Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Kaveri & aero-engine 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.
JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2651
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 25 Apr 2017 17:47

chetak wrote:
Old chap,

if you for a single moment imagine that (for example) single crystal technology will be available to you on a silver platter just because you purchased RR, you will be sorely disappointed and also out of many many billions of pounds foolishly spent.

These are not just commercial secrets but also state secrets. Period.

There is no business model for weapon technology in all the formats it encompasses. There are only state interests.

It is currently in the interest of every weapon technology country in the world to deny us access. no matter which fancy business management book tells you how to slice it in the commercial world or which block head sandal wearing, personal hygine challenged, latest on the block, long haired whizkid flavor of the month economics professor tells you that it is so.


Where did I say we will get SCB..?? :wink:

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15882
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby chetak » 25 Apr 2017 17:59

@JayS wrote

IPR will be as much restricted as it will be in any other biz model, be it JV, be it that you own it. But when you own it you control it to better extent than just being a customer. Also not everything is under restriction, low hanging fruits (MRO for example) can be plucked. And you can slowly infuse key tech back to home products. (Tata Motors is doing it). And with RR you are directly No-2 Civil engine OEM. Try to go solo and it will be 30yrs before we even have one engine flying on civil jet.


Tata motors makes very low end and unsafe cars that most may not even be able to pass standard EU crash test criteria.

JLR make very high end and exclusive cars that have a worldwide appeal and reputation. JLR will not contaminate its brand by associating with any tata car as the tata's themselves have commercially firewalled JLR and the tata brands so that no association is made in the public mind.

The guys who have successfully leveraged R&D technology from the foreign acquisitions and successfully transplanted them into their own products, leapfrogging years of potentially failure prone and very costly R&D efforts are the mahindras.

Take a look at their entire product range. It's full of technology that they have directly used from their foreign companies because the kind of cars mahindra makes are compatible with the technology that they have consciously acquired with the sole aim of leveraging the R&D.

There is no mismatch of automobile products like with the tatas and JLR which operate essentially in the extreme opposite ends of the market.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15882
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby chetak » 25 Apr 2017 18:00

JayS wrote:
chetak wrote:
Old chap,

if you for a single moment imagine that (for example) single crystal technology will be available to you on a silver platter just because you purchased RR, you will be sorely disappointed and also out of many many billions of pounds foolishly spent.

These are not just commercial secrets but also state secrets. Period.

There is no business model for weapon technology in all the formats it encompasses. There are only state interests.

It is currently in the interest of every weapon technology country in the world to deny us access. no matter which fancy business management book tells you how to slice it in the commercial world or which block head sandal wearing, personal hygiene challenged, latest on the block, long haired whizkid flavor of the month economics professor tells you that it is so.


Where did I say we will get SCB..?? :wink:


what did you want from RR, their extensive knowledge of toilet cleaning techniques??

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2651
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 25 Apr 2017 18:04

Just doing some googling regarding flutter and Screech issues. Incidentally RM12 faced these exact two issues. And F135 also faced screech issue.

https://www.dodbuzz.com/2011/01/19/f135 ... fix-found/

“During development testing of the F135 in the May 2009 time frame, P&W found that at low altitude and high speed, certain pressure pulsations occurred when operating in full afterburner. This phenomenon, known broadly in the industry as screech, has been addressed with design modifications that have been validated to eliminate the issue. The modifications include minor hardware changes to the fuel system, reduced aerodynamic leakages, and upgraded software. The design of these modifications benefited greatly from the tools and processes developed in the design of the F119 engine that powers the F-22. The F119 and the F135 are the only two production engines that have provided augmented, stealth capability. With the modifications identified and implemented, the F135 now provides full max augmented thrust throughout the flight envelope. For the SDD program, a kit has been developed that brings these modifications to the engines that are powering the flight test program. Two engines have been modified to date with the design showing excellent results. The production configuration is being validated this year in both the CTOL/CV and STOVL variants of the F135. Confident that the F135 was providing the full required thrust throughout the flight envelope was just one of many reasons the government certified the CTOL/CV engine for Initial Service Release (ISR) in March 2010 and the STOVL engine achieved ISR in December 2010.”


some interesting info.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2651
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 25 Apr 2017 18:10

chetak wrote:
JayS wrote:
Where did I say we will get SCB..?? :wink:


what did you want from RR, their extensive knowledge of toilet cleaning techniques??


