Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
Lilo
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4080
Joined: 23 Jun 2007 09:08

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Lilo »

Jewel in the crown: Rolls-Royce's single-crystal turbine blade casting foundry
....

The components the ABCF is producing are not ones that most people ever see: they are the turbine blades that are hidden away in the hottest part of jet engines. For from the decorative brilliance of Greek bronzes, they combine a utilitarian appearance with complexity of form and function and a jewel-like internal perfection: weighing only about 300g and small enough to fit in the palm of a hand, they are in fact perfect single crystals of a metal alloy whose composition has been fine-tuned over many years to operate in the hellish conditions of the fastest-moving part of a jet engine.

“Back at the birth of the jet engine, Sir Frank Whittle’s prototypes were made entirely of steel,” said Rolls-Royce chief of materials Neil Glover. “Steel is great for strength and surface hardness, but if you need high-temperature performance it isn’t actually very good; 450–500°C is about its limit.”

Its unsuitability led to a search for a more temperature-resistant material, and jet makers turned to nickel alloys. Relatively abundant, with large deposits in Australia, and low in price, nickel melts at 1,728K (1,455°C) and is resistant to corrosion – both valuable properties for components that function inside a jet engine. Even more important is its ability to form alloys, and the particular property of one of those alloys, a compound known as gamma-prime in which nickel combines with aluminium, to retain its strength at high temperatures. “In steel or even titanium, the strength rapidly drops off as you reach 40–50 per cent of the melting point,” Glover said. “Nickel alloys retain their strength up to 85 per cent of the melting point.

And engine manufacturers make full use of this property. Jet engines work by positioning turbine blades, which spin in the current of hot gases expanding out of the combustion chamber, on the same shaft as the compressor blades that force air into the engine at high pressure. So at the back of the engine, the low-pressure turbine blades, which operate in a gas stream that has cooled down somewhat, are on the same shaft as the large fan blades at the front of the engine, which accelerate air to generate the engine’s thrust. This shaft runs through the middle of the shorter, wider intermediate pressure (IP) shaft, which again has turbine blades at the back and compressor blades at the front. Outside this is the high-pressure shaft, which runs the compressor that forces air into the combustion chamber itself. The combustion chamber is annular, with an exit ring at the back controlling the flow of exhaust gases, and it’s here where the single-crystal blades are found. The gases, fresh from combustion, are at around 1,700°C; and the shaft spins at speeds in excess of 12,000rpm.

This means the blades operate in an environment several hundreds of degrees hotter than the melting point of the nickel alloy. To stop them melting, the metal must be cooled. This is done via two mechanisms: the blades are coated with a low-conductivity ceramic; and they are riddled with a complex, branching structure of internal channels. “Air is drawn from the HP compressor, routed through the core of the engine and into the root of the blades,” explained Glover.

“It passes through the cooling channels and exits through a myriad of holes in the surface of the blade, to create an envelope of cool air around the blade. So the metal is never above its melting point, even though the environment is. The cooling air isn’t actually that cool; it’s at about 600–650°C, but we have to take it from the hot core of the engine so it has enough pressure to get through the channels and out of the holes. It’s still enough to keep the blade temperature down to about 1,150°C.”

Heat is vital to jets; the hotter they can operate, the more energy they can extract from their fuel. This is the major point of competition between engine makers, so over the six decades jets have been in operation, forcing the temperature higher, and developing turbine blades that can withstand the heat, has been one of the most important technology races in the sector. It’s been a gradual process, Glover said, culminating in the development of single-crystal blades in the late 1980s.

The single-crystal structure isn’t intended to cope with temperature, however; it’s to make the blades resistant to the huge mechanical loads that result from their rotational speed. “Every single blade extracts power from the gas stream equivalent to a Formula One car engine,” Glover said. “And the centrifugal force on them is equivalent to the weight of a double-decker bus.

Normally, metals are composed of many crystals – ordered structures of atoms arranged in a regular lattice, which form naturally as the metal cools from a molten state. These crystals are typically of the order of tens of microns in size, positioned in many orientations. At high temperatures and under strain, the crystals can slide against each other, and impurities can diffuse along the boundaries between the grains. This is known as creep, and it badly affected early turbine blades, which were forged from steel and later nickel bars.

The first stage in development was to get rid of any grain boundaries at right angles to the centrifugal loading, which led to the development of blades that were cast so the metal crystals all ran from top to bottom. Later, this was optimised further by casting single crystals, with no grain boundaries at all. It’s a highly complex process: not only must the blades be cast with the internal cooling channels already in place, but the crystals are not homogeneous. Rather, zones of different composition and crystallographic structure exist within the blade.

“You can think of nickel superalloys like these as being like composites,” said Rolls-Royce’s aerofoil turbine materials technologist Neil D’Souza. “It’s a mixture of two phases, one of which – gamma-prime – gives rise to the sustained increase in strength at high temperature.”

When it crystallises, nickel forms a structure known as face-centred cubic (fcc); each cube has a face with five atoms, one at each corner and one in the middle. When alloys are made, generally the atoms just swap in and out of the fcc lattice. But under the right conditions, aluminium and nickel combine in such a way that nickel goes to the centre of the faces and aluminium to the corners. This is known as a precipitate; it forms islands of greater order within the bulk of the alloy, about half a micron in dimension, packed closely together in a rectilinear formation. Because the size of the lattices of the precipitate and the less ordered bulk alloy are almost identical, they are all part of the same crystal.

“You could imagine building a ball and stick lattice model,” said Glover. “In the bulk alloy, you’d place the balls representing the components of the alloy, about 10 different elements including nickel, aluminium, chromium, tantalum and titanium, pretty randomly, and when you got to the gamma-prime precipitate you’d put in this ordered arrangement of aluminium at the corners and nickel in the middle. It’s all on the same regular lattice, oriented the same way, so it’s all the same crystal, but you have these much stronger regions where there’s the array of gamma-prime precipitate.”

