Kaveri Engine

[Indx TechStyle]

Can't ISRO help DRDO make engines? I mean ISRO has some of the top brains and high success rates.

I know I'm quoting an year old post but it's ISRO who can have help from DRDO for engines.
ISRO can't help DRDO, making aero engine more difficult, there are many technical issues like Hot corrosion and reusability (ISRO engine can't be reused).
DRDO can make an engine with even with 200kN thrust but it's useless if it's not reusable. Rockets get burst only in single use, fighter planes are not.
I can explain you in more details.

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

For those interested this is a review article published in the Transactions of The Indian Institute of Metals by Niranjan Das highlighting some important technological milestones acheived by DMRL for superalloys to be used in Kaveri engine.
http://download.springer.com/static...ef0622e60248ea5f4c4077a370064239a7329a02e39b3

 

[rudresh]

I am not a turbofan engine expert but few points

2. You are confusing yourself with the max internal temperature and the thrust. First of all there is no such material or alloy that could with stand such high temperature and sustain the strength and stress at such temperature. It is the technique or the special design that help attaining them such as SCB and the thermal coating. Problem is the capability to manufacture such structure, because you cannot make a die to build it or machine it plus the grains structure of such material should be uniform to give them the max strength thus the SCB in which each layes are build from the powder and adhessive thus grow the whole structure slowly. Question is do we have, yes we have developed such capability but it is of early stage or few generation behind than the leading leaders. Second is the thermal barrier coating paint, which protects these blades, but we don't have it at all confirm by the GTRE director himself. There is no problem with the core of the Kaveri, rather its the compressor stages needs to be refined.

3. Let me again state myself, no OEM is going to give this capability to India, and thinking that Snerma is going to help GTRE to get this capability is no where close to the reality. Max they will supply such parts and will not share this secret. So if India wants to get all this tech. that they have to get it themself, thus I stated that from hooks to crooks, from cheat to copy do whatever to achieve it, and when I say develop the tech. than it means to develop the machining, anufacturing, design and r&d database and knowledge and this is not possible by only one entity aka GTRE rather the national effort is needed.

1.The internal temperature and the thrust are directly proportional as the internal temperature increases the thrust will increase so the better alloy combination will work.
You have elaborated what i ment - ( SCB in which each layers are build from the powder and adhessive thus grow the whole structure slowly.)By which you will get new alloys which will tolerate more temperature and lighter - any one of them will increase thrust and hence the newer alloys are made. India may be in the 2nd gen of alloys and the rest have moved forward to 4 th or 5th gen as we experiment more we will also be making newer generation alloys.
There is no problem with the core - dosent mean that there is no margin for improvement. There may be lot of areas in that highly tricky thing ( combustion stability, vibrations etc..) where we could be hand held from experienced people for better results ....many small improvements in design will change the cumulative output.

2.What you are stating is 100% correct- no OEM is going to give this capability to India.They (the French are talking only about design consultancy and testing). Even with what india has on hand we will be able to make a 90Kn engine with the technology what we have is my strong openion.

There were lot of things which were not availble such as SCB, Blisk and Thermal barrier coatings with us when all these reports were coming out ......As per the sources ( don't ask where i may get some for u but not all) the kaveri engine is running on - DS blades and not on SCB, may be without any BLISK discs also.Thermal barrier coatings - really dont know since no such article i saw about it. There was a report in DRDO monthly PDF (may be 2010 year article or so) which details about some major developments about the Alloys made by now all these are tested and ready to go into Kaveri engine or may be just getting incorporated.

Both the above combined will really push us near 90Kn minimum.

It is not only about reaching 90kn here its...... testing (x,y,z parameters......), testing,testing,testing andmore testing in order to be completely confident in making that every thing is perfectly fine with the engine before it gets into a double or single engine bird so that there will be very less amount of surprise inside a fighter plane (It takes near to 4000-6000 hrs of testing it for its certification before getting into a plane).They have completed a major portion of it already. This is what we want a completely tested and certified engine from the consultancy.
You might have herd about this when americans were about to help us with this kind of support but indians denied because they asked for the IP rights for kaveri and denied in any metallurgical assistance. The French are doing the same with out IP rights and will certainly not involve any assistance with metallurgy.Today you may get the engine but may not be able to reproduce because the devil is metallurgy and hence you cannot copy an engine completely as such the French help will come only in testing and certifying the engine.

If the French supply some critical engine components we can certainly expect near to 120 kn or so which is required for amca and no of such engines may just cross 2000 and i dont think the french are fools to loose such an oppourtunity.

French are certainly adamant ......but really not fools.

 

[rudresh]

French are not simply helping us - French talk from time to will make you realise,if u have followed the French drama from the beginning.......
1.At first they tried putting their core and calling it Kaveri.
2.Later they told we may be able to make SCB or not also after 10 years of research.
3.Later will give the TOT as soon we will be able to produce (after 10 years).
4.They will help us to make 90kn engine after which india need not depend on others.....in the fourth stage.