There is more to Jet engine design than SCB. Much more. GTRE needs things other than SCB too. We will have our own SCB already available and being industrialised as we speak. I have posted some details in past. Its not even a show stopper. In fact we can always get them "Make to Print" from either French or Americans or British for Kaveri, store large number of spares to remove uncertainties in supply during war times, and be done with it.

And yes, we could use their extensive toilet cleaning techniques in India too. LOL.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15882
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby chetak » 25 Apr 2017 18:21

JayS wrote:
chetak wrote:
what did you want from RR, their extensive knowledge of toilet cleaning techniques??


There is more to Jet engine design than SCB. Much more. GTRE needs things other than SCB too. We will have our own SCB already available and being industrialised as we speak. I have posted some details in past. Its not even a show stopper. In fact we can always get them "Make to Print" from either French or Americans or British for Kaveri, store large number of spares to remove uncertainties in supply during war times, and be done with it.

And yes, we could use their extensive toilet cleaning techniques in India too. LOL.


and what if no one will make to your print because their govt says don't do it??

or is it because nothing in kaveri has reached any stage of finality yet?? and no one has the faintest idea when such a happy occasion may actually come about??

I thought that SCB was the final hurdle and that crossed, it would be all khushal mangal for the Indian aviation scene, and you are saying that there is more, much more??

do tell.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2651
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 25 Apr 2017 19:56

chetak wrote:
JayS wrote:
There is more to Jet engine design than SCB. Much more. GTRE needs things other than SCB too. We will have our own SCB already available and being industrialised as we speak. I have posted some details in past. Its not even a show stopper. In fact we can always get them "Make to Print" from either French or Americans or British for Kaveri, store large number of spares to remove uncertainties in supply during war times, and be done with it.

And yes, we could use their extensive toilet cleaning techniques in India too. LOL.


and what if no one will make to your print because their govt says don't do it??

or is it because nothing in kaveri has reached any stage of finality yet?? and no one has the faintest idea when such a happy occasion may actually come about??

I thought that SCB was the final hurdle and that crossed, it would be all khushal mangal for the Indian aviation scene, and you are saying that there is more, much more??

do tell.


Kaveri doesn't even use SCBs saar. SCB is not *needed* for Kaveri's success in terms of achieving the original design objectives. Right now there are two or three issues which are already listed in recent posts.

But for it to power LCA and remain relevant, it needs to become 90kN class engine, For that it needs:

- higher TET (SCB helps in only this one parameter and nowhere else. And that too one can jack up TET by may be 50deg over and above DS blades, not more. Better cooling technology also needed for that.)
- Better materials across the components to support higher temp operations with decent life
- improvement in Aerodynamic and thermal efficiencies of Compressors and turbines (need 3D aerodynamics)
- reduced weight (better, lighter materials, Blisk tech, better structural design methodology)
- improvement in Combustion efficiency (better CFD tools)
- full set of ground and flight testing facilities
- lots of money and experience
- A whole lot of manufacturing technologies which we do not have

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15882
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby chetak » 25 Apr 2017 20:05

JayS wrote:
chetak wrote:
and what if no one will make to your print because their govt says don't do it??

or is it because nothing in kaveri has reached any stage of finality yet?? and no one has the faintest idea when such a happy occasion may actually come about??

I thought that SCB was the final hurdle and that crossed, it would be all khushal mangal for the Indian aviation scene, and you are saying that there is more, much more??

do tell.


Kaveri doesn't even use SCBs saar. SCB is not *needed* for Kaveri's success in terms of achieving the original design objectives. Right now there are two or three issues which are already listed in recent posts.

