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.
JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3607
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 20 Apr 2018 17:39

chetak wrote:
Pratyush wrote:Why do we need antifreeze for Indian operations requiemnts. I would imagine that heat generated by gas turbine would be sufficient to turn ice into water for injection into the engine.

Besides do we know for certain that Kaveri will be using water injection for extra thrust?


Its just an idea that is being tossed around.

The proposed plan is to store the water in the tail/vertical fin section of the aircraft.

rapidly consumable weights stored at the extreme ends of the air frame may produce CG problems of its own, depending on the weight, of course and especially during combat maneuvering.


Vina is proposing to use water injection only for TO and climb out. So the water tank wherever it is will be empty soon enough. (Surely during TO, there will need to be a small tweak to be needed in FCS though, but I think this should be fairly easy). Even in case someone wants to make fin a wet fin for fuel, that fuel should be consumed during idling/Taxing/TO itself. It will indeed need FCS modification otherwise. 100kg at ~5m from CG is similar to 500kG at CG. The fin itself will need modifications as its not fit for being a fuel/water tank as of now. Perhaps use of inner rubber fuel tanks can be made so that the composite structure itself would not need to be modified too much. Water is not good for composites. (In fact the very first composite usage in operational use is in Fins. Then, it was observed that they undergo fatigue failure due to water seepage as seeped water repeatedly freezes-liquefies when the aircraft changes altitude/Op conditions, widening cracks. The damage is typically undetectable from outside unless you do detailed NDT and this results in catastrophic failures one fine day.)

Main challenge would be to create the water injection system in the engine and related ducting in the aircraft. Had it been a fairly simple system, it would not have been dispensed with. There are a lot of complications associated with it. I don't think IAF will accept it.

However the proposal works well in theory otherwise.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17724
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby chetak » 20 Apr 2018 18:39

JayS wrote:
chetak wrote:
Its just an idea that is being tossed around.

The proposed plan is to store the water in the tail/vertical fin section of the aircraft.

rapidly consumable weights stored at the extreme ends of the air frame may produce CG problems of its own, depending on the weight, of course and especially during combat maneuvering.


Vina is proposing to use water injection only for TO and climb out. So the water tank wherever it is will be empty soon enough. (Surely during TO, there will need to be a small tweak to be needed in FCS though, but I think this should be fairly easy). Even in case someone wants to make fin a wet fin for fuel, that fuel should be consumed during idling/Taxing/TO itself. It will indeed need FCS modification otherwise. 100kg at ~5m from CG is similar to 500kG at CG.

Main challenge would be to create the water injection system in the engine and related ducting in the aircraft. Had it been a fairly simple system, it would not have been dispensed with. There are a lot of complications associated with it. I don't think IAF will accept it.

However the proposal works well in theory.


If that is all, it should be OK. Even the plumbing is fairly short and the pumps are maybe engine mounted. There would be other issues to solve. The RR Dart used water methanol injection in some variants so the IAF may already be familiar with the system in a historic sense.

The wet fin for fuel is used by the IL design bureau for sure but I cannot specifically recall now if the IL76 uses it or not.

jaysimha
BRFite
Posts: 683
Joined: 20 Dec 2017 14:30

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby jaysimha » 20 Apr 2018 19:06

found these 3 papers. Posting for records.

Designing Turbine Blades for Fatigue and Creep
https://publications.drdo.gov.in/ojs/index.php/dsj/article/download/5872/3016

Fuzzy Computing for Control of Aero Gas Turbine Engines.
https://publications.drdo.gov.in/ojs/index.php/dsj/article/download/4184/2442

Software for Fuel Schedule Selection and Transient Behaviour of marine gas turbine
http://publications.drdo.gov.in/ojs/index.php/dsj/article/viewFile/4410/2591

Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 344
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Haridas » 20 Apr 2018 19:29

pravula wrote:Cheapest antifreeze is a mix of methanol+water.

