground debris
• Zerschmettert
• Zertrümmern

Heavy battered fan blade

4.6. Creep • Elongation • Ausdehnung Definition: 1. Operational 1.1. Loss of cooling

• Growth • Kriechen Continuous stretch or deformation of a part in operation 1.1.1. Blocked cooling
• Stretched • Verlängerung under high temperatures, and/or centrifugal loads and high passages
rotational speeds (latter impacts rotating parts only). Creep is 1.1.2. Blockage or
predominant in the engine’s hot section (turbine) and in the malfunction of the cooling
last blade stages of high-pressure compressors (HPC), airflow
whereby the blades elongate towards the surrounding shroud 1.2. Continued and/or
case, and the shrouds expand under thermal influence. In extensive heat accelerated
order to improve the engine efficiency, the clearance between by high rotating speeds
blades and casing shall be kept as minimal as possible. When and centrifugal forces
heavy operations cause severe blade elongation, the blade tips 1.2.1. Turbulences
rub against the non-moving shrouds. The resulting damage is 1.2.2. Heavy landings
known as tip rub. 1.2.3. Overloaded
The V2500 engine manual further distinguished between: 1.3. Deposits on casing
• Leading edge tip rub 1.4. Compressor surge
• Mid chord tip rub
• Trailing edge tip rub 2.1. Creep cracking
2. Fatigue 2.1.1. Random stress
fluctuations
2.1.2. Stress concentrations
HPC stage 11 tip rub
2.2. Life time of part
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 30 of 35

exceeded
2.3. Shortened lifecycle
caused by operational
means

3.1. Inspection procedures

3. Poor maintenance not correctly followed
3.1.1. Missed tip clearance
check
3.1.2. Not performed or
improper repair, e.g., Fan blade tip rub against fan case
blades not trimmed to
restore minimum tip
clearance

4.7. Curl • Twisted • Geknickt Definition: 1. Tip-rub 1.1. Elongation/creep of

• Warped • Umgebogen A rounded fold in a rotating part after contact with a fixed, blade (see ‘3.9 Creep’)
• Verdreht non-moving part. This defect can be observed after a blade tip 1.1.1. Heavy landings
rubbed against the engine case (see ‘tip rub’). 1.1.2. Overloaded
1.2. Deposits on casing
1.3. Compressor surge
1.4. Missed maintenance
inspection or incorrect
procedures during
maintenance inspection of
tip clearance

HPC stage 1.5 blade tip curl

Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 31 of 35

4.8. Dent - • Delle Definition: 1. Impact 1.1. FOD

• Einbeulung Damage to the surface of a part caused by mechanical impact 1.1.1. Hail
• Einbuchtung of a dull object. A dent is visible as small, smooth indention 1.1.2. Ice
• Eindruck with rounded edges, corners and bottom. Material is 1.1.3. Left-behind items
• Vertiefung displaced but not removed. Often, dents can be found at or 1.2. KOD
close to the leading edge of a blade [61]. A cluster of multiple 1.3. Organic damage
dents on the leading edge can result in waviness of the blade. 1.3.1. Birds
1.3.2. Wildlife

Dent on leading edge of LPT stage 5 vane

4.9. Peening - • Gehämmert A group of very small dents caused when a part is repeatedly 1. Impact 1.1. FOD
• Gestrahlt hit is called peening. 1.1.1. Hail
1.1.2. Ice

HPC stage 4 blade root

LPC stage 2.5 blade

Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 32 of 35

4.10. Scratch - • Kratzer Definition: 1. Impact 1.1. FOD (fine foreign

Shallow, thin lines, marks or dragged indentations on either particles)
the coating (if present) or the material surface caused by 1.1.1. Airborne particles
movement of sharp foreign objects, careless handling or 1.1.2. Fine sand and dust
improper assembly. Scratches have a sharp bottom and 1.1.3. Polluted air
material is usually not removed. 1.1.4. Volcano ash

2. Poor maintenance 2.1. Careless handling of

parts or tools
2.2. Improper (dis-)
assembly LPT stage 7 blade scratched on airfoil surface

4.11. Waviness - • Welligkeit An engine blade that has been deformed under influence of 1. Operational 1.1. Loss of cooling
• Wellig high temperatures is called waviness (The term ‘waviness’ 1.2. Continued and/or
originates from the FAA Aviation Maintenance Handbook). extensive heat accelerated
by high rotating speeds
and centrifugal forces
1.2.1. Turbulences
1.2.2. Heavy landings
1.2.3. Overloaded
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 33 of 35