But for it to power LCA and remain relevant, it needs to become 90kN class engine, For that it needs:

- higher TET (SCB helps in only this one parameter and nowhere else. And that too one can jack up TET by may be 50deg over and above DS blades, not more. Better cooling technology also needed for that.)
- Better materials across the components to support higher temp operations with decent life
- improvement in Aerodynamic and thermal efficiencies of Compressors and turbines (need 3D aerodynamics)
- reduced weight (better, lighter materials, Blisk tech, better structural design methodology)
- improvement in Combustion efficiency (better CFD tools)
- full set of ground and flight testing facilities
- lots of money and experience
- A whole lot of manufacturing technologies which we do not have


then, it might have been a hallucination when i actually saw and then held a kaveri SCB in my hands, prototype though it may have been.

it felt pretty real to me though, must have all that daru i didn't drink or all that potent stuff that i did not smoke.

and wait, it made in India too, what a shame, no??

was it a waste of good effort as per you, then.??

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2651
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 25 Apr 2017 20:22

chetak wrote:
JayS wrote:
Kaveri doesn't even use SCBs saar. SCB is not *needed* for Kaveri's success in terms of achieving the original design objectives. Right now there are two or three issues which are already listed in recent posts.

But for it to power LCA and remain relevant, it needs to become 90kN class engine, For that it needs:

- higher TET (SCB helps in only this one parameter and nowhere else. And that too one can jack up TET by may be 50deg over and above DS blades, not more. Better cooling technology also needed for that.)
- Better materials across the components to support higher temp operations with decent life
- improvement in Aerodynamic and thermal efficiencies of Compressors and turbines (need 3D aerodynamics)
- reduced weight (better, lighter materials, Blisk tech, better structural design methodology)
- improvement in Combustion efficiency (better CFD tools)
- full set of ground and flight testing facilities
- lots of money and experience
- A whole lot of manufacturing technologies which we do not have


then, it might have been a hallucination when i actually saw and then held a kaveri SCB in my hands, prototype though it may have been.

it felt pretty real to me though, must have all that daru i didn't drink or all that potent stuff that i did not smoke.

and wait, it made in India too, what a shame, no??

was it a waste of good effort as per you.??


DMRL has made Kaveri SCBs (photos are available on internet), if that's what you saw. I saw them too. They got it machined and coated from abroad. We don't have those two key technologies yet (MIDHANI is trying to develop them). Growing crystal is only one part. But Kaveri does not use SCBs, as in its base design it doesn't need SCBs. It uses only DS blades. My source of info is DMRL and GTRE tech personnel who told me this during AI-2017. I used to think that Kaveri does use SCB and they get it from Snecma, since we cannot make them yet. Now if they told me incorrect info, I can't say. But I assume they are right, when I do not have any better source. I spent good 30-40 minutes each talking to folks there at both the stalls.

Kaveri's brochure TET is good 200-250K less than the State of the art values I have seen on actual engine test data. Why would Kaveri's TET be so bad if it had state of the art blades in it..??

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15882
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby chetak » 25 Apr 2017 22:19

[Deleted]
Last edited by ramana on 27 Apr 2017 00:04, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Edited ramana

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47922
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby ramana » 25 Apr 2017 22:32

JayS wrote:Just doing some googling regarding flutter and Screech issues. Incidentally RM12 faced these exact two issues. And F135 also faced screech issue.

https://www.dodbuzz.com/2011/01/19/f135 ... fix-found/

“During development testing of the F135 in the May 2009 time frame, P&W found that at low altitude and high speed, certain pressure pulsations occurred when operating in full afterburner. This phenomenon, known broadly in the industry as screech, has been addressed with design modifications that have been validated to eliminate the issue. The modifications include minor hardware changes to the fuel system, reduced aerodynamic leakages, and upgraded software. The design of these modifications benefited greatly from the tools and processes developed in the design of the F119 engine that powers the F-22. The F119 and the F135 are the only two production engines that have provided augmented, stealth capability. With the modifications identified and implemented, the F135 now provides full max augmented thrust throughout the flight envelope. For the SDD program, a kit has been developed that brings these modifications to the engines that are powering the flight test program. Two engines have been modified to date with the design showing excellent results. The production configuration is being validated this year in both the CTOL/CV and STOVL variants of the F135. Confident that the F135 was providing the full required thrust throughout the flight envelope was just one of many reasons the government certified the CTOL/CV engine for Initial Service Release (ISR) in March 2010 and the STOVL engine achieved ISR in December 2010.”


some interesting info.