But this doesn’t just happen naturally. To make the blades, the first stage is a ceramic ‘core’, of the form of the tortuous internal cooling channels. Wax is injected around this to form the shape of the aerodynamic blade, plus several other features that assist in the casting process. Platinum pins are inserted to support the core inside the wax; then the form is ‘shelled’ by coating it in an slurry of alumina-silicate material to form a ceramic coat. Several more coats of different compositions are applied and then the wax is melted out to leave a void in the shape of the blade. This is investment or ‘lost-wax’ casting, the same technique those Ancient Greek sculptors used to make the Riace Bronzes.

Molten metal is then poured into the mould, which is placed inside a furnace to keep the metal molten. At the base of the mould is one of the additional casting features: a helical structure about the same shape as three turns of a standard corkscrew. Known as the pigtail, this is attached to a plate that is cooled by water. Once filled, the mould is slowly withdrawn from the furnace into a cooler chamber. The metal starts to solidify at the chilled plate, and crystals begin to grow into the pigtail. The crystals grow in a straight line in the direction that the mould is being withdrawn, but because of the pigtail’s twisted shape, all but the fastest-growing crystals are eliminated. Only a crystal with the correct orientation emerges into the blade mould proper, and the gradual withdrawal of the mould ensures the crystal continues growing through the melt into the rest of the space.

The formation of the vital precipitates results from careful control of the external temperature and from the design of the mould; those multiple layers of ceramic determine how fast the heat from the molten metal can dissipate, and this provides the extra finesse to achieve the required internal structure. The platinum pins holding the core in place diffuse into the alloy without affecting its properties.

Once solidified, the casting is removed from the mould and the first of some 20 processes begins to prepare it for assembly into an engine. First, the ceramic cores are dissolved away with caustic alkalis. Then the extra features for casting are machined away. The holes for the cooling air to escape are drilled using electrical discharge machining, which forms the required hole geometry to direct the air to the points where it is needed. Finally, the blade receives its insulating ceramic coating by electron-beam plasma deposition.

The ABCF in Rotherham concentrates on components for large civil airliner engines because, with the advent of aircraft such as the Airbus A350 XWB, for which Rolls-Royce has developed the Trent XWB engine, this is where the company sees its main growth coming from.

Costing some £110m, the ABCF was built to automate as much of the production process as possible. “Single-crystal casting is expensive, and many parts of the process have traditionally been very hands-on,” said ABCF manufacturing manager Steve Pykett. “Our people are fantastically skilled, but they’re human, and no human is going to produce the same quality of work at the end of a shift as they do at the beginning.”

The production of the wax assembly is a good example of this philosophy. “You’ll always find a wax room at an investment casting foundry,” Pykett said. “It requires hand-eye co-ordination and dexterity to make the wax form, but that doesn’t deliver consistency.”

Working with the Manufacturing Technology Centre near Coventry, Rolls-Royce developed an automated system to hold the ceramic core, inject wax, pin the core in place and conduct the assembly process. “It used to take a whole shift to make an assembly; now it takes an hour,” Pykett said. “But time was not the main driver here. We now know that we have consistent product coming out of the wax process, whatever the time of day, and that gives us a solid platform from which we can reduce cost.”

Some other processes have also been automated, including the dressing operation to remove the sacrificial features of the casting. The blades then go into inspection, where Rolls-Royce has replaced five processes with two. The castings are then shipped to another plant at Crosspointe, Virginia, for further machining of the features that will allow them to be attached to their discs in the engine, and for drilling of the cooling holes; they come back to a plant in Annesley, Nottinghamshire, for coating.

“This process is so complex, with precise control of temperatures and materials handling to manage, virtually atom by atom, how the blades are formed,” said casting manufacturing executive Mark Hulands. “What we’ve done is to transfer some of the skills in making these components from the manufacturing engineers on the line to the process developers,” Hulands said. “And that doesn’t mean we’ve de-skilled. Our engineers still need to be highly skilled to keep the processes running smoothly, but they’re different skills and we’ve improved the consistency so we can drive costs down.”
Just realized how complex it is to make a internally channeled SCB with varying composition of alloy elements at different places of the blade.
Some blade pics in the HTFE-25 presentation are labelled as 3-D printed maybe they are for the low pressure sections.
The High pressure & compressor sections may be SCBs(as purportedly achieved in kaveri program) & not 3D printed.
I dont remember seeing any pics of kaveri blades with internal channels....can some one refresh my memory?

Edit:
nileshjr wrote:^^ That's my webpage. :mrgreen: Screenshots from the AI seminar video only. The seminar is a must watch. Link posted above.
Didnt know that it was your blog Nilesh garu,many thanks for uploading the presentation pics, quite informative to say the least, will watch the video.
abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3090
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by abhik »

vina wrote:TOI(let) says that in addition to the 25KN turbofan engine, HAL is developing a HTSE 1200 (i.e. 1200 bhp turbo shaft engine ) for helicopters , basically for the LUH (1 engine) and Dhruv (twin engine).

Now if they put in gear train and stuff in front of a customised LP spool , you can get a Turbo Prop as well, which might be decent for Dornier or slightly larger sized planes.
IIRC it was 1200kw not HP.
JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4567
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by JayS »

Lilo wrote: Just realized how complex it is to make a internally channeled SCB with varying composition of alloy elements at different places of the blade.
Some blade pics in the HTFE-25 presentation are labelled as 3-D printed maybe they are for the low pressure sections.
The High pressure & compressor sections may be SCBs(as purportedly achieved in kaveri program) & not 3D printed.
I dont remember seeing any pics of kaveri blades with internal channels....can some one refresh my memory?
I cannot recall for sure about the HPT blades. I don't think HTFE-25 needs SCB in HPT. The HPT NGV and stator blades are definitely printed. Also you don't need SCBs in HPC. The temperatures are much less at 600-700K.

