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.
Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Gyan » 03 Jan 2015 17:57

IIRC long time ago I remember reading a DRDO honcho commenting that we need bypass ratio of around 0.58 but I am going by memory alone

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7770
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Indranil » 03 Jan 2015 18:22

The original EOI had more information (though different massflow). May be useful to fine-tune your calculations.

indranilroy wrote:BREAKING NEWS :-o
GTRE's next engine (from tender to Design & Development of three stage blisk fan)

Design and development of three stage 5:1 pressure ratio all Blisk fan for 75/110 kN thrust class engine. The broad design specifications and constraints are defined as below.

Code: Select all

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|               Design specifications: ISA-SLS - P1=101.325kPa ; T1=288.16K                             |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Parameter             | Value        | Constraint                | Remark                             |
|-----------------------|--------------|---------------------------|------------------------------------|
| Mass flow rate        | 85-87 kg/s   |                           | ~5% growth potential should be     |
|-----------------------|--------------|---------------------------| available. GTRE would like to      |
| Pressure Ratio        | 4.8-5.0      |                           | participate in the design process. |
|-----------------------|--------------|---------------------------| The mode of participation will be  |
| Isentropic efficiency | 83-84%       | Minimum 83%               | deliberated later.                 |
|-----------------------|--------------|---------------------------|                                    |
| Surge margin          | ~22%         | Part speed margin should  |                                    |
|                       |              | be more than 25%          |                                    |
|-----------------------|--------------|---------------------------|------------------------------------|
| Max inlet diameter    | As needed by | ~780 mm                   | Selection of material will dictate |         
|                       | the designer |                           | maximum rotational speed.          |
|-----------------------|--------------|---------------------------|                                    |
| Rotational speed      | As needed by | Nil                       |                                    |
|                       | the designer |                           |                                    |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Time frame for the above activities up to component level aerodynamic testing, aeromechanical testing for generating performance map, structural testing relating to life and safety is approximately five years (60 months). It also includes manufacture of five sets of hardware for testing and evaluation of above tests.

SCOPE OF WORK: The scope of work includes Design of Fan, CAD/CAE Simulations & Analysis, Prototype Development, Performance & Functional Testing and Proving of the Fan. This includes certification level tests as per MIL 5007-E .Further, it also includes transfer of production technology to GTRE which is inclusive of setting up of infrastructure, training and assistance in manufacturing of blisks.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Gyan » 03 Jan 2015 18:27

Can we now be talking about three engines:-

Kaveriwith Mass flow Rate78 kg/s, Inlet of ??mm and Power 56/79kn -76/107kn

Yamuna with Mass flow Rate 85-87 kg/s, Inlet of 780mm and Power 75/110kn

Gangawith Mass flow Rate 98-100 kg/s, Inlet of 820mm and (Power 88/123-98/137kn as predicted in above posts)

member_28108
BRFite
Posts: 1852
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby member_28108 » 03 Jan 2015 19:45

One thing the Kaveri is not shelved.The project continues.There will be further testing at high altitudes,The core will be used for other purposes.It will be fully tested and validated and may be used for other purposes and will be the basis for different engine(Ganga Yamuna or whatever )

sivab
BRFite
Posts: 935
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby sivab » 11 Jan 2015 01:14

:D :D :D Good news from DMRL via Saurav Jha

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/553 ... 36/photo/1
Image

Don't miss the last line in picture.

