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.
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby SaiK » 12 Jun 2011 09:00

the recent posts from mrca thread also confirms this is not ECO core. /period.. this puppy if 120kN (new puppy, whatever it is baselined off it does not matter) then start making halwa.

sivab
BRFite
Posts: 962
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby sivab » 12 Jun 2011 23:21

Bummer, GE slides in this presentation shows F414-INS6 in 98KN category.

http://www.boeing.com/AeroIndia2011/pdf ... iefing.pdf

which conflicts with link below for F414-INS6 being highest thrust F414

http://www.geae.com/aboutgeae/presscent ... 01001.html

Gurneesh
BRFite
Posts: 465
Joined: 14 Feb 2010 21:21
Location: Troposphere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Gurneesh » 12 Jun 2011 23:43

This was posted by rakesh on MMRCA thread..

Rakesh wrote:France's Rafale fighter proves its 'omnirole' skills
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2011/06/14/357687/frances-rafale-fighter-proves-its-omnirole-skills.html

Propulsion system supplier Snecma, meanwhile, will deliver its first enhanced examples of the M88 engine to Dassault's Merignac final assembly site in November, after completing the last test activities on the -4E version this month. Drawing on the activities of Snecma's ECO development programme of 2004-07, the new standard will reduce ownership costs and maintenance demands, and will also have the growth potential to increase available power from a current maximum of 17,000lb (75kN) to roughly 19,800lb.



So, it seems that ECO can take the M88 to about 88 kN.

Making a 120 kN or even a 100 kN Kaveri based on ECO might require substantial changes in ECO itself.

@ Sivab, INS6 at 98 kN is surely a bummer if true.
Last edited by Gurneesh on 13 Jun 2011 01:25, edited 1 time in total.

ManojM
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 10
Joined: 16 Apr 2006 23:31
Location: North of 49

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby ManojM » 12 Jun 2011 23:57

GE press release is right - in a way. The INS6 is the current highest thrust model of the 414 family while the EPE with higher thrust is shown in the Boeing timeline as ~2015. The Boeing pdf also alludes to the EPE being under development.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby SaiK » 13 Jun 2011 10:14

sivab!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

where does it say 120kN (~27klbs)? the 22000lbs should convert to 98kN aprox.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Singha » 13 Jun 2011 11:16

why would Tejas need an engine with the thrust of AL31. thats more appropriate for a much heavier plane in the F-16-block60 category?

chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby chackojoseph » 13 Jun 2011 12:31

Singha wrote:why would Tejas need an engine with the thrust of AL31. thats more appropriate for a much heavier plane in the F-16-block60 category?



Singha,

I may not be entirely right on this, but, folks are on high horse power thrust here. The fact that kaveri is "flat rated" excapes the logic of discussion here. Kaveri should be able to cove constant high thrust and variable thrust is not required.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby SaiK » 13 Jun 2011 16:21

There are limits to which a horse can power up to given mechanical and structural characteristics. If Kaveri could reach 95-100kN wet (which is about 414 has), imo it should be good enough and added to the new eco-nomoical tech spins, should increase loiter range.

btw, Kaveri DOES require flat rated feature for Indian conditions. If we don't require that, then why reinvent the wheel(meaning joint ventures) - Snecma is not going to go knowledge dumping here.. they are here to learn as well for the new sets of data, IAF operates on day to day.

Now, you see why IAF does not like Snecma making inroads here.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7648
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby nachiket » 13 Jun 2011 17:50

Singha wrote:why would Tejas need an engine with the thrust of AL31. thats more appropriate for a much heavier plane in the F-16-block60 category?

Exactly. I am not sure if the airframe can even withstand it. A thrust of 98KN would give the Tejas an impressive T/W ratio. Folks should realize that a 120KN GE engine would consume more fuel than a 98KN one and thus reduce the endurance. It is just not required.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby SaiK » 13 Jun 2011 19:16

the 120kN is sivab injection theory, cleverly interlaced between two news articles. :(

sivab
BRFite
Posts: 962
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby sivab » 13 Jun 2011 19:52

saik: GE has demonstrated F414-EPE with 20% more thrust than F414-400. When they said highest thrust F414, I assumed its some version of that. In the end "highest thrust" was just a mktg gimmick.