Please note the TIT for this particular version of 25kN is ~1400K (So inconel can be used. AFAIK Inconel is good till 1200K only. So cooling is needed to reach to 1400K). For Kaveri its more than 1700K. A whole world of difference. If you check the other seminar details from the webpage you will realize the difference in complexity. Even if HAL has SCB in this engine, it must be outsourced. Kaveri SCBs are outsourced from Snecma IIRC. The DMRL technology for SCB is not mature enough (hope I am wrong here).
Picklu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2128
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Picklu »

This engine is 35 kg heavier than Al-55 even though shorter in length and same in dia.

Question for gurus:

Will the use of
a. SCB in HPT and
b. increasing the TIT to 1700k
increase the efficiency of the engine in
a. reducing weight for the same output
b. increasing the output itself beyond 25kN?

If yes, then by how much? Any back of the envelop calculation possible?

These will give us idea about the phased improvement of the core itself over lifetime via mk2, mk3 etc
JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4567
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by JayS »

Old news, I don't know if it was posted here before, but I am reading this thing for the first thing so highlighting.

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/459 ... ng-25.html
Hindustan Aeronautics (HAL) is all set to tap 3D printing technology to manufacture components for its Rs 458-crore 25-kN (kilonewton) aircraft engine project.

In an interaction with Deccan Herald, newly-appointed Chairman T Suvarna Raju said the 6.5-year-long project was going on track until a vendor who was to supply critical components abruptly backtracked.

Undaunted, the company decided to buy 3D printing equipment to master the brains of component manufacturing.
JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4567
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by JayS »

Picklu wrote:This engine is 35 kg heavier than Al-55 even though shorter in length and same in dia.

Question for gurus:

Will the use of
a. SCB in HPT and
b. increasing the TIT to 1700k
increase the efficiency of the engine in
a. reducing weight for the same output
b. increasing the output itself beyond 25kN?

If yes, then by how much? Any back of the envelop calculation possible?

These will give us idea about the phased improvement of the core itself over lifetime via mk2, mk3 etc
First thing first, by increasing temperature of the thermodynamic cycle, you will basically leave the comfort zone where you can use 3D printing easily. Increasing TIT will not only demand change in HTP blades but also HPT NGV, CC liners, HPT casings, HPT stator and what not. More intricate cooling system will be needed. Cost will increase proportionately. Why complicate things like this?? This engine can easily reach to 40kN without so much added intricacies. For anything more Kabini core can be used as basis. There are other things like Ultra-High BP, GTF, open rotor which could be focused on for diversification of HTFE family. Some low hanging fruits like application of 3D aerodynamic optimization for improvement of existing design can be plucked easily side by side.
Picklu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2128
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Picklu »

Tx Nilesh ji for the detailed response on the upgrade path. Now lets prey to see this in operational service at the earliest to set up the initial phase of a modern product life cycle for engine in India.

We got one for Dhruv and another one for LCA is coming up. With the engine in place, the end to end portfolio for FLY category will be done.

Also with KGMT coming up, a major component of the MOVE category(gearbox, shaft and propeller being the other components) will also get done for navy other than the current FLOAT category.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19236
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by NRao »

nileshjr (and anyone else),

I have not read the past few pages (lazy). What is your take on the present situation of engines in India? 1-5 lines for Kaveri (can it be revived? worth it? should it?, whatever else you can think of), whatever this Indo-US/GE effort and anything else. Synopsis should do.

Thx.
Lilo
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4080
Joined: 23 Jun 2007 09:08

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Lilo »

nileshjr wrote:
I cannot recall for sure about the HPT blades. I don't think HTFE-25 needs SCB in HPT. The HPT NGV and stator blades are definitely printed. Also you don't need SCBs in HPC. The temperatures are much less at 600-700K.

Please note the TIT for this particular version of 25kN is ~1400K (So inconel can be used. AFAIK Inconel is good till 1200K only. So cooling is needed to reach to 1400K). For Kaveri its more than 1700K. A whole world of difference. If you check the other seminar details from the webpage you will realize the difference in complexity. Even if HAL has SCB in this engine, it must be outsourced. Kaveri SCBs are outsourced from Snecma IIRC. The DMRL technology for SCB is not mature enough (hope I am wrong here).
First thing first, by increasing temperature of the thermodynamic cycle, you will basically leave the comfort zone where you can use 3D printing easily. Increasing TIT will not only demand change in HTP blades but also HPT NGV, CC liners, HPT casings, HPT stator and what not. More intricate cooling system will be needed. Cost will increase proportionately. Why complicate things like this?? This engine can easily reach to 40kN without so much added intricacies. For anything more Kabini core can be used as basis. There are other things like Ultra-High BP, GTF, open rotor which could be focused on for diversification of HTFE family. Some low hanging fruits like application of 3D aerodynamic optimization for improvement of existing design can be plucked easily side by side.
Nilesh garu,
Thanks for pointing out the bolded portions & the TIT for this engine.Guess 3D printing will serve our purpose well for the time being.Means the real challenge is to move ahead from Kabini & produce its next (reliable) iteration - by incorporating SCB tech(hopefully homegrown by that time).
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Indranil »

Oh! I was following these at AI-15. New videos have been uploaded. Very impressive presentation and work. I absolutely loved the humbleness. every engine expert in the room agreed with the methodology. But there was Mr. Jain from IAF! He had to teach everybody what is best for the nation, when he could not even comprehend what the speaker and the other experts in the room were trying to tell him! He was stuck on 25kN for which HAL was already license producing the Adour. Even after explaining that they are developing the core first. An engine from 20-35kN can be build using this core, he wouldn't be satisfied. "Why 25kN"? Then he had to be explained in layman terms that the engine HAL is developing is better than the Adour in every conceivable way. But no, "why 25kN"?