:D :D :D DMRL now has SCB tech. BETTER than what is used in AL31!!! :D :D :D

This will now go into next gen Kaveri (~110KN) for AMCA and possibly LCA MkII.

sivab
BRFite
Posts: 935
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby sivab » 11 Jan 2015 03:12

http://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/English/DRD ... -ebook.pdf

GTX-35-VS Engine
During the year, 122 h of engine testing have been completed on five prototypes, viz., K5, K6, K7,
K8 and K9 of Kaveri engine. Notably engine endurance has been established for K7 engine through
continuous testing of 50 h in one build
. HP compressor was tested at Anecom, Germany. Various tests
like aeromechanical mapping, performance mapping, and inlet distortion tolerance tests were carried
out. The improved HP Compressor gave 3 per
cent improved mass flow rate and increased pressure
ratio. 50 h of testing was done at various inlet conditions


Small Turbo Fan Engine
Under this project, 3-D model of the engine and its components have been created. Detailed CFD
analysis has been carried out to establish the targeted engine performance. The engine is expected to
provide 410 kgf thrust at 0.75 kg/kgf-hr specificfuel consumption (SFC). Manufacture of the components
with indigenous material is under progress
. Development of LRUs and accessories has started. First
prototype of the alternator has been realised. The alternator is designed to operate at 53,000 rpm
speed and deliver 4kW power. High pressure (HP) and low pressure (LP) turbine rotor blades, Nozzle
Guide Vanes (NGV), and HP NGV casings were realised with indigenous technology


Single Crystal Blades and Vanes for Aero-engine Applications
DMRL has demonstrated single crystal casting process for high pressure turbine blades (HPTB)
and high pressure turbine vanes (HPTV) having intricate cooling channels to be used in advanced
aero-engines. This is an advanced technology in comparison to what HAL, Koraput, currently has for
hollow single crystal HPT rotor blades (used in SUKHOI fighter aero-engines)

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7770
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Indranil » 11 Jan 2015 13:03

sivab wrote:http://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/English/DRDO-a-glimpse-ebook.pdf
Small Turbo Fan Engine
Under this project, 3-D model of the engine and its components have been created. Detailed CFD
analysis has been carried out to establish the targeted engine performance. The engine is expected to
provide 410 kgf thrust at 0.75 kg/kgf-hr specificfuel consumption (SFC). Manufacture of the components
with indigenous material is under progress
. Development of LRUs and accessories has started. First
prototype of the alternator has been realised. The alternator is designed to operate at 53,000 rpm
speed and deliver 4kW power. High pressure (HP) and low pressure (LP) turbine rotor blades, Nozzle
Guide Vanes (NGV), and HP NGV casings were realised with indigenous technology


This is good news. The SFC of 0.75 kg/kgf-hr is significantly better than 1.05 kg/kgf-hr advertised earlier. This is on par with the best in the world in this thrust category.
Image

member_28108
BRFite
Posts: 1852
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby member_28108 » 11 Jan 2015 16:16

Regarding the Kabini core ,in the exhibition they mentioned it has a very well working core.

maitya
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 469
Joined: 02 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby maitya » 13 Jan 2015 19:09

sivab wrote::D :D :D Good news from DMRL via Saurav Jha

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/553 ... 36/photo/1
Image

Don't miss the last line in picture.

:D :D :D DMRL now has SCB tech. BETTER than what is used in AL31!!! :D :D :D

This will now go into next gen Kaveri (~110KN) for AMCA and possibly LCA MkII.

Yes definitely good news from the sheer turbofan metallurgical technology capability/maturity ascendency perspective.

Pls refer to one of my posts on TeT vs Turbine blade tech etc in the Kaveri sticky here:
First the co-relation of Thrust vs TeT vs OPR relationship - if we are not able to increase the OPR, the specific work can be increased slightly by increasing TeT, provided it's a quantum jump. Refer to the corresponding graph here.
Image

But that also means, for given core (so for Kabini), if we are not able to get a big-enough TeT enhancement, for an unchanged OPR, the Useful-Work (or thrust) increase would be minimal. Since none of us would have access to similar plots for the Kabini core, we can't say if this TeT increase will result in any significant Thrust increase etc.

But even then, assuming we get a larger increase in thrust because of this TeT increase, let's hold on to our lungi-dance for a minute, shall we:

Pls refer to another of my posts in the Kaveri sticky - here:
maitya wrote:As it can be clearly seen that the stagnation temperature rise across the stage increases with the tip Mach number squared, and for fixed positive blade angles, decreases with increasing mass flow. Fig 4 is the corresponding schematic representation.