Gurneesh
BRFite
Posts: 465
Joined: 14 Feb 2010 21:21
Location: Troposphere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Gurneesh » 13 Jun 2011 19:57

nachiket wrote:
Singha wrote:why would Tejas need an engine with the thrust of AL31. thats more appropriate for a much heavier plane in the F-16-block60 category?

Exactly. I am not sure if the airframe can even withstand it. A thrust of 98KN would give the Tejas an impressive T/W ratio. Folks should realize that a 120KN GE engine would consume more fuel than a 98KN one and thus reduce the endurance. It is just not required.


EPE is actually said to decrease sfc by 1 % while increasing power by 20 %. Refer the boeing presentation linked by sivab.

It is important to note that 414-400 started testing in 1993 (or about 2 decades ago). Advancements in materials and combustion and flow processes since then will impart significant benefits to the engine performance and sfc.

Wiki lists INS6 at 120 kN !!! Could someone get a clearer answer from some Chaiwalas.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Singha » 13 Jun 2011 20:21

higher thrust usually needs more air, which usually means intake enlargement as the french are proposing for M88-9 UAE idea for 1.5cm wider...and though it sounds small the french say it will need a lot of testing and customer has to foot some of the bill.

ranjithnath
BRFite
Posts: 114
Joined: 12 Jun 2010 14:39

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby ranjithnath » 13 Jun 2011 21:18

Wiki lists INS6 at 120 kN !!! Could someone get a clearer answer from some Chaiwalas.

wiki article is a stub!!besides we havent seen a single legit source claiming INS6 to be around 120 kN.as sivab pointed out its just a marketing gimmick.if it was indeed the 120 KN engine,trust me,GE would be the first one to come out and declare it and boasts how it provides almost 30KN more mil power than their europeans counterparts.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby SaiK » 13 Jun 2011 21:29

we could think about divertless inlets for supersonic flows, and for take offs, and internal (like pak-fa), have a variable geometric vane controls (similar to exhaust) to adjust the right flow.. would require quite a bit of control law testing though, but entirely possible.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby NRao » 14 Jun 2011 04:39

I am not too familiar with this topic of Kn.

However, may be the following article provides some clues?

2009 :: Indian Defence Ministry plans to revive Tejas

The Eurojet EJ200 and the GE F-414 engines generate a thrust of 95-100 Kilo Newton, which meets the IAF’s requirements.


F414
In 2006, GE has tested an Enhanced Durability Engine (EDE) with an advanced core which can provide a 15% thrust increase or longer life without the thrust increase. It has a six-stage, high-pressure compressor and an advanced high-pressure turbine. GE has tested the new high-pressure compressor and a two-stage advanced fan. These components with the advanced core could yield 20% increase in thrust over the current F414 and final growth step would produce an engine with 30% more thrust than the F414 - just under 29,000 lbf (130 kN).

chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby chackojoseph » 14 Jun 2011 09:02

I am advancing the Kaveri materials article to today. Stay tuned. :D

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Singha » 14 Jun 2011 09:19

imo the 29000lb thrust F414 version might be useful for the F-18 given its weight and wing issues...but if we a good engine around 100KN dont see why its not enough for a light a/c like Tejas

the AMCA will need a pair of higher thrust engines because internal bay drives a boxy jsfish fuselage that will increase weight and we will likely go for a 2 seater config given its strike orientation. so either this kaveri-snecma 100KN thing will need to be modified upward or a newer design element introduced. we should no let engine drive down AMCA size compromise...keep enough room for everything internal rather than podded.

whatever the case, I think we should stick to kaveri-snecma even if its 95% of EJ220/414EDE and costs higher, because the design and manufacturing skills gained by making a engine inhouse are priceless as are the relations built with parts suppliers and institutions in europe and elsewhere.
Last edited by Singha on 14 Jun 2011 09:23, edited 1 time in total.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4374
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Cain Marko » 14 Jun 2011 09:23

Yup, Tejas should do fine with 10 ton engine so long as the keep empty weight close to the 6500kg mark imho, better than most single engined birds out there including the vaunted F-16 blk50+.