They very well know that indians will make the engine on their own, now it is only the matter of time and later no consultancy and no oppourtunity for their product,if americans extend the same kind of support.One should see the marathon race that india has run to make French to agree ......to our terms.French will see to kill off 404 in all the possible ways if they want to stay in this race.

 

[kunal1123]

can any body know the status of "high-altitude engine test facility as well as a trisonic wind tunnel facility at DRDO for testing and R&D of aeroengines and aerodynamic bodies" that was the part of C-17 deal. it was ink around june 2011 .

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...bn-deal-for-C-17-jets/articleshow/8869589.cms

 

[wuzetian]

can any body know the status of "high-altitude engine test facility as well as a trisonic wind tunnel facility at DRDO for testing and R&D of aeroengines and aerodynamic bodies" that was the part of C-17 deal. it was ink around june 2011 .

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...bn-deal-for-C-17-jets/articleshow/8869589.cms

I was also wondering about what happened to that

 

[wuzetian]

What is the difference between k9 and k10 programmes ?

 

[Indx TechStyle]

What is the difference between k9 and k10 programmes ?

K9+ Program is a program to prove concept of complete design and gain hand on experience of aircraft engine integration and flight trials to cover a defined truncated flight envelope prior to the launch of production version of K10 Standard engine. While K 10 Program is a
Joint Venture (JV) partnership with a foreign engine manufacturer. K 10 program engine will be final production standard Kaveri engine and shall have less weight and more reheat thrust along with certain other changes to meet the original design intent.

I think K9 prototype has already been tested.

 

[kunal1123]

I think K9 prototype has already been tested.

that will be great , have any sources because didn't hear any news about k9 or k10 development apart from that k10 suppose to be joint development

 

[Indx TechStyle]

have any sources because didn't hear any news about k9

Really? More than 6 years have passed since then.

 

[kunal1123]

Really? More than 6 years have passed since then.

really 6 year, well i know that kaveri is tested and it is still alive even there is news to shut off. and i also know that kaveri program is split into k9 and k10(in which k10 is joint development) but never heard that k9 concept is tested or about K9 prototype
well if you can provide some sources for that will be great...

 

[HariPrasad-1]

What is the difference between k9 and k10 programmes ?

K9 is current Kaveri program which failed to produce desire result. K10 will be a new program with K9 inputs.

 

[wuzetian]

K9 is current Kaveri program which failed to produce desire result. K10 will be a new program with K9 inputs.

Thank you Bhai [emoji106] [emoji106] [emoji106] [emoji106] [emoji106]

 

[Indx TechStyle]

really 6 year, well i know that kaveri is tested and it is still alive even there is news to shut off. and i also know that kaveri program is split into k9 and k10(in which k10 is joint development) but never heard that k9 concept is tested or about K9 prototype
well if you can provide some sources for that will be great...

Quoting from Wiki

A press release in August 2010, stated that GTRE with the help of Central Institute of Aviation Motors (CIAM) of Russia is trying to match objective of fine tuning of Kaveri engine performance. Until August 2010, one major milestone which is altitude testing, simulating Kaveri engine performance at different altitude and achieving speed of Mach 1 had been completed successfully. One of Kaveri prototype (K9) was successfully flight tested at Gromov Flight Research Institute in Moscow, on 4 November 2010.

......................

 

[kunal1123]

Quoting from Wiki

......................

OK i think i have taken wrong meaning from , i thought that kaveri is split in to two different program k9+ and k10 where both are fresh with later one is for amca (jv with forign pataner) and k9+ is self for lca mark 2.
that what i think , am i right?
wiki QUOTE
In July 2007, GTRE divided Kaveri program into two separate programs. They are K9+ Program and K 10 Program. K9+ Program is a program to prove concept of complete design and gain hand-on experience of aircraft engine integration and flight trials to cover a defined truncated flight envelope prior to the launch of production version of K10 Standard engine. While K 10 Program is a Joint Venture (JV) partnership with a foreign engine manufacturer. K 10 program engine will be final production standard Kaveri engine and shall have less weight and more reheat thrust along with certain other changes to meet the original design intent.

 

[aakash_2410]

I know I'm quoting an year old post but it's ISRO who can have help from DRDO for engines.
ISRO can't help DRDO, making aero engine more difficult, there are many technical issues like Hot corrosion and reusability (ISRO engine can't be reused).
DRDO can make an engine with even with 200kN thrust but it's useless if it's not reusable. Rockets get burst only in single use, fighter planes are not.
I can explain you in more details.