So what does the above representation mean from a Kaveri perspective. Well, as I’ve mentioned above, there’ll be an attempt to better the current Compressor SPRs of Kaveri via TeT improvements. This will essentially mean increase the compressor blade rotor tip speed which, as the above schematic shows, will result in increase in ambient temperature across the compressor stages.

Increasing temperature on the compressor stages will mean breaching the 650-700deg C (or so) max operating temp point of the Ti-based Compressor blades. So we should see an attempt towards junking the current Ti-based blades and switching to Equiaxed-casted Ni-alloy based compressor blades atleast for the later HPC stages (where the peak temp will be reached).


See the dilemma ... we get the SC based Turbine-blade tech and increase the TeT by say 50-70deg C - which means for the same turbine mass, the amount of work that we now get from turbine is going to be higher.

This higher amount of work from the Turbine will increase the rotating speed of the compressor stages increasing their SPR and thus the overall OPR. But increasing Compressor SPRs would mean increase in ambient temperature across compressor stages.
Now that would mean, the temperature gradient across the first couple of stages would still be tolerable for the Ti based blades but higher across the last couple of compressor stages where it will conveniently breach the ~600deg C limit for Ti.

To solve it, these stages would have to resort superalloys (not the fancy SC or DS ones but the SDRE Equiaxed ones would do) - but casted superalloys have higher density (and thus weigh more for the same volume or geometry) - again increasing the overall weight of an already over-weight (by ~135Kg) engine is it.

To make it slightly more complicated, the last 2 stages of the 6 stage HPC are already made up of casted superalloys - since we wouldn't know how much more temp-and-structure tolerance level (aka head room) of these are there currently , we will not be able to gauge if we need to move to diff composition of these superalloys. Also critical would be finding out, that with this increase in TeT, what the temp gradient increase level is across 3rd and 4th level (i.e. how closer will they be to ~ 600deg limit of the Ti).

OR

We slightly increase the mass flow (by artificially enlarging the core) thru the compressor stages (refer to the Euler turbine equation above) and keep a tight-lease on this temperature increase across HPC stages.
But then that would mean going back by atleast 3-4years and do the whole assembly-testing-flight testing etc etc cycle once again.

OR

But there can be a better solution as well.
Can we keep the make the current compressor stages more "heat-resistant" and tide over this. Possible, if we are able to master the casting methodology etc for the intricate internal-cooling-passage-based blade cooling tech (with hollow shafts which would carry-in the cold-air and also carry out (towards the combustor) hot air etc). Pls note until very recently we were importing the wax-and-ceramic based moulds for the HPT stage (for the DS based blades with intricate internal-cooling-passages). But then again that's absolute cutting edge of the compressor blade tech.


Bottomline is, IMO, as far as Indian turbofan tech development is concerened, the Achilees heel right now is to somehow master the contemporary compressor technology (which brings the OPR to 27-30 levels) while keeping the overall weight low (in a turbofan the Fan and HPC contributes to the majority of the weight). That brings us firmly to areas of (also details can be found here and here,

1. Good-old 3D CFD codes*
2. Low aspect ratio (aka wide chord) blade design and manufacturing
3. Manufacturing (mass-level) capability of multi-circular arc profile compressor blades
4. Blisk tech (for HPC and even the Fan)
5. High speed milling
6. Electro-Chemical machining,
7. Linear Frictional Welding,
8. Wax/Si based mould fabrication tech etc even for light weight materials like Ti,
9. Intermetallic Titanium Aluminide (TiAl - with 50% density level of current superalloys) based compressor blade and disc manufacturing ability (EBM etc.)
10. Surface-finish tech (~5-6 micron levels) for compressor
ityadi ityadi.