References
1. National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine. Commercial Aircraft Propulsion and Energy
Systems Research: Reducing Global Carbon Emissions; The National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA,
2016; p. 122.
2. Kumari, S.; Satyanarayana, D.; Srinivas, M. Failure analysis of gas turbine rotor blades. Eng. Fail. Anal. 2014,
45, 234–244.
3. Dewangan, R.; Patel, J.; Dubey, J.; Prakash, K.; Bohidar, S. Gas turbine blades—A critical review of failure
at first and second stages. Int. J. Mech. Eng. Robot. Res. 2015, 4, 216–223.
4. Rao, N.; Kumar, N.; Prasad, B.; Madhulata, N.; Gurajarapu, N. Failure mechanisms in turbine blades of a
gas turbine Engine—An overview. Int. J. Eng. Res. Dev. 2014, 10, 48–57.
5. Rani, S. Common Failures in Gas Turbine Blade: A critical Review. Int. J. Eng. Sci. Res. Technol. 2018,
doi:10.5281/zenodo.1207072.
6. Mishra, R.; Thomas, J.; Srinivasan, K.; Nandi, V.; Raghavendra Bhatt, R. Failure analysis of an un-cooled
turbine blade in an aero gas turbine engine. Eng. Fail. Anal. 2017, 79, 836–844.
7. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). Southwest Airlines Flight 1380 Engine Accident. Availabe
online: https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Pages/DCA18MA142.aspx (accessed on 3 November 2018).
8. Carter, T.J. Common failures in gas turbine blades. Eng. Fail. Anal. 2005, 12, 237–247.
9. Yuan, Z. Borescope Inspection Management for Engine. IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Eng. 2018, 182, 012013.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/128/1/012013
10. Nickles, G.; Him, H.; Koenig, S.; Gramopadhye, A.; Melloy, B. A Descriptive Model of Aircraft Inspection
Activities. Federal Aviation Administration. Available online:
https://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/maintenance_hf/library/documents/media/human_factors_mainten
ance/a_descriptive_model_of_aircraft_inspection_activities.pdf (accessed on 27 October 2018).
11. Yuan, Z. Borescope inspection for HPT blade of CFM56-7B engine. IOP Conf. Ser.: Mat. Sci. Eng. 2018, 382,
032028. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/382/3/032028
12. Adamczuk, R.R.; Seume, J.R. Early Assessment of Defects and Damage in Jet Engines. Procedia Cirp 2013,
11, 328–333.
13. Drury, C.G.; Gramopadhye, A.K. Training for visual inspection. In Proceedings of the 3rd FAA Meeting on
Human Factors in Aircraft Maintenance and Inspection: Training Issues, Atlantic City, NJ, USA, 12–13 June
1990.
14. Hou, J.; Wicks, B.J.; Antoniou, R.A. An investigation of fatigue failures of turbine blades in a gas turbine
engine by mechanical analysis. Eng. Fail. Anal. 2002, 9, 201–211.
15. Khajavi, M.R.; Shariat, M.H. Failure of first stage gas turbine blades. Eng. Fail. Anal. 2004, 11, 589–597.
16. Choi, Y.-S.; Lee, K.-H. Investigation of blade failure in a gas turbine. J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 2010, 24, 1969–
1974.
17. Laguna-Camacho, J.R.; Villagran-Villegas, L.Y.; Martinez-Garcia, H.; Juarez-Morales, G.; Cruz-Orduna,
M.I.; Vite-Torres, M.; Rios-Velasco, L.; Hernandez-Romero, I. A study of the wear damage on gas turbine
blades. Eng. Fail. Anal. 2016, 61, 88–99.
18. Laskowski, P. Damages to Turbine Engine Components. Sci. J. Sil. Univ. Technol. Ser. Transport. 2017, 94,
111–121.
19. U.S. Department of Transportation. FAA-H-8083-32A, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Aviation
Maintenance Technician Handbook—Powerplant; FAA: Oklahoma City, OK , USA, 2018; Volume 2. Available
online: https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aircraft/media/FAA-H-8083-32-
AMT-Powerplant-Vol-2.pdf (accessed on 8 January 2019).
20. Pratt & Whitney. Standard Practices Manual (PN 585005). In Visual Inspection-General 01; Pratt & Whitney:
East Hartford, CT , USA, 1998.
21. IAE. International Aero Engine, V2500 Maintenance Manual, Borescope Inspection, Standard Practices
ATA 70-00-03 2000. Available online: https://www.slideshare.net/RafaelHernandezM/v2500-bsi-issue-01
(accessed on 8 January 2019).
22. Waite, S. Defect Types and Inspection. In Proceedings of the MIL17 Maintenance Workshop, Chicago, IL,
USA, 19–21 July 2006.
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 34 of 35