JayS, Would these apply to Kaveri especially the three areas listed in the posts above?

I guess the after burner issue would be fuel injection and software changes can tackle it.

Did the Kaveri 'screech' happen at low altitude?

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2014
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby abhik » 25 Apr 2017 23:40

How does HAL HTFE-25 compare to Kaveri from a technological, future growth and learning perspective? From the figures released it looks like the HTFE-25 weighs only 350kg for 25 kN while Kaveri weighs 1200+ kg for only a little more than double its dry thrust (I assume the HAL engine doesn't have afterburner). The T/W ratio difference seems to be quite a bit, I guess it reflects the experience gained over the last couple of decades.
Would building a HTFE-100 be a better way forward than trying to fix Kaveri which has remained in test rigs for the last 2 decades?

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2651
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 26 Apr 2017 11:49

ramana wrote:
JayS wrote:Just doing some googling regarding flutter and Screech issues. Incidentally RM12 faced these exact two issues. And F135 also faced screech issue.

https://www.dodbuzz.com/2011/01/19/f135 ... fix-found/



some interesting info.


JayS, Would these apply to Kaveri especially the three areas listed in the posts above?

I guess the after burner issue would be fuel injection and software changes can tackle it.

Did the Kaveri 'screech' happen at low altitude?


I don't know. What we know is screech and Flutter issues were uncovered during flight trials in Russia. But we don't know what all points they tested for. The GTRE person carefully avoided telling me which points these issues are popping up.

Frankly speaking, these two things, flutter and screech are way above typical academic stuff taught in college. You need to actually work on it, either in PhD or as a professional to have a proper understanding of it. I have done combustion design but never done acoustics related stuff, which is what screech is. And I am not finding time to read (and it will need a lot of technical reading) enough about all this to bring myself up to speed to figure out exactly which points these two issues could be occurring. Whatever I find I will post here.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2651
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 26 Apr 2017 14:22

abhik wrote:How does HAL HTFE-25 compare to Kaveri from a technological, future growth and learning perspective? From the figures released it looks like the HTFE-25 weighs only 350kg for 25 kN while Kaveri weighs 1200+ kg for only a little more than double its dry thrust (I assume the HAL engine doesn't have afterburner). The T/W ratio difference seems to be quite a bit, I guess it reflects the experience gained over the last couple of decades.
Would building a HTFE-100 be a better way forward than trying to fix Kaveri which has remained in test rigs for the last 2 decades?


T:W for HTFE-25 is 5.66 (source - from AI-seminar slides). I am not sure where this 350kg figure is coming from or what exactly it is. It appears in many reports but it doesn't fit the bill. Kaveri is 7.5 T:W class. Kaveri is more advanced than HTFE.

Also keep in mind that HTFE-25 is not a full fledged engine as of now. Currently they are focused only on core certification and not worried about LP system so much. They kind of picked one number to size LP system for now and made it accordingly. But LP system may not be certified. or we see different thrust number in the first full fledged engine depending on the application. It could be scaled up to 35-40kN I suppose.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47922
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby ramana » 27 Apr 2017 00:05

Screech comes from vibrations in the audible range. So its still a vibration problem.

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3492
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Neela » 29 Apr 2017 02:34

Jet starter kit and APU explained.



PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1816
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby PratikDas » 29 Apr 2017 07:15

A good intro to jet engine screech in relatively simple language here: Screech Tones in Supersonic Jets

An extract:
Screech Suppression

Some surprisingly simple techniques work. One is to put a baffle around the periphery of the jet.
This inhibits the feedback path of the sound, and thus breaks the resonance loop. For round jets,
it is possible to break the symmetry of the vortex rings by placing a probe or other asymmetric
disturbance at the edge of the shear layer. For example, in our lab experiment, we found that a
pencil introduced into the shear layer would stop the screech tone. Of course this might have
been because the jet was at a relatively low Reynolds number, and the turbulence level is very
low, so that we had a high level of clean symmetry. This may not be the case in a jet engine
exhaust. On the other hand, Dr. Ahuja's team at GTRI has shown that placing small tabs into the
shear layer at the nozzle exit can reduce screech tones greatly.