*Essentially, as the grand-mullah Enqyoobuddin Gas-turbini had sermoned many moons back, get hordes of DOO and PIGS onto this with freedom of destroying a couple of cores, with harsh timelines and supervision and see the results – PissBUH!!

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7770
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Indranil » 14 Jan 2015 04:33

We definitely have a long long way to go.

maitya wrote:We slightly increase the mass flow (by artificially enlarging the core) thru the compressor stages (refer to the Euler turbine equation above) and keep a tight-lease on this temperature increase across HPC stages.
But then that would mean going back by atleast 3-4years and do the whole assembly-testing-flight testing etc etc cycle once again.


You would like this. From the DRDO e-book.
Various tests like aeromechanical mapping, performance mapping, and inlet distortion tolerance tests were carried out. The improved HP Compressor gave 3 per cent improved mass flow rate and increased pressure ratio. 50 h of testing was done at various inlet conditions.


maitya wrote:But there can be a better solution as well.
Can we keep the make the current compressor stages more "heat-resistant" and tide over this. Possible, if we are able to master the casting methodology etc for the intricate internal-cooling-passage-based blade cooling tech (with hollow shafts which would carry-in the cold-air and also carry out (towards the combustor) hot air etc). Pls note until very recently we were importing the wax-and-ceramic based moulds for the HPT stage (for the DS based blades with intricate internal-cooling-passages). But then again that's absolute cutting edge of the compressor blade tech.

Isn't this what DMRL is advertising. They are saying that they got from a hollow blade with a single channel
Image
to something which has multiple channels to handle multiple airflows.
Image

Are you suggesting something like this?
Image

Kailash
BRFite
Posts: 1061
Joined: 07 Dec 2008 02:32

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Kailash » 14 Jan 2015 13:14

Thanks for the extremely elightening post maitya ji. Indeed this is a very difficult engineering problem. I dont think anymore that folks at GTRE, DMRL, Midani etc are slacking or assigning less skilled people on the job.

The task IS really so complex that meaniful progress takes technological advances in a lot of different areas. Hope more money is pumped in and there is progress in this area.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8117
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Pratyush » 14 Jan 2015 13:18

Gentlemen, having seen the progress made on the various material aspects of a GT design. Can any one enumerate where we are still lacking. When it comes to GT design.

Will
BRFite
Posts: 637
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Will » 26 Jan 2015 01:10

Reports coming in that the U.S. n India will explore the possibility of building jet engines in India. Wonder what this will mean n involve. Help on the 115kn Kaveri follow up for the AMCA?

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2251
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby VinodTK » 26 Jan 2015 04:11

Will wrote:Reports coming in that the U.S. n India will explore the possibility of building jet engines in India. Wonder what this will mean n involve. Help on the 115kn Kaveri follow up for the AMCA?

US to help India design, develop jet engines
Washington has agreed to assist Delhi in sharing, designing and developing jet engines for aircraft—a critical technology that is exclusively owned by a handful of countries—in what is being considered a big step forward in Indo-US defence collaboration.

The assistance comes within months of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) winding up a Russia-backed project to develop Kaveri jet engines after losing more than Rs 2,000 crore and almost three decades.
:
:
:
The big takeaway is the collaboration on jet engines, to be used in home-grown aircraft. “India and the US have agreed to explore development of jet engine in the country. It would be broader than the Kaveri programme,” said S Jaishankar, Indian Ambassador to the US.
:
:
:

rgsrini
BRFite
Posts: 738
Joined: 17 Sep 2005 18:00

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby rgsrini » 26 Jan 2015 06:03

^^It just means that India is in the verge of developing its own Jet engine. Nothing else would explain US interest in "helping" India overcome a hurdle.

sarang
BRFite
Posts: 131
Joined: 16 Jun 2007 11:23
Location: India

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby sarang » 26 Jan 2015 07:15

It would better be a step further than what is already developed, like veriable cycle and 3D thrust vectoring. :D

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7920
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby brar_w » 26 Jan 2015 08:08

Joint collaboration and transfer of technology is based on mutually agreed areas. The list announced includes areas of interest of India where the US is willing to transfer technology. No one wrote a bunch of areas concerning aerospace projects on pieces of paper and drew the first 3 or 4 :). The reports on collaborations on certain tech areas are just those. Extrapolating something totally different from them is a risky proposition. Same applies to EMALS if it is indeed an area where the two parties have agreed to advance the talks and work together. It means that it is a mutually agreed technology of interest.