I'm sorry for not having introduced myself properly on any of the threads because I don't know how to but I have 2 masters in Aeronautical Engineering from Loughborough University and,

Wow! I don't know who told you this but, I actually can't believe that you're suggesting that making simple gas turbines that combusts a mixture of kerosene and air and shoots it out of nozzles and thus propelling an engine is harder to design/produce than three-staged SLV with a solid boosters, liquid motors and actual cryogenic engines.

Let me give you a hint: 4-5 countries can independently design cryogenic engines, 30-40 countries can design gas turbines.


I'd like eloberate more if you're interested. Also, how do you introduce yourself on this forum

 

[Alok Arya]

I'm sorry for not having introduced myself properly on any of the threads because I don't know how to but I have 2 masters in Aeronautical Engineering from Loughborough University and,

Wow! I don't know who told you this but, I actually can't believe that you're suggesting that making simple gas turbines that combusts a mixture of kerosene and air and shoots it out of nozzles and thus propelling an engine is harder to design/produce than three-staged SLV with a solid boosters, liquid motors and actual cryogenic engines.

Let me give you a hint: 4-5 countries can independently design cryogenic engines, 30-40 countries can design gas turbines.


I'd like eloberate more if you're interested. Also, how do you introduce yourself on this forum

Yes you are right that degining turbofan is easier than cryogenic but most difficult part of turbofan is metallurgy . Kaveri is world class degine but we actually lack in few technologies such as tbc , scb , dry metallurgycasting ,3 d printing , blisk , high strength disc metallurgy etc etc .
We are very interested here . Please elaborate here if you can . Also elaborate in which state Kaveri is , and what is more needed to make a engine of >110 kn wet and >75 kn dry thrust engine from this variable rated engine . Thanks in advance .

 

[wuzetian]

Yes you are right that degining turbofan is easier than cryogenic but most difficult part of turbofan is metallurgy . Kaveri is world class degine but we actually lack in few technologies such as tbc , scb , dry metallurgycasting ,3 d printing , blisk , high strength disc metallurgy etc etc .
We are very interested here . Please elaborate here if you can . Also elaborate in which state Kaveri is , and what is more needed to make a engine of >110 kn wet and >75 kn dry thrust engine from this variable rated engine . Thanks in advance .

Yes do give your expert opinion. [emoji3] [emoji3] [emoji3] [emoji3]

 

[Scrutator]

Yes you are right that degining turbofan is easier than cryogenic but most difficult part of turbofan is metallurgy .

Actually, metallurgy is the most difficult part even in the design of cryogenic engine. One deals with metals for extreme cold temperatures, while the other (turbofan) deals with metals for extreme high temperatures!!

The difficulty for each cannot realistically be gauged by how many countries have mastered it. (run of the mill) Gas turbines are needed in the tens of thousands and hence driven by business needs most attempt and several succeed in their design and build efforts (for various degrees of efficiency). On the other hand Cryogenic engines are not that essential other than for space exploring countries - as such few attempt and fewer succeed.

That said, gas turbines are different from turbofans for aircraft applications (even though the broad principle of compression and ignition of the fuel mixture may be similar). The requirements for weight reduction and fuel efficiency is far far greater for a turbofan (for aircraft application) than it is for gas turbines - and there in lies the rub!!

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Wow! I don't know who told you this but, I actually can't believe that you're suggesting that making simple gas turbines that combusts a mixture of kerosene and air and shoots it out of nozzles and thus propelling an engine is harder to design/produce than three-staged SLV with a solid boosters, liquid motors and actual cryogenic engines.

Rocket & missile engines are made for single use which are eliminated post stage.

Meanwhile, aircraft engines are to be used again & again.
Look, I never said that designing rocket engines is easier but aircraft engines need stability, a consistent thrust, not varying one.

Plus making material for them is most difficult step. Nickel based superalloys are preferred to resist hot corrosion.
Plus, you need a stable engine in an aircraft for consistent thrust.

And please don't boast of your engineering degree. You aren't alone educated here and you can never guess who's hiding behind this anonymous username. That's me.:biggrin2:
Just not disclosing my ID.

Let me give you a hint: 4-5 countries can independently design cryogenic engines, 30-40 countries can design gas turbines.

Designing? LOL
We have even developed and materialized them .
Those toys by 30-40 countries are small turbines, even India has those, not only designed but developed and tested.
We are talking about big turbofans, with thrust in order of 100kN which can power fighter aircraft. India has achieved 81kN.
Only few countries can do so. Besides US, EU & Russia, it's Canada I guess.

I'd like eloberate more if you're interested.

Go ahead, do it as soon as possible.

I think UK produces those. Put the metallurgy of superalloy used there here please. Hamara bhi kaam zara asan ho jayega!
And don't forget to tell me about those 30-40 countries.

Also, how do you introduce yourself on this forum

Create a new thread in Introduction & Greetings section by your name.