This goes back to the issue of "receptivity": even small disturbances can cause major changes to
the instability waves, if introduced at the region of highest receptivity: the nozzle lip.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2651
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 29 Apr 2017 10:33

ramana wrote:Screech comes from vibrations in the audible range. So its still a vibration problem.


Gas turbine reheat thrust augmenters known as afterburners are used to provide
additional thrust during emergencies, take off, combat, and in supersonic flight of
high-performance. Afterburners provide a lightweight, low-capital cost method
to greatly increase engine thrust. During the course of reheat development, the
most persistent trouble has been the onset of a high frequency screech. It is
characterized by a peculiar violence, and its onset is invariably followed by rapid
mechanical failure. This failure evinces itself in the tearing of the sheet metal, or
if the screech is mild, persistent breakage of bolts or slackening the nuts [1].

Two types of instabilities are encountered in afterburners. They are buzz and
screech. Reheat buzz is a low frequency, self-excited oscillation that can occur
above a certain fuel-air ratio. Screech is accompanied by high frequency pressure
oscillations that may be of such magnitude as to cause rapid deterioration of the
burner. Screech might be, or closely related to, some form of resonant oscillation
or also known as flame-driven resonant oscillations or combustion instability.
The afterburner-inlet conditions at which screech occur differs widely for various
afterburner designs. Combustion-driven flow oscillations that arise in combustors
and the afterburners are difficult to predict.

Because of destructive nature of screeching combustion considerable effort is
required to find methods of mitigating or preventing the occurrence of screech.
Screech is associated with transverse oscillations. It is reported that the perfo-
rated liners are effective in mitigating transverse oscillations over the full operable
range of fuel-air ratio for burner.


Problem is there can be one or multiple origins of the vibratory motion in the gas - combustion instability, flow instabilities such as vortex shedding, Kelvin-Hemzhold instability, turbulence etc or Fluid-Stricture Interaction between the flame holder and the gas. To investigate such phenomena one needs high fidelity CFD codes with huge computational power and/or very elaborate experimental facilities. Experience really matter in such cases if you don't have good facilities. We lack on all of it.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7516
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Pratyush » 29 Apr 2017 12:00

I am asking questions only for my understanding as I have no technical back ground.

Why is it that Kaveri program which was de-linked from LCA in the late 2000s continued in its current form. When it was clear that it will not meet the intended design goals. I have heard repeatedly that it would be used to power a UCAV. But the question remains, if the engine is unfit for flight certification then how can it power a UCAV.

Why was a new engine program not launched incorporating the lessons from Kaveri that had achieved a certain % of design goals.

Marten
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2176
Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
Location: Engaging Communists, Uber-Socialists, Maoists, and other pro-poverty groups in fruitful dialog.

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Marten » 29 Apr 2017 12:25

Boils down to current capabilities and budget, along with the will to succeed in an area where only 8-10 companies have succeeded over the past fifty years.

How would you plan a new program without funding.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 903
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Gyan » 29 Apr 2017 14:05

I wonder if GTRE should have followed ISRO startegy of closely copying a known design and then incrementally improving it rather than a clean slate endeavour. Should we have simply copied F404 and tried improving it step be step? Any idea about the strategy being followed for new 110kn design?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47922
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby ramana » 30 Apr 2017 02:49

ISRO was a co'developer of Viking engine and contributed Engineering man hours as the contribution.
This became the Vikas engine.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47922
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby ramana » 09 May 2017 00:03

X-post from Missiles thread for completeness...

Karthik S wrote:https://www.livefistdefence.com/2017/03/exclusive-crucial-engine-for-indias-cruise-missiles-revs-up.html

Three months ago, India’s Nirbhay cruise missile was destroyed mid-flight after an electro-mechanical failure made it roll dangerously with half-opened wings. The roll glitched out the missile’s intertial navigation system, sending it careening out of its notified flight envelope and forcing the test team on ground to push the kill switch. As scientists work to clear up problems bedeviling the crucial long-range weapon effort, a related development is understood to be showing fresh promise, and could soon be a direct part of the Nirbhay: the Indian-built Manik mini turbofan engine, intended to power production series Nirbhay cruise missiles.