As far as Variable Cycle engines are concerned, there are no programs of record other than S&T efforts that are fully funded and closed from participation (vendors have already been down-selected all the way till 2018-2020 timeframe). 3D Thrust Vectoring can be easily accommodated (imho) if specifically asked for since GE's proprietary AVEN was offered to Sweden more than a decade ago (a scaled effort to accommodate the F404 family).

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7770
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Indranil » 26 Jan 2015 08:22

All this talk is quite meaningless till India remains on the "export control" list. Even if export of technology or parts is allowed, it has to go through an extremely long and bureaucratic procedure to get approval. That is not what India needs to move ahead faster. Therefore, I would like to know who suggested GoI to seek help in aero engines from USA. If it is from the folks in GTRE, then how is it that USA plans to circumvent the current hurdles in providing technology and parts freely to India. For example, how can India freely buy parts from OEMs, for example hydraulics from Moog?

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7920
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby brar_w » 26 Jan 2015 08:30

^^ All the barriers are unlikely to all go away in on fell swoop. Bureaucratic hurdles in the pentagon are a pain in the back end for a lot of folks, but if the top leaders are willing to personally get involved (both sides) these barriers can be broken. No one is going to open the flood gates to technology..Its up to both sides to agree on technology of interest where progress can be made. There is nothing stopping India from to also work with other powers in aerospace on engine or other projects.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7770
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Indranil » 26 Jan 2015 10:20

Though on paper, they may be different. But having or not having access to the US OEMs and "Western" OEMs is one and the same thing.

brvarsh
BRFite
Posts: 193
Joined: 03 Mar 2011 20:29

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby brvarsh » 26 Jan 2015 10:47

Since when was Kaveri declared a failure? Is the new US Jet Engine collaboration mean Kaveri is dead or rebooted?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16405
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby NRao » 26 Jan 2015 11:30

From the joint statement:

Continuing bilateral engagement on the Defence Technology and Trade Initiative (DTTI), including the 22 January 2015 agreement in principle to pursue co-production and co-development of four pathfinder projects, form a working group to explore aircraft carrier technology sharing and design, and explore possible cooperation on development of jet engine technology.


"export control list" has been making a lot of noise for ages. If we had a thread for it we would have filled pages.

As the list belongs to the SD, we need to expect resistance. The support from the Pentagon/DD, for more than a decade, is reflected in the form of the DTTI . Things, however, should change and move faster with the alignment between the SD and DD - in the form of the recent trip by Puneet Talwar

Seems that the effort to support the dev of an engine was rather recent and therefore there is bound to be more uncertainty with that topic - as opposed to naval technologies, for which the support has been prolonged and more mature. As we post expect support for the AMCA to be more than the engine.

Give it time, we should expect to see the engine effort mature. IF it does mature India should have a sustainable engine - a better one than one that China will have at the same point in time.

One more OT observation (in my "agenda", sorry). India is if not ahead, on par with nations like the UK and Australia. A few people on both sides have worked a lot to get where things are. When the next SecDef is confirmed expect a boost. Then keep an eye on this "engine". Perhaps even think of a ALCA.

Meanwhile let us see what happens with the AMCA engine - need one with TV IIRC. Dandy.