Even after explaining that they are not competing with GEs and PWs of the world. They want to take a first step: to come up with an engine in 10 years time which is reasonable in terms of TWR, SFC, reliability and life. They are not trying anything exotic, they expect to their third or fourth iteration to be fielded in an aircraft, and by then they would be behind the state-of-art of that time. But still they will be be confident that they can design a solid engine that works well enough. By the way, the SFC (0.72) and TWR (6.6) are nothing to scoff at. They are firmly rooted in reality. I loved the speaker and his teams work.

On the other hand, did you see Mr Jain's presentation from the previous day? :x A very poor representation of the IAF. Hopefully, not the correct one!
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5305
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by srai »

^^^
Unfortunately, people like Mr. Jain tend to have the loudest voices!
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Indranil »

He did. The speaker and the chair had to ask him many times to let them finish their answers.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20782
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Karan M »

indranilroy wrote:
Oh! I was following these at AI-15. New videos have been uploaded. Very impressive presentation and work. I absolutely loved the humbleness. every engine expert in the room agreed with the methodology. But there was Mr. Jain from IAF! He had to teach everybody what is best for the nation, when he could not even comprehend what the speaker and the other experts in the room were trying to tell him! He was stuck on 25kN for which HAL was already license producing the Adour. Even after explaining that they are developing the core first. An engine from 20-35kN can be build using this core, he wouldn't be satisfied. "Why 25kN"? Then he had to be explained in layman terms that the engine HAL is developing is better than the Adour in every conceivable way. But no, "why 25kN"?

Even after explaining that they are not competing with GEs and PWs of the world. They want to take a first step: to come up with an engine in 10 years time which is reasonable in terms of TWR, SFC, reliability and life. They are not trying anything exotic, they expect to their third or fourth iteration to be fielded in an aircraft, and by then they would be behind the state-of-art of that time. But still they will be be confident that they can design a solid engine that works well enough. By the way, the SFC (0.72) and TWR (6.6) are nothing to scoff at. They are firmly rooted in reality. I loved the speaker and his teams work.

On the other hand, did you see Mr Jain's presentation from the previous day? :x A very poor representation of the IAF. Hopefully, not the correct one!
Unbelievable obnoxiousness from that gent in question. "I am being hard hitting", "I have made a presentation yesterday", "I am representing the interests of the nation".
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20782
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Karan M »

Was this the same mahan insaan in the MiG-27 UPG discussion at the previous Aero India. Who kept repeating similar pointless stuff on repeat?
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20782
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Karan M »

Note the NIIP paper was not video recorded in the aeroindia archives. Deliberate choice?
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Indranil »

Karan M wrote:Was this the same mahan insaan in the MiG-27 UPG discussion at the previous Aero India. Who kept repeating similar pointless stuff on repeat?
I don't know. But that would make him a know-all, avionics and propulsion!

I liked how the chair put him in his place. You "speak" of what will happen in 2050, TWR of 15:1 (with an eye roll). This man is "making" a real engine. You should go back to IAF and tell them to support him. You have always asked for an engine first, a plane to build around an engine. Here, this man is building a wonderful engine for you. Take it, and build an aeroplane around it. Why are you asking him to go back to license production?

To which he replies. This is an international conference. I have done my "research". If a foreigner would have said what I said, you all would have applauded ... bla bla bla. Thankfully , his colleague from the IAF had better sense to close that discussion with a good rebuttal saying that IAF and DRDO are going towards the right direction with concrete steps, which was nice to hear.
member_29267
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 61
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by member_29267 »

The Chair was right when he said that IAF wanted HAL/GTRE to now come up with an engine first and then design a platform around it. That is what they are doing. IAF (and many here in BRF too) was very critical of GTRE/DRDO wrt to Kaveri for trying to build an engine around the platform for LCA. W should support the new approach being taken by HAL and hopefully we can could IJT Mk 2 and twin engine AJT around this engine without significant delays.
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5305
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by srai »

^^^

Typically, you build an engine around the platform because the platform specifies an engine dimensions and thrust requirements. However, that may have been the wrong approach for countries like India who haven't built proven aero engines in the first place and can't leverage existing components. So it makes sense to design and build a series of engines that provide a range of thrust in the micro, light, medium and heavy classes independent of any platform. That should provide enough flexibility to power a wide range of aero platforms. For example, variations of micro for cruise missiles and UAV; light (HTFE-25) for IJT/AJT/UAV or business jets; medium (Kaveri) for LCA/UCAV/AMCA; and heavy for FGFA.
JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4567
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by JayS »

indranilroy wrote: Oh! I was following these at AI-15. New videos have been uploaded. Very impressive presentation and work. I absolutely loved the humbleness. every engine expert in the room agreed with the methodology. But there was Mr. Jain from IAF! He had to teach everybody what is best for the nation, when he could not even comprehend what the speaker and the other experts in the room were trying to tell him! He was stuck on 25kN for which HAL was already license producing the Adour. Even after explaining that they are developing the core first. An engine from 20-35kN can be build using this core, he wouldn't be satisfied. "Why 25kN"? Then he had to be explained in layman terms that the engine HAL is developing is better than the Adour in every conceivable way. But no, "why 25kN"?

Even after explaining that they are not competing with GEs and PWs of the world. They want to take a first step: to come up with an engine in 10 years time which is reasonable in terms of TWR, SFC, reliability and life. They are not trying anything exotic, they expect to their third or fourth iteration to be fielded in an aircraft, and by then they would be behind the state-of-art of that time. But still they will be be confident that they can design a solid engine that works well enough. By the way, the SFC (0.72) and TWR (6.6) are nothing to scoff at. They are firmly rooted in reality. I loved the speaker and his teams work.