23. Grimm, S.; Abecker, A.; Völker, J.; Studer, R. Ontologies and the Semantic Web. In Handbook of Semantic
Web Technologies; Domingue, J., Fensel, D., Hendler, J.A., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2011;
pp. 507–579, doi:10.1007/978-3-540-92913-0_13.
24. Narayanan, V.K.; Armstrong, D.J. Causal Mapping for Research in Information Technology; Idea Group
Publishing: Hershey, PA, USA, 2005.
25. Colomb, R.M. Ontology and the Semantic Web; IOS Press: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2007.
26. Protégé. Protégé. Availabe online: https://protege.stanford.edu/ (accessed on 8 January 2019).
27. Ji, Z.; Pons, D.; Pearse, J. Measuring Industrial Health Using a Diminished Quality of Life Instrument. Safety
2018, 4, 55.
28. Forbes, D.; Wongthongtham, P.; Terblanche, C.; Pakdeetrakulwong, U. Ontology Engineering Applications in
Healthcare and Workforce Management Systems; Springer, Cham, Switzerland, 2018; doi:10.1007/978-3-319-
65012-8.
29. Oberle, D.; Eberhart, A.; Staab, S.; Volz, R. Developing and managing software components in an ontology-
based application server. In Proceedings of the 5th ACM/IFIP/USENIX international conference on
Middleware, Toronto, ON, Canada, 18–20 October 2004; pp. 459–477.
30. Wang, W.; Liu, X.; Luo, Y.; Wang, X.; Xu, Z.J.C.E. Study of ontology and application for emergency event
model. Comput. Eng. 2005, 31, 10–12.
31. Acharya, S.; Saha, S.; Pradhan, P. Novel symmetry-based gene-gene dissimilarity measures utilizing Gene
Ontology: Application in gene clustering. Gene 2018, 679, 341–351.
32. Chaudhury, S. Multimedia Ontology—Representation and Applications; Chapman and Hall/CRC: New York,
NY, USA, 2015.
33. Denkena, B.; Boess, V.; Nespor, D.; Floeter, F.; Rust, F. Engine blade regeneration: A literature review on
common technologies in terms of machining. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2015, 81, 917–924.
34. Kułaszka, A.; Chalimoniuk, M.; Błachnio, J. Types of Damages to Turbines of Aircraft Turbine Engines;
Diagnosing Capabilities. J. Pol. C. 2015, 4, 1–8.
35. Cowles, B.A. High cycle fatigue in aircraft gas turbines—An industry perspective. Int. J. Fract. 1996, 80,
147–163.
36. Ilcewicz, L. Composite damage tolerance and maintenance safety issues. In Proceedings of the FAA
Damage Tolerance and Maintenance Workshop, Rosemont, IL, USA, 19 July 2006.
37. Boeing. Foreign Object Debris and Damage Prevention. Aero Magazin. Available online:
https://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/aero_01/textonly/s01txt.html (accessed on 28 October
2018).
38. U.S. Department of Transportation. AC 150/5210-24, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Session.
Airport Foreign Object Debris (FOD) Program. 2010. Available online:
https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_150_5210-24.pdf (accessed on 28
October 2018).
39. Meher-Homji, C.B.; Gabriles, G. Gas Turbine Blade Failures-Causes, Avoidance, And Troubleshooting. Tex.
AM Univ. Turbomach. Lab. 1998, doi:10.21423/R1RD4R.
40. Aerospace Industries Association (AIA). NAS 412, Foreign Object Damage (FOD) Prevention Guidance
Document; Aerospace Industries Association (AIA): Arlington, VA, USA, 2018.
41. Marandi, S.M.; Tajdari, M.; Rahmani, K.H. Foreign object damage on the leading edge of compressor
blades. Middle East J. Sci. Res. 2013, 13, 818–822.
42. Khan, M.A.U. Non-destructive Testing Applications in Commercial Aircraft Maintenance. In Proceedings
of the 7th European Conference on Non-destructive Testing, Copenhagen, Denmark, 26–29 May 1998.
43. Iannone, L.; Rector, A. Calculations in OWL; University of Manchester: Manchester, UK, 2008; Volume 432.
Available online: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-432/owled2008eu_submission_17.pdf (accessed on 17 January
2019).
44. Vardar, N.; Ekerim, A. Failure analysis of gas turbine blades in a thermal power plant. Eng. Fail. Anal. 2007,
14, 743–749.
45. Azevedo, C.R.F.; Sinatora, A. Erosion-fatigue of steam turbine blades. Eng. Fail. Anal. 2009, 16, 2290–2303.
46. Doroshtnasir, M.; Worzewski, T.; Krankenhagen, R.; Röllig, M. On-site inspection of potential defects in
wind turbine rotor blades with thermography. Wind Energy 2016, 19, 1407–14223.
47. Juengert, A. Damage Detection in Wind Turbine Blades using two Different Acoustic Techniques. J.
Nondestruct. Test. 2008, 34, 11–15.
Aerospace 2019, 6, 58 35 of 35