Will
BRFite
Posts: 637
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Will » 26 Jan 2015 12:55

Well with reports that the Kaveri is being wound up. Time to open a new thread on "Indian Jet Engines". :)

sachin_b_k
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 20
Joined: 12 May 2010 16:43

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby sachin_b_k » 26 Jan 2015 15:25

Hmm...all the news about kaveri being wound up seems more like a strategy to keep the engine development away from the snooping media, auditors and parliamentary committee glare. Its too important a project to be shelved that too after the engine actually fructified and works albeit at a lower thrust. Having an indigenous engine for LCA is an absolute must for the path of becoming a serious global military player

member_28108
BRFite
Posts: 1852
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby member_28108 » 26 Jan 2015 15:26

Will wrote:Well with reports that the Kaveri is being wound up. Time to open a new thread on "Indian Jet Engines". :)


Please note Kaveri is not "wound up" there will be further testing etc.It has completed 15 hours of 85 hours of high altitude testing and testing continues and lessons learnt will be transferred.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36392
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby SaiK » 27 Jan 2015 00:14

http://idrw.org/?p=56883
Did US and India agreed to work on New F414 engine variant ?

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JTull » 27 Jan 2015 00:37

SaiK wrote:
http://idrw.org/?p=56883
Did US and India agreed to work on New F414 engine variant ?


Again a screw driver ToT is being touted as win-win!

Surely, a deeper cooperation is possible.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16405
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby NRao » 27 Jan 2015 00:51

They have not even formed the working groups. That article, in true form, is highly speculative - in parts he says so too.

Any engine effort has a very long way to go. A year or two to get started - IF at all they do get started.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36392
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby SaiK » 27 Jan 2015 00:57

What the media is ignoring is, Kaveri tech is not BS. It is a great engine with huge future scope. All it needs is the experience GE F414 got. But contradiction and opponents will always kill Kaveri to get GE in.

What DRDO must do is ask for IITs, and tech institutions to join in with young minds to correct K versions. We have already succeeded in SC blades (not sure how far it is product-ion-ized). hot-engine is the buzzword, which is nothing but advanced heat-resistant materials and blade designs that cools faster [like rolls-royce's cooling holes on the sc- blades].

few detailed studies by young minds can bring better results at a lower cost.. but, heck, we all can scream. it is GTRE that should take leadership. I still feel, that unit of DRDO needs massive reorg.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5180
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby RoyG » 27 Jan 2015 01:00

The US isn't going to hand over its engine tech crown jewels. We may get some tech here and there but at the end of the day we are going to have to develop our own systems by ourselves and steal sensitive technology. There is no other way around this. Open up the defense sector to private players and slowly start winding down DPSU responsibilities. Our higher education also needs a complete revamp.

No major power wants India to be militarily powerful. We have to compete and get out of this begging mentality.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36392
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby SaiK » 27 Jan 2015 01:05

I have said the same in no better words.. we are having resource crunch here because the way GTRE is organized. Right funds + Right minds, will take the Kaveri to Jupiter next. I wish PMO and MoD realizes K is as important as nuke deals.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5180
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby RoyG » 27 Jan 2015 01:22

SaiK wrote:I have said the same in no better words.. we are having resource crunch here because the way GTRE is organized. Right funds + Right minds, will take the Kaveri to Jupiter next. I wish PMO and MoD realizes K is as important as nuke deals.


I'm glad you and most on BRF share the same mentality. We should share Kaveri tech with private industry and have multiple research/design/manufacturing clusters competing against each other. We can't have 1-2 DPSU's responsible for designing our engines. It won't work.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16405
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby NRao » 27 Jan 2015 01:25

India can still take the Kaveri forward, nothing to stop that.

The DTTI framework is about co-development. So, what is the end goal of a collaboration, who wants to contribute what, etc.

Long way to go on a topic such as an engine.