On the other hand, did you see Mr Jain's presentation from the previous day? :x A very poor representation of the IAF. Hopefully, not the correct one!
It was rather unfortunate for him to try and belittle HAL's efforts. They all are on the same team. I have heard this argument few times now coming from IAF personnel - "why DRDO/HAL builds which is there already today, which we can buy easily from elsewhere?? Why can't they just build futuristic platforms which we need 30 years down the line??". I don't know what's the reason for such naive view, but they simply don't seem to understand that unless you build the foundation and the 1st floor and 2nd and so on, you can't build 10th floor directly. Its not one or even a handful of entities which make some aerospace platform possible. I was watching the documentary on the Russian 'White Swan'. They mentioned more than 800 institutes were involved in the development program. Thats the kind of foundation that is needed to make a strong MIC. The work we are doing today will go into make this foundation first - academic institutes, RnD, manufacturing, suppliers and what not. All these things are developed through iterations. And frankly I don't see IA/IAF have any idea whatsoever about what they need 30 years down the line let alone understand where will the technology be 30 years down the line. They should first build cadre within themselves who are core technology people who understand all this. Those people will be the bridge between the developer and the user side. If we SDREs were good at working together, we wouldn't even need to wait until something like this come up. If the user and developer had feeling of common ownership rather than this stupid tu-tu-main-main attitude, they would have made a common team of people from both sides sitting together under one roof working solely on development of SQR/tech-specs and acquisitions and technology road maps etc. I never understood why IAF/IA has to separately make SQR and then send to DRDO for acceptance. Why can't they just sit together and make SQR right from starting . That way all the crap will be eliminated right at the source in much less time and neither side can blame other for unrealistic expectations/demands/promises.

I feel stupid that we on BRF even discuss all this. Its so plain stupid obvious.
Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Gyan »

After Army came up with Windy and Tuffy, I am still waiting for IAF version of coughie & fartie.
JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4567
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by JayS »

NRao wrote:nileshjr (and anyone else),

I have not read the past few pages (lazy). What is your take on the present situation of engines in India? 1-5 lines for Kaveri (can it be revived? worth it? should it?, whatever else you can think of), whatever this Indo-US/GE effort and anything else. Synopsis should do.

Thx.
I am not sure what you want to know exactly. I am rather hopeful about the engine development in India, since I have heard from a x-paanwalla who heard it from chaiwalla that Modi government has given huge impetus to the engine development since they understand its of paramount importance. They want engine tech across the board not just 1 or 2 classes. We should see lot of money flowing towards engine RnD in future if this is true. We already have so many projects running around (a list of all known projects is ther a few pages back here).

Kaveri is dead only on paper as a 'program'. Not as a product. Kabini core is being utilised and we should see industrial, marine versions in few years. One engine for UCAV is planned. Even Kaveri-90kN is being discussed around. I hope they continue certifying Kaveri in its current form and put it on a twin-jet fighter platform ASAP. And eventually in one of the LCA prototypes. This is the logical end. I hope they pursue it. There was a tender for about 18-19 Kaveri engines to be manufactured by pvt player. This gives me further hope. This will help big time in industrializing the technology. After this the next big thing left it MRO, but for that the engine needs to be put in to service in IAF.

If they certify current Kaveri 80kN version in its entirety it will help achieve following things:
- Establishing full certification procedures/processes to be used for all future programs
- A chance to develop engine testing facilities/infrastructure before Kaveri-110kN comes up (why the mig-29 that was mentioned many times is not bought so far?? Why are we not buying Il-76 flying test bed from Ru or demanding B747 based flight test bed from Boeing/GE as a part of Offset deals??)..
- Kaveri-90kN, which would be just an uprated version of current engine, will be certified in very short time and could be applied to LCA MK1/1A during MLU.

All this will help big time in Kaveri-110kN version when its ready for testing.


I have very less hopes from Indo-US efforts. If it doesn't kill indigenous development efforts, I'll be happy with that much also to be frank. The way I see it is, if we anyway gonna buy GE engines in large number, why not make the best out of it and try to 'beg' as much as possible. Personally I think if we make Kaveri-110kN our national mission 1st serial production AMCA can definitely fly with Kaveri. We are looking 12-15 yrs down the line. But to avoid LCA-Kaveri fiasco, it would be prudent to use F414 at least for 1st batch of AMCA. Chinese reportedly sinking in $60B in engine development we should put at least $6B on the table.
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5305
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by srai »

^^^
Agree. Kaveri in its current form should be taken to its logical end through certification and limited production run to establish a complete engine infrastructure in India from engine R&D to certification process to production.
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by SaiK »

might not happen, keep your fingers x-ed.

reason: http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 8#p1951848
Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4104
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Neela »

Was looking into Honda's new business jet. ~3kN thrust engines developed along with the airframe. Lots of videos available on their website.
I was surprised through - a lot of development has happened in the US. Even for such a small jet.
Mitsubishi's MRJ also uses P&W engines.
Looks like Amerikuh is everywhere.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19236
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by NRao »

nileshjr,

More than what I had expected, so thx.

A couple of follow ups:

1) IF Modi gov is pushing all engine, what is the problem with Kaveri from your point? Why the reluctance of sorts? Just asking

2) if Kaveri-90kN is being discussed, what HAS prevented then from taking steps so far? Funds or techs or both?

3) Same thing with Kaveri 110kN. What am I missing if it was just a matter of pushing things?

I would have thought if all thsi was possible they would have pushed that product - is is a strategic product after all. I mean even a snoring MMS (sorry, no harm meant to him) should have dreamt of it, woken up and given orders. Strategic. No?

On the US effort, I have a few thoughts, next post.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by shiv »

Neela wrote: Mitsubishi's MRJ also uses P&W engines.
Looks like Amerikuh is everywhere.
Actually for aero engines Americuh, UK and France and to a lesser extent Russia. Canada to a small extent. China is nowhere and not even Japan. I am sure of this although I expect the usual LOL bashing "Do not under-estimate China" etc. I think people who speak of Chinese engines have no idea about where engine technology is now. When you have 100,000 engines running notching up several million collective hours of reliable service carrying people billions of kilometers - you then have a claim on engine tech.
JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4567
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by JayS »

^^ Absolutely right. The shear amount of technological capabilities that need to be built up to be able to make a decent jet engine by today's standard is mind boggling. People who have not seen things up close might find it difficult to appreciate this.
member_20067
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by member_20067 »

shiv wrote:
Neela wrote: Mitsubishi's MRJ also uses P&W engines.
Looks like Amerikuh is everywhere.
Actually for aero engines Americuh, UK and France and to a lesser extent Russia. Canada to a small extent. China is nowhere and not even Japan. I am sure of this although I expect the usual LOL bashing "Do not under-estimate China" etc. I think people who speak of Chinese engines have no idea about where engine technology is now. When you have 100,000 engines running notching up several million collective hours of reliable service carrying people billions of kilometers - you then have a claim on engine tech.