Almost exactly a year ago, DRDO chief S. Christopher witnessed a test run demonstration of the Manik turbofan at the DRDO’s Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) in Bengaluru. In March 2015, Defence Secretary G. Mohan Kumar was shown the engine switched on. It was in November 2014 that the mini turbofan engine was christened Manik.

Livefist has learnt that the Nirbhay cruise missile, currently powered by an NPO Saturn 36MT turbofan, will next be tested in the May-June period using a turbojet engine. While the GTRE has been mandated with proving the Manik turbofan by the time the Nirbhay’s other flight systems are proven, top sources confirm a Nirbhay test powered by a Manik engine could take place by the end of next year. The Manik turbofan has been under rigirous ground and high power tests for over two years now, and scientists are understood to be satisfied with progress. Current activity includes work spread between GTRE and the National Aerospace Laboratory. At the latter’s Propulsion Division, Manik components including its fan, centrifugal compressor, high pressure and low pressure turbines and alternator are under test.

At 425 kgF (kilogram-force) of thrust, scientists are working to reduce the Manik turbofan’s current 110 kilogram total weight. The engine makes major use of the Mishra Dhatu Nigam-developed MDN 321 special steel and special indigenous alloys.
Significantly, the GTRE isn’t fully equipped to test the Manik and is working fast to add test capabilities and infrastructure. This was borne out yesterday in the defence standing committee’s report to Parliament, where the MoD made the following admission:

“The existing Fan & Compressor Test Facility at Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) has inadequate capacity and has become obsolete. To carry out testing of Fan & Compressor for existing and future generation gas turbine engine programmes of GTRE, it is essential to have a dedicated Fan & Compressor test facility at GTRE. GTRE is working out the budgetary cost of this facility to be established ‘on turnkey basis’ with an objective to initiate EPC approval by end of Oct 2016.”

The report further details aggressive plans to beef up a non-existent engine development and validation ecosystem in South India:

“The design improvement and validation of aero engine components and modules through testing is a continuous activity to enhance and demonstrate engine performance and reliability. At present, only limited aerodynamic and structural testing can be conducted within the country. Hence, the required component testing facilities at an estimated cost of Rs.1330 crore are planned to be established by DRDO at Rajanakunte, Bengaluru for development of Ghatak engine and all future generation aero engines.”

In addition, the DRDO is reported to be planning a twin test cell at GTRE to carry out ‘performance testing of gas turbine engines upto 130 kN thrust class’, which includes all versions of the Kaveri engine, including the dry version being developed for the Ghatak stealth UCAV. The bolstering of gas turbine development and testing infrastructure is belated but very welcome: it amplifies a recognition that India is willing to invest in one of the toughest areas of military science, one that has tormented the most advanced nations, and is currently harrowing China too.

But the Nirbhay isn’t the end game, as it were. Livefist learns the Manik turbofan will also power the DRDO’s secretive Long Range Cruise Missile (LRCM), a weapon project revealed first here on Livefist in 2010. Top DRDO sources reveal the LRCM, currently still in a configuration phase, will involve a three-stage power system: a booster to put the missile in the air, the Manik turbofan to power the LRCM through its 1,000-km cruise phase and, finally, a ramjet engine that will push the LRCM into supersonic endgame towards its target. The full-fledged project is being spearheaded by the Aeronautical Development Establishment (ADE) and Defence Research and Development Laboratory (DRDL).




So what is the expected weight goal for the Manik currently weighing 110 kg?

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3492
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Neela » 09 May 2017 00:27

Saturn's 36T Specification
Engine..............................................................................36МТ
Thrust at maximum rating, kgf..................................................450
Specific fuel consumption at maximum rating*, kg/(kgf∙h).................0.71
Weight, kg...........................................................................71

For a little less than Saturn 36T's thrust , Manik weighs nearly 50% more atm.
But its still early days for it.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47922
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby ramana » 09 May 2017 00:30

So how much does Saturn 36MT (used in Kh-59) cost vs. Manik engine now?

And will the reduced weight Manik have to undergo the same bench testing underway now?

its in 2014 that the engine was named Manik.
And its 2017 and still we don't have a usable prototype.
I think this is Kaveri all over again.

What ails GTRE that they always sign up to design and engine and deliver sub-specification models?