48. Chougule, A.; Jha, V.K.; Mukhopadhyay, D. Ontology Based System for Pests and Disease Management of
Grapes in India. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE 6th International Conference on Advanced Computing
(IACC), Bhimavaram, India, 27–28 February 2016; pp. 133–138.
49. Bedi, P.; Marwaha, S. Framework for Ontology Based Expert Systems: Disease & Pests Identification in
Crops—A Case Study. In Proceedings of the 2005 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Las
Vegas, NV, USA, 27–30 June 2005; Volume 1, pp. 256–259.
50. Angelica, M.; Ferdinand, F. Expert System Based on an Ontology Method to Analyze Types of Arabica
Coffee Beans. Int. J. Recent Contrib. Eng. Sci. IT (iJES) 2017, 5, 31–41, doi: 10.3991/ijes.v5i2.6908.
51. Rajput, Q.; Khan, N.; Larik, A.; Haider, S. Ontology Based Expert-System for Suspicious Transactions
Detection. Comput. Inf. Sci. 2014, 7, 1, doi:10.5539/cis.v7n1p103.
52. Chang, C.W.; Lee, R.S.; Chang, T.W. Development of Knowledge-Expandable Ontology-Based Expert
System for Process Planning in Cold Forging of Flange Nuts. Procedia Eng. 2017, 207, 502–507.
53. Chen, Y.-J.; Chen, Y.-M.; Wu, M.-S. Development of an Ontology-Based Expert Recommendation System
for Product Empirical Knowledge Consultation. Concurr. Eng. 2010, 18, 233–253, doi:
10.1177/1063293X10373824.
54. Shue, L.-Y.; Chen, C.-W.; Shiue, W. The development of an ontology-based expert system for corporate
financial rating. Expert Syst. Appl. 2009, 36, 2130–2142.
55. Alagha, H.M. Diagnosing Heart Diseases Using Ontology and SWRL Rules. Master’s Thesis, The Islamic
University–Gaza, Research and Postgraduate Affairs, March 2017.
56. Hu, Y.; Kasabov, N. Ontology-Based Framework for Personalized Diagnosis and Prognosis of Cancer Based on Gene
Expression Data; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2007; pp. 846–855.
57. Taha, B.; Fadhil, R. An Ontology-Based Expert System for General Practitioners to Diagnose
Cardiovascular Diseases. Adv. Comput. Sci. Technol. 2015, 8, 53–65.
58. Thirugnanam, M.; Thirugnanam, T.; Mangayarkarasi, R. An Ontology Based System for Predicting Disease
using SWRL Rules. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Bus. Inform. 2013, 7, 1–15.
59. Abu-Naser, S.S.; Kashkash, K.A.; Fayyad, M. Developing an Expert System for Plant Disease Diagnosis. J.
Artif. Intell. 2008, 1, 78–85.
60. Groover, M.P. Fundamentals of Modern Manufacturing: Materials, Processes, and Systems, 5th ed.; Wiley:
Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2012.
61. Witek, L. Numerical stress and crack initiation analysis of the compressor blades after foreign object
damage subjected to high-cycle fatigue. Eng. Fail. Anal. 2011, 18, 2111–2125.

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).