Could not agree more--- the amount of upfront investment, the heritage and culture of building jet engines could not be appreciated enough.. it is not a skill set we can lead frog and acquire.. easily
vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by vina »

shiv wrote:Actually for aero engines Americuh, UK and France and to a lesser extent Russia. Canada to a small extent. China is nowhere and not even Japan. .
I had explained this long long ago in the Kaveri thread.
We have Nihon Jin, Cheeni Jin and Yindu Jin, But No In Jin !!
Only Gai Jin have In Jins.

A poor take on the old quote in Calcutta which goes like this.
We have Mukerjee, Chatterjee and Bannerjee, But No Enerjee
Will
BRFite
Posts: 637
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Will »

To succeed one needs to have multiple engine projects running at sustained rates. There will probably 95% failures till one reaches a certain level of technology but one has to keep at it . Reports are that the AMCA will go with an engine that's wont have the ability to super cruise at a sustained rate. That's being realistic keeping in mind what's available to India today.But one should aim to develop an engine with that ability. That can be attained one day locally only through a properly managed and funded engine program .
JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4567
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by JayS »

NRao wrote:nileshjr,

More than what I had expected, so thx.

A couple of follow ups:

1) IF Modi gov is pushing all engine, what is the problem with Kaveri from your point? Why the reluctance of sorts? Just asking

2) if Kaveri-90kN is being discussed, what HAS prevented then from taking steps so far? Funds or techs or both?

3) Same thing with Kaveri 110kN. What am I missing if it was just a matter of pushing things?

I would have thought if all thsi was possible they would have pushed that product - is is a strategic product after all. I mean even a snoring MMS (sorry, no harm meant to him) should have dreamt of it, woken up and given orders. Strategic. No?

On the US effort, I have a few thoughts, next post.
I don't have enough info/clarity on current situation on Kaveri right now to comment on these things. No point in shooting in dark. Things might be going on well behind the curtain.

Its is a gazillion dollar question as to why GoI does not act in logical manner on many such simple strategic things.
Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4104
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Neela »

Indranil-Sir,
I am curious about a statement you possibly made. I cannot find that post anymore through searches .
You had mentioned that Al-55I has life of 150hrs before overhaul.

[ And please dont mistake me for a Phillip here for the following statements]
NPO Saturn Im sure do know that 150hrs is a ridiculously low mtbo.Their product profile has a large number of engines . Harnessing that knowledge for Al-55I and tweak it for IJT's needs seem to be a straightforward thing the company to do to create a reasonably spec-ed engine. Do you think there could be other reasons here?
JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4567
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by JayS »

^^ I had made that comment. I have read it long time ago so don't have exact link. But its not very difficult to find references to it. The very 1st link that Google threw says this:

http://in.rbth.com/blogs/2014/02/24/fla ... iner_33117
The new engine too hasn't received certification. “The Russian engine needs to be overhauled more frequently than suits the Air Force,” an IAF official told Defense News. The engine would need to be overhauled about every 150 hours of flying, while the air force wants the engine to operate at least 900 hours before an overhaul is needed.

A Russian diplomat, however, says the engine meets the basic requirements of the IJT, adding that the service life of the engine is being increased to 500 hours.

While 500 is a big improvement over 150, it is still not enough. Jet trainers conduct several sorties a day. If the IJT does, say, 10 sorties lasting an hour each daily, it would result in engines being overhauled every 50 days. That is going to severely limit aircraft availability, and the IAF finds that unacceptable.
Russians are not well known for long service life numbers anyways. And it looks like in Al-55 they did a real shabby job in 1st iteration. Perhaps because it wasn't meant for their own use. Or perhaps they wanted to milk us in stages. Your guess is as good as mine here since we would hardly get to know the exact engineering explanation/reason for 150 number.

GE F404 is well known for severe life-related issues in its early days (upto of 60+% life reduction on some major components). For all the technological prowess GE has, even they couldn't make it work satisfactorily in one go. Such examples should tell us SDREs what to expect and what not to from our Scientists/Engineers in version 1.
Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4104
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Neela »

^^^
Thank you sir.
Took your cue and looked up commercial jets where Saturn engines are used...going under assumption that
- in the commercial space, max availability is pre-condition for revenue
- they need to put up a jet+engine that is nearly comparable with other competitors ( else no one will buy them)
Landed up in Sukhoi regional jet and surprise surprise ...the core is Snecma but Fan and others are Saturn.

So even Saturn , in the cut-throat commercial space (where GE,PW seem to be leaders), went with Snecma for their engine core.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by shiv »

Neela wrote:^^^
So even Saturn , in the cut-throat commercial space (where GE,PW seem to be leaders), went with Snecma for their engine core.
Actually one of the most successful engine families is from CFM engines. CFM is a joint venture between GE and Snecma. So France is very high on the engine pecking order.

One of their most roaringly successful products is the CFM 56
http://www.cfmaeroengines.com/engines/cfm56-7b
In total, nearly 8,400 CFM56-7B engines are in service on 737 aircraft, making it the most popular engine/aircraft combination in commercial aviation. More than 190 customers fly CFM56-7B engines and the fleet has accumulated more than 150 million flight hours. The primary factors behind the engine's broad-based acceptance include industry-leading reliability and environmental friendliness, low cost of ownership and world-class customer support.
150 million hours is 17,000 years of flying CFM engines alone and I bet there is not a single BRFite who has not flown a jet with a CFM 56
Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Shreeman »

I have never understood this latesht-besht-most-ephicient not to mention costly engine business. Take locomotives -- are they TFTA? Do they run an impressive system that a) is mostly sanction proof, b) can be made in house and in beyond airshow quantities, and c)serve a purpose for even the poorest? No? Only bullet trains will work? Why?