CM.

chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby chackojoseph » 14 Jun 2011 09:31

Indian developments in materials for Military Aero Gas turbines

All thanks to akimalik @ BRF for his efforts.

akimalik
BRFite
Posts: 133
Joined: 14 Apr 2010 11:27

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby akimalik » 14 Jun 2011 10:53

talking about DSI and inlets and the works, I have a question:
As explained by seniors DSI has its pros and cons.
One of the cons of the DSI concept is its inability to change shape (perhaps that is also what makes it a simple and attractive alternative).
But what if we try to overcome that using Shape Memory alloys?
that way we can modify the shape of the DSI to pre-planned shapes depending on the air-flow needs.

Something to this effect is already done for the exhaust sections of the dreamliner's engines:
http://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers/archive/2005/december/ts_sf07.html

Something more on SMAs:
http://webdocs.cs.ualberta.ca/~database/MEMS/sma_mems/flap.html

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Singha » 14 Jun 2011 11:05

is it true that DSIs only work for planes flying upto around Mach1.8 like F-solah/JSF/JF17 ? I also read same is true for splitter plates as seen on Tejas/Jaguar etc.

allegedly for planes wanting to fly beyond that speed, they need in additional to a DSI/splitter plate in front, a system like M2K moveable cone or ability to change the x-section of the inlet somewhere inside like F15/MKI/Mig29/F22....

EF/Rafale looks like a combo of splitter plate and ability to shape change the inlet interior.

for RCS purpose maybe a DSI, and a deeply blended inlet like Rafale or some of the new UCAVs with S-duct/Y-duct is best.

merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby merlin » 14 Jun 2011 14:22

Even though redundant and obvious just wanted to put this down

Single Crystal -> Directionally solidified -> Equi-axis

Equi axis already qualified
Directionally solidified under qualification/to start qualification
Single Crystal batch quantities, qualification after DS is qualified

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby SaiK » 14 Jun 2011 17:18

For frontal RCS, Rafale inlets looks good in the sense of having to reflect off the nose cone extenders rather a inlet rebound. However, like pak-fa, the advanced wanes could actually deflect or permeate the waves and guide them off for return.

Current LCA has no such problem for RCS in the sense the Y duct is too darn stealthy, but only have to focus on DSI if required or variable geo control vanes for dog fights flow regime[/imo/assumptions on supersonic requirements].

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3641
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Neela » 01 Jul 2011 20:23

Chacko,
Waiting for Ti updates you promised.

chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby chackojoseph » 01 Jul 2011 21:19

Neela,

:P I forgot. Can you please point out the post and the discussion. I will start working on it.

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3641
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Neela » 04 Jul 2011 12:56

chackojoseph wrote:Neela,

:P I forgot. Can you please point out the post and the discussion. I will start working on it.

:oops:

neerajb
BRFite
Posts: 830
Joined: 24 Jun 2008 14:18
Location: Delhi, India.

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby neerajb » 04 Jul 2011 14:48

chackojoseph wrote:Neela,

:P I forgot. Can you please point out the post and the discussion. I will start working on it.


viewtopic.php?p=1107891#p1107891

Cheers....

chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby chackojoseph » 04 Jul 2011 16:03

The Ti development for Aero Engine is mentioned here. Actually, no one discussed it. It thought it was too technical and hence decided to lower the technical part in future articles.

Indian Developments in Materials for Military Aero Engines

Suresh_Shyam
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 12
Joined: 09 Jun 2011 19:00

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Suresh_Shyam » 04 Jul 2011 16:26

:-? is that still kaveri tested in Gromov Flight Research Center?.Could some one tells what's the status of kaveri :?: :x

rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby rajanb » 04 Jul 2011 17:05


Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Shrinivasan » 04 Jul 2011 23:11

chackojoseph wrote:The Ti development for Aero Engine is mentioned here. Actually, no one discussed it. It thought it was too technical and hence decided to lower the technical part in future articles.

Indian Developments in Materials for Military Aero Engines

Chacko, Please add this to your "Chacko Corner" has loads of valuable information. I have never even heard of SIFL. What was more interesting is to see SIFL's customers for Titanium products... Developing a Mil-Ind complex is not easy, it takes time... but it will happen only if we persist.

I remember how long BHEL Trichy took to create an Anxilliary Industry eco-system to supply quality components and to take up jobs...