However, what *seems* to be good about this (vs. other efforts) is that there is a push at the highest levels to make DTTI work. And, DTTI being a framework, is not product specific.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7770
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Indranil » 27 Jan 2015 05:40

Kaveri is really the stepping stone to India's engine success. It is really the bedrock on which all next generation engines will be based on. Anybody who says that Kaveri is a failure have no idea on what they are talking about. Kaveri (as indeed any other current engine development) is no longer aero-design constrained. The advantages due to aero stuff has platued for sometime now and scientist the world over have kind of caught up. Besides, you can take a working engine, cut it up and study why a certain shape works so well.

Engine development nowadays is materials constrained. Given the same materials and tools, almost all the guys will build engines within 5-10% of one-another. We are at least 15-20 years behind the state-of-art on the materials front. The bad thing is it cannot be reverse engineered. The good thing is that gains in this field are also slow. So if the Indian govt. puts in the necessary funding to set up these research facilities, India can build working prototypes of E200/F414 class of engines in 10-15 years.

GTRE and DMRL should provided the necessary funding to come up with new test rigs and duplicate time critical ones. This is not a new ask. People like Dr. G. Balachandran have asked this for 2 decades now. They should be able to run tests on one rig while the preparing for the next ones on the other.

What I would also like to see is GoI open the doors to manufacturing these engines to all interested parties. I don't foresee anybody else to even bid except Bharat Forge, but one never knows HAL already has a HUGE advantage of existing infrastructure, trained manpower and experience. If they still cry in the face of competition, let them!

P.S. People visiting Aero India should enquire about the HAL 25 kN HTFE.

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JTull » 27 Jan 2015 15:12

US engine tech is with pvt companies. It is not for their govt to give it away in any form. Without adequate compensation or guaranteed orders, this will not happen. Very different scenario from Brahmos!

And how can India guarantee anything without seeing the tech benefits first, unless we're only getting mature tech.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11309
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 27 Jan 2015 15:18

The answer, there are no shortcuts, we must have our own R&D and govt policy of orders cutting the Huge Arms agent coterie like Nandas etc.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Sagar G » 27 Jan 2015 18:39

Saurav Jha @SJha1618 · Jan 25

The Kaveri engine performed for 57 hours continuously during tests in Russia, whereas the Chinese WS-10 could not.


No surprises that Murica suddenly wants to "co-develop" engines with us.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36392
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby SaiK » 27 Jan 2015 19:00

I see a vision, but the product users are different. This is the problem, and Amir Khans clearly know how to handle it because they have done it and CMMI-ed it.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Sagar G » 27 Jan 2015 19:19

SaiK wrote:I have said the same in no better words.. we are having resource crunch here because the way GTRE is organized.


Please elaborate on the structuring of GTRE and how is that causing resource crunch ???

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16405
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby NRao » 27 Jan 2015 20:20

First order of importance is the engine for the AMCA. Let us wait and see what happens there. It *just may* provide an indicator for what could happen with the DTTI effort.

Second, materials (as mentioned) + manufacturing is the focus. As mentioned about a decade behind on materials, I would suspect even more on manufacturing.

DTTI is not about the old models - number of orders, etc. The situation is still very fluid, but there was talk of India wanting to participate in things like paint for stealth objects (point being what kind of "orders" can we envision there?). There is a lot more to all this than the traditional thinking.

Note that the DTTI model was started in 2005 (after years of talking) and it has just about started to take shape. Not even a project has been agreed to outside some nebulous notes on carrier and engine. It will need time ...... is it an entire engine that they want to talk about, enhancing somethign already there, ........ who knows. The Kaveri effort may or may not be the starting point. The starting point could be a coupel of engine components from both sides, no one knows. The engine effort could be a dud (i do not expect this option, but ..........)

The only thing that is sure is that the DTTI framework will advance (for another 10 years for now). For one, there are enough very high level people on both sides that have been pushing it (for 10 years now). And, India has now, under NaMo, slowly decided to be a real global player: Note a data point on India willing to participate in dealing with the IS (among other things). DTTI is only a small cog in that larger wheel.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6866&p=1786360#p1786360


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Chinmay, skaranam and 45 guests