Did thy not have product requirements when they signed up for the project?
What was the weight requirement? Same as SATURN 36MT?

There is something systemic wrong in the that place.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5765
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Indranil » 09 May 2017 02:05

Neela wrote:Saturn's 36T Specification
Engine..............................................................................36МТ
Thrust at maximum rating, kgf..................................................450
Specific fuel consumption at maximum rating*, kg/(kgf∙h).................0.71
Weight, kg...........................................................................71

For a little less than Saturn 36T's thrust , Manik weighs nearly 50% more atm.
But its still early days for it.

We don't know what those 110 kgs and 71 kgs include.

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3492
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Neela » 09 May 2017 10:40

Indranil-ji
Are you talking about the jet starter kit not counted into weight?
36MT has all single stages in fan- HP compressor- HP turbine- LP turbine .
There isn't much scope for weight ambiguity but google does give diff results ( < 100kg ) whereas Saturn website mentions 71kgs.

In any case,
Saturn 36Mt dimensions: 850mm x 330mm
Manik is : 900 x 360mm

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8613
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Project BRF: India's Kaveri Engine Saga

Postby UlanBatori » 14 Jul 2017 03:58

They are pursuing peacetime research and publishing papers. That is fine, but they don't seem to have an Admiral Hyman Rickover / KPS Gill to set and drive through a hard, laser-focused project to get results. Wonder how the nuclear submarine ppl did it - or is it also, in the immortal words of R.K. Laxman, "100% Indigenous with only 99% imported parts"?

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8613
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Project BRF: India's Kaveri Engine Saga

Postby UlanBatori » 14 Jul 2017 04:04

Sounds like GATET is along the right path. Any gyan on whether it has substance? I know IITM center is focused on combustion, didn't seem to have much interest in rotating anything. Obvious a great idea to have advanced research in all aspects, but is there someone to take all this and insist on it being USED by the application engineer types in real engines?

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35362
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Project BRF: India's Kaveri Engine Saga

Postby SaiK » 16 Jul 2017 08:52

linking it here as I found this.. feel free to delink if reference invalidates forum rules
http://www.indiandefensenews.in/2016/12 ... t.html?m=1
http://www.indiandefensenews.in/2017/03 ... s.html?m=1

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8613
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Project BRF: India's Kaveri Engine Saga

Postby UlanBatori » 16 Jul 2017 23:03

Ribbon-cutting?

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8613
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Project BRF: India's Kaveri Engine Saga

Postby UlanBatori » 16 Jul 2017 23:10

Polis have fired the gun on the EllSeeYay dhaga :eek:
NRaoji, on additive mfg. Do u see an additive-manufactured turbine blade doing better than single-crystal? Of course crystal growth is additive manufacturing of a different kind..
Surprised to see above that Kaveri does not have single-crystal blades. WTF not I wonder, in the land of diamond-cutters. Isn't there anyone even setting basic timelines and deliverables on the biggest tech limiters?
I agree that if desh goes big-time into metal/ceramic additive mfg with nanotech thrown in, desh could leapfrog engine tech quite a lot. But it needs tough program mgmt as well as the ability to retain really smart people.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3870
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Project BRF: India's Kaveri Engine Saga

Postby Manish_Sharma » 25 Jul 2017 06:25

Paging Maitya jee,

NRao wrote:
ramana wrote:

Mind adding the highlights? The link comes up as blocked.


Confident with initial studies that show that the desi ‘Kaveri’ engine can be revived and turned around for fighter jet operations in a short time span, India has asked its French collaborators whether the power-pack of the engine can be further boosted to upgrade its fleet of Su-30 MKI fighters.

The Kaveri project – which was abandoned in 2014 as it did not meet the power requirements of the Air Force – is being revived with French help for use on both the indigenous Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) and a new unmanned combat aerial vehicle (UCAV) project.

Work is on with the French side to use the significant offsets on the Rafale fighter jet deal to fund a redevelopment of the Indian jet engine project. French company Safran has to invest over $1 billion in India as part of its offset obligations for the Indian Rafale deal.