Small Industries like SIFL are Vital cogs of this wheel called Mil-Ind Complex

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4850
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Neshant » 07 Jul 2011 13:29

A bit of education on how turbine jet engines work


Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4850
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Neshant » 07 Jul 2011 13:42

vina wrote:
thammu wrote: outlines the offsets including a High Altitude Engine Test Facility and Trisonic Wind Tunnel Facility valued at $510 million, for the Defence Research & Development Organisation.
.



They should model the facility based on TSAGI the legendary aero engine test center in Russia.

chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby chackojoseph » 07 Jul 2011 16:35


Chacko, Please add this to your "Chacko Corner" has loads of valuable information. I have never even heard of SIFL. What was more interesting is to see SIFL's customers for Titanium products... Developing a Mil-Ind complex is not easy, it takes time... but it will happen only if we persist.

I remember how long BHEL Trichy took to create an Anxilliary Industry eco-system to supply quality components and to take up jobs...

Small Industries like SIFL are Vital cogs of this wheel called Mil-Ind Complex
[/quote]

Its already there. SIFL has HAL, ISRO, OFB and DRDO as its major customers. Even Brahmos Aerospace in its earlier avatar was a Kerala state govt concern. All such precision items are manufactured in Kerala, As ISRO has already worked with them.

suryag
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3624
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby suryag » 07 Jul 2011 19:48

Chacko-ji have the tests in Gromov culminated ? it has been 9 months since we started(it was in Nov last year IIRC)

Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3010
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Kanson » 07 Jul 2011 20:57

chackojoseph wrote:The Ti development for Aero Engine is mentioned here. Actually, no one discussed it. It thought it was too technical and hence decided to lower the technical part in future articles.

Indian Developments in Materials for Military Aero Engines


It is about presentation and not about technical complexities.

The articles looks like reading HAL newsletter but thanks for sharing such information. Continue to do so in future as well.

Just confirms the progressing we made in this front. To simplify - we are almost reached there in every front.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby NRao » 07 Jul 2011 21:22

suryag wrote:Chacko-ji have the tests in Gromov culminated ? it has been 9 months since we started(it was in Nov last year IIRC)


Since the air in Russia is more expensive, inflation, it will take more funds/time and the new end date is 2012.

chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby chackojoseph » 07 Jul 2011 21:30

suryag wrote:Chacko-ji have the tests in Gromov culminated ? it has been 9 months since we started(it was in Nov last year IIRC)


In May, it passed just 20 hours. Approx 60 - 80 hrs may be required.

Kanson wrote:The Ti development for Aero Engine is mentioned here. Actually, no one discussed it. It thought it was too technical and hence decided to lower the technical part in future articles.

Indian Developments in Materials for Military Aero Engines


It is about presentation and not about technical complexities.

The articles looks like reading HAL newsletter but thanks for sharing such information. Continue to do so in future as well.

Just confirms the progressing we made in this front. To simplify - we are almost reached there in every front.


Please make it James Bondish. :lol:

Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3010
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Kanson » 09 Jul 2011 22:59

^ You want Roger Moore/Pierce Brosnan types or Daniel Craig type ? :)

My interlude is to encourage you to attempt more such, what you consider as high technical stuff. We don't see such article often. Thanks for the understanding.

To me there are some clarity issues to fully understand and get oneself engrossed in the article. Some of them:

a. The article prepped the reader's interest with the title of talking about materials of Aero Engine. The section is introduced as "primary alloys used in gas turbines are being manufactured at MIDHANI". But it introduced materials for Space and Missiles and the about LCA after Kaveri and then about MIG and Su-30. I'm confused whether the materials introduced were for engines or for airframes.

b. Under the Forgings section, after the introduction of turbine discs, the news is about fan discs.

c. After the tantalizing information of Disc made from Alloy Ti834 which is described as new development meant to withstand 600°C there is no information to know its significance of why it was developed. Nor the article explains where the disc is used(turbine/fan/comp).

d. After the listing of materials Ti-29A and BS-347 as part of Kaveri engine, no where there is any reference or information about them throughout the article while heading of the article reads as "Materials for Aero Engines".

In my view, if an ordinary joe can understand at the least half of such tech article and if the mood after reading is positive consistent with the theme, then the article is a success.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: amar_p, kirpalbasra, lakshmanM, M_Joshi, nam, Pratyush, TandavBrahmand and 67 guests