Now why is import-only the only solution to creating a comparable air network? Thats right, we dont want to even think of the day when such a system might become reality.

All this brochritis serves no purpose. The constellations would be great even today if bihar airways and orissa airlines were operating them like buses.

It is that kind of loss of prestige that finally makes local development possible. Until then, air parasite on end, the rafale on the other.
maitya
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 623
Joined: 02 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by maitya »

nileshjr wrote:^^ Absolutely right. The shear amount of technological capabilities that need to be built up to be able to make a decent jet engine by today's standard is mind boggling. People who have not seen things up close might find it difficult to appreciate this.
Wrt the highlighted part above, let try and point-out, in layman pov ofcourse, some such "difficulty" wrt one aspect of a modern turbofan i.e. the topic being discussed currently, that of 3-D printing manufacturing tech, by HAL engineers, for the NGV of "seriously non-sexy" 25KN turbofan.

In 3 part series - another 2000 word post :oops:

[Part - 1]

[NGV and it’s Function]
The Nozzle Guide Vanes (NGV) or nothing but static (stator) aerofoils that are "hung from the ceiling", which does two things :

1) Increase the gas velocity (accelerate it) so that the downstream turbine rotor blades can extract energy.
To do so, these vanes are arranged in such a way, that they form a convergent duct (lie a funnel) that convert the gaseous heat and pressure energy into higher velocity gas flow.

And as Velocity increases the impact pressure increases (being a function of velocity) but the static pressure decreases - do note the whole trick prior-to-combustor entry is to slow down the air-mass to as low as possible increasing the static pressure.
Here just the opposite is happening i.e trading of static pressure to impact pressure - needless to say the total pressure (sum total of static and impact pressure remains same, always).

Do further note, like all stators, these NGVs being static, do NOT add (or subtract) any energy. They merely convert energy i.e. from pressure and temperature of the gaseous energy to velocity. And, as with any expansion, this increase in velocity comes with a temperature drop across it.


2) NGVs also play a secondary role of directing the expanded gas in the combustor to the turbine rotor blades at the optimum angle.

Thus they need to be of complicated aerofoil geometry to match the "expectant" airflow pattern on the turbine face (somewhat mimicking the turbine geometry blades - actually with a 90 phase etc and even then not an exact replica, but those are advanced topics not to be discussed here).



[The Involved Stresses]
Now what does all of these above means - it means you need,
a) a large aerofoil structure, which will be static

b) but will have to withstand the highest temperature anywhere in the turbofan core (except of course right inside the combustor - the flame temperature within the combustor is around 2K deg C or 1930 deg C (the melting temp of Ni is approx. 1455deg C)

c) will see a temperature drop between the "front-end" of the vanes to it's "rear-end" i.e. across it


Now let's see what kind of stresses does all this means, the NGVs needs to endure/overcome:
a) Obviously thermal stress - because having to withstand such high temperatures, higher than the turbine rotor blades - so high Thermal Mechanical Fatigue (TMF) resistance (aka higher melting points).

b) Not much of Mechanical stress - as unlike the turbine rotor blades, it's static (so no dealing with centrifugal force etc).
But since there's a temp drop across it's face, there will be Mechanical stress (neither tensile stress that are paramount for a turbine discs nor the cyclic stresses) but not of the order of magnitude of that of the blades and discs of a turbine rotor.
So no need of materials with very good tensile ductility, high tensile yield and ultimate strength etc - a moderately "strong but ductile" element would do

c) Also it doesn't really need to worry about cyclical loads (again since not moving) that leads to LCF of the turbine discs and HCF of the turbine blades.


[Problem Definition and High Level Approach]
What does all these mean?

It means material wise, you would need something that can withstand very very high operating temperature regimes but with moderate tensile and ductile properties.

Now over the year’s investment casting and the vacuum heat-treatment processes have become sophisticated enough to have a casted materials being able to withstand such level of mechanical strength - also being casted they will not be as ductile as wrought ones, but ductile enough. So using casted Ni superalloys would solve the mechanical stress aspects.

However tackling Thermal Stress creates a huge problem - going the ceramic route would have been optimum, but being brittle, it will not able to withstand even the moderate mechanical stress that it will be subject to.

But there's the other leeway you get - not much of creep-resistance, LCF and HCF enduring properties are required either. So all those high-funda DS or SC casting technologies is of little value. An equi-axed casted Ni-superalloy would do, provided it can withstand such high temps.

Traditionally, a Co-based superalloy would have been best - as these have the best TMF resistance. But they have poor corrosion and oxidation resistance properties which, is also a critical factor due to such high temperatures involved.
So we are basically left with casted Ni-based superalloys (with higher Co and Cr content, to bump up the Thermal stress resistance a bit).

But then comes a bigger challenge - all of these will still not take you to a material which will be able to endure 1800+ deg C ambient condition - not without some sort of internal cooling (and also TBCs).

But before that, let me just re-iterate the thumb rule – castings are intrinsically stronger than the forgings, at high temperature regimes – this is mainly attributed to relatively coarse grain size/structure of a casted materials compared to those forged.
And this creates another set of problems - these being aerofoils with complex plan-form/shapes creates a major problem in "carving" out these cooling paths in a thin-walled structure.


So you are back to the basic "problem/difficulty" of casting DS/SC blades - of thin-walled mold creation, for such a large and complex shape with such intricate cooling passages inbuilt. Do note neither DS nor SC investment casting processes are not viable for large castings like that of a whole integral-NGV-along-with-its-casing etc.