India is keen on an indigenous power plant that can be used for its future series of aerial combat platforms. Sources have told ThePrint that now the Indian side has suggested that the Kaveri engine be rated up to produce a power of 125 kn – to make it usable for the Su-30 MKI fleet.

The Air Force has a fleet of just under 300 Sukhoi jets that will need to be upgraded. “The idea is to have a more powerful engine that can be used for a ‘Super Sukhoi’ upgrade. With the numbers we require, it will be good to have a Make in India solution,” sources involved in the process told ThePrint.

The sources said that studies are now being carried out on the feasibility of using the upgraded Kaveri for the Su-30 MKI fleet. While Russia will need to be consulted for an engine replacement on the fleet as it is the designer of the jet, officials on the Indian side do not foresee any objections given that French engines are being extensively used, including on the KA-226 helicopters that are to be manufactured domestically for the Army.


ramana wrote:So what is the thrust level required for current SU-30MKI?

Never mind. From Wiki

AL-31FP Improved variant for the Indian Su-30MKI with thrust vectoring Salyut, HAL 2000 123 kN (27,700 lbf) Yes Su-30 MKI, Sukhoi Su-30MKM In service/production


Can anyone well versed in thermodamnics tell if the Kaveri core can be enhanced to produce 125 KN?

geeth
BRFite
Posts: 1192
Joined: 22 Aug 1999 11:31
Location: India

Re: Project BRF: India's Kaveri Engine Saga

Postby geeth » 25 Jul 2017 15:29

^^^ Not just the core, the whole of Kaveri cannot be enhanced to 125 KN with tech available now anywhere.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2651
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Project BRF: India's Kaveri Engine Saga

Postby JayS » 25 Jul 2017 16:09

This is gyan thread. For regular discussion please use the Kaveri and Aero Engine thread. Else mods mamus will come with danda in hand. Mods, can you please remove last few posts to the other Kaveri thread..?

BTW, you are right about that geeth. But I wouldn't say "tech available anywhere" but its impractical anyway. :wink:
Last edited by Indranil on 26 Jul 2017 00:32, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Posts moved

sommuk
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 9
Joined: 18 Jul 2017 20:07

Re: Project BRF: India's Kaveri Engine Saga

Postby sommuk » 27 Jul 2017 16:17

Titanium additive manufacturing is now being actively considered by some of India's leading private sector firms with an interest in the defense manufacturing sector. Titanium forging is also on top of the agenda. I personally know of one company based in Pune.

sommuk
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 9
Joined: 18 Jul 2017 20:07

Re: Project BRF: India's Kaveri Engine Saga

Postby sommuk » 27 Jul 2017 16:22

Cranfield University in the UK has a programme wherein there is a direct 'lab-to-production line' concept in additive manufacturing ...so TRL 1-2-3 to directly TRL 7-8-9 in collaboration with aerospace majors like Airbus, Boeing and Rolls Royce. Perhaps a model which premier Indian universities could emulate.

sommuk
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 9
Joined: 18 Jul 2017 20:07

Re: Project BRF: India's Kaveri Engine Saga

Postby sommuk » 27 Jul 2017 16:23

This one is specifically for aircraft structures

https://www.cranfield.ac.uk/press/news- ... technology

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5765
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Indranil » 27 Jul 2017 19:52

Sommuk, the above posts have been moved to this thread from the "gyan" only thread. "gyan" only threads are for reference only. Use this thread for discussion about Kaveri engine.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3328
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: Project BRF: India's Kaveri Engine Saga

Postby Cosmo_R » 28 Jul 2017 01:01

UlanBatori wrote:They are pursuing peacetime research and publishing papers. That is fine, but they don't seem to have an Admiral Hyman Rickover / KPS Gill to set and drive through a hard, laser-focused project to get results. Wonder how the nuclear submarine ppl did it - or is it also, in the immortal words of R.K. Laxman, "100% Indigenous with only 99% imported parts"?


"99% imported by 100% indigenous people".

I have been unfortunate witness to this import substitution saga for decades. When all the theories didn't pan out, the subject got changed and ended with "India has more pressing priorities than xyz. We have to first...."

Even Ganesh statues are made in China.

Kalam was our Rickover.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Jaeger, shivatar, sudhan, yensoy and 52 guests