And then comes the more importantly difficult aspect of actually casting the actual vanes from such a mold.

(contd ...)

PS: Pls do refer to the Kaveri sticky thread, quite generously, for further detailed understanding of various stuff surmised above.
maitya
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 623
Joined: 02 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by maitya »

[Part - II]

[Casting Mold Materials and Design]
First let’s look at the mold design and production itself:

The mold design (and casting temperature control) itself requires extensive understanding (and thus devise algorithms from it) of the various thermal and mechanical processes undergoing during heating up, pouring and metal solidification sequence. This in itself is a very closely/jealously guarded IP which wouldn’t be made available by the established engine-devt houses.

Normally, this is where the problem starts … whilst the pattern-material for the mold for the solid (or hollow) vane structure can be quite easily formed by the traditional wax-injected methods, using the same for the delicate internal-cooling-structures, imposes unacceptable level of handling restrictions, for the future casting-workflow steps.
Similarly, there’re additional headaches wrt ability to remove (by leaching) the ceramic cores from the castings itself in the final stages.

So currently a separate plastic based (Polystyrene) pattern-material is used for fabricating the intricate internal cooling structure - the key advantage is high resistance to handling damage, even in extremely thin sections (for e.g. sections between two adjacent cooling passages etc).

But, as with all things in life, nothing comes free – plastic based patterns have this tendency of causing shell mold cracking during pattern removal, and thus require more expensive tooling and injection equipment than that for wax-based patterns.

Patterns are usually produced by injecting pattern material in to metal dies - but this injecting itself is quite complicated requiring complicated hydraulic machines etc – plus different pattern material requires different injection temp and injection pressure (for Wax patterns it’s 70deg C at 1.5KSI while for plastics it’s 260deg C at 20KSI).


[Casting Mold Assembly]
Next step in casting process is pattern/mold assembly – As the name suggests, since it ‘s almost impossible to create an integral mold for the entire vane structure (or even turbine blades) due to it’s complicate aerofoil shape … so separate smaller pattern segments produced in dies, injected separately and are then assembled together in different ways.

For example, pattern clusters of aircraft turbine blades may range from 6 to 30 parts etc.

The Wax components are assembled by “wax welding” while Polystyrene pattern segments are assembled by “solvent welding” etc (nowadays, laser welding units have been developed for “welding” wax components).
The tolerance levels for the required alignment to precise temp control etc are so narrow that, it’s a technology in itself on it’s own right.


[Internal Cooling Tubes and Ceramic Cores]
Intricate internal cooling tubes are normally created via a ceramic core process …
Without going into too much details about it, pls note that from a layman pov, the preformed cores (and there’s something called self-formed cores for simpler passage-way geometry) are formed by a number of ceramic forming processes.
(e.g. simple tubes and rods etc are extruded from silica glass and used in core creation, fine ceramic powder are injection molded into steel dies etc).

This is another technology in itself.

But for the current discussion, pls note silica based ceramic core systems have high temperature property limitations and also hampers the ability to remove (by leaching) the ceramic cores from the castings without compromising mechanical properties.

Thus for creating complex-shaped ceramic core components, a very high scrap rate is normal (approx. 75% or thereabouts), increasing the time and cost of making them.

(contd ...)
maitya
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 623
Joined: 02 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by maitya »

[Part - III]

[The Kaveri/Kabini Example]
For real world example, in the Kaveri/Kabini world this was a major holdup ... IIRC the molds were finally imported for Safran (?). Productionising such stuff also would have been a headache.

Another problem that one is forced to deal with, is that of dealing with this tendency of non-uniform internal porosity within the micro-structure, most prominent in large-cross-sectional sections – a process called HIP (Hot Isostatic Pressing) does mitigates this to a large extent.


[Advantanges of 3D Manufacturing Tech and Epilogue]
3D printing technology immensely helps here … It eliminates the need of many investment casting process steps leading to cost and lead-time reduction etc.

For example, none of these above complexities of first producing different mold patterns and then later assembling them are required.

As defined in a CAD, using SLS (selective laser sintering) prototype patterns can be produced by depositing fine layers of various materials etc. And as a bonus, these patterns have been found to have favorable de-waxing response, resulting in much better surface quality etc.
So with 3-D printing technology, now it is possible to provide casting patterns without the use of wax or ceramic injection dies. So now it’s possible to take a 3-D CAD, convert it into various cross-sectional layers directly build 3-D ceramic shells, with all inbuilt intricate-cooling paths etc, into which metal can be poured.


What HAL engine division folks are trying to achieve just that.
Develop the required know-how to circumvent a large part of the modern turbofan-core workflow using a modern manufacturing technology. Again it’s not path-breaking as that’s the current trend in various giant engine-houses world-wide – but it does create that technology foundation, based on which larger (and thus more complicated) problems can be addressed etc.

Kudos to them!!

[The End]


(PS: As opposed to that IAF gent who can’t simply comprehend the “utility of re-inventing the 25KN wheel”. :roll:
As a corollary, if GE hands-them-down a 100KN engine via export route tomorrow, these same gents will then loudly wonder at the next logical step of Kaveri/Kabeni development of say a 100KN turbofan as 100KN class is already available, why can’t you try 150KN class straightaway?)
vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by vina »

So with 3-D printing technology, now it is possible to provide casting patterns without the use of wax or ceramic injection dies. So now it’s possible to take a 3-D CAD, convert it into various cross-sectional layers directly build 3-D ceramic shells, with all inbuilt intricate-cooling paths etc, into which metal can be poured
Surely they cannot use 3D printing (or even casting) on single crystal blades. It is that last 200 to 300 deg difference in material capability that makes such a vast difference in overall engine performance. There is no real substitute for the traditional methods for turbine blades of higher performance engines.

Not that I have a quibble with what they are doing for this 25KN engine, this rapid prototyping and testing and iterative development is the right strategy.
Post Reply