Saar, do care to read the paper, it teaches using methanol & water as a known prior art!

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6211
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby nachiket » 20 Apr 2018 22:21

Doesn't water injection lead to thick black smoke due to unburnt fuel trailing from the exhaust? You can see that in old photos of 707 or B-52s where they used water injection during takeoff. I guess it is not a problem if used only during takeoff and climb, unless maybe if the airbase itself is under attack. But the IAF will consider that for sure and may object.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3607
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 20 Apr 2018 22:45

Some interesting History
https://www.icast.org.in/news/2005/oct05/oct04db.html
While Air Vice Marshal Roy Chowdury, the founder director, initiated the project as an engine technology startup, Arun Prasad developed test facilities.

Dr R Krishnan concentrated on materials and metallurgical support, besides setting up test beds and also engine integration with the LCA, and thereafter S C Kaushal focussed on component testing and certification procedures apart from rotodynamics.


From one of the former GTRE Director R. Krishnan. Can't copy text. So click the link to read.
https://books.google.co.in/books?id=Z-M ... ng&f=false

pravula
BRFite
Posts: 221
Joined: 07 Aug 2009 05:01

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby pravula » 21 Apr 2018 02:31

Haridas wrote:
pravula wrote:Cheapest antifreeze is a mix of methanol+water.

Saar, do care to read the paper, it teaches using methanol & water as a known prior art!


Sorry for not being clearer. I was responding to this comment from chetak, implying water+alcohol is also a type of antifreeze.

Anitfreeze?? Defeats this very purpose and would cause irreparable damage to the engine.

There is however a non freezing mixture of water and alcohol that could be used.

prasannasimha
Forum Moderator
Posts: 882
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:22

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby prasannasimha » 21 Apr 2018 06:41

Regarding water injection incidentally Kaveri blades were modified to be liquid cooled with a channel in it when I saw it in one of the exhibitions.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50763
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby ramana » 21 Apr 2018 06:46

The idea is to inject in the burner to add mass flow.

prasannasimha
Forum Moderator
Posts: 882
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:22

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby prasannasimha » 21 Apr 2018 07:03

Yes but when I asked I think they had toyed with or implemented that idea already as they were telling about some channels for water I asked if it was just to cool and they said it was not the only reason and the subsequent discussion went over my head. When I saw this discussion it suddenly reminded me of that discussion. So they may have toyed with that idea

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby vina » 21 Apr 2018 09:37

Okay. Look like, not too many folks here have actually read this beyond the title in the link or even the exec summary I posted.

A couple of points. No the cg won't shift.There is an entire section about aircraft implementation and if you read carefully, what is being advocated to be stored in is reserve /divert fuel or fuel that will be used last. This is like a fixed weight.

No. Injection into the HPC like the paper says will IMPROVE the smoke number per the references.And no icing etc, injection is not in the engine inlet but rather HPC inlet where it is 153c.

No large pumps either. For HPC inlet use bleed air. Again an entire discussion there with engg comparison with harrier which has a booster pump and injection into the turbine blades. None of all that needed.

Haridas, pass it on to whomever you think will be benefit in any way. No issues.

Paris is stunningly beautiful as always. One of my favorite places how I wish we cared a bit more for our cities and how we conduct ourselves in public and be a bit more cultured. Sigh.

Au revoir folks.

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby vina » 21 Apr 2018 10:08

Oh, I forgot to add. As you are driving out of CDG, you can see a mounted display of another classic by the roadside, which I pointed out to my kids. The only successful super cruiser ever, the Concorde. This too had obviously as it would need, Turbojet engines which while allowing to super cruise at mach 2+,couldn't get off the ground by itself. So for the Concorde they used a mild reheat!

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3607
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 21 Apr 2018 10:11

prasannasimha wrote:Regarding water injection incidentally Kaveri blades were modified to be liquid cooled with a channel in it when I saw it in one of the exhibitions.


Are you sure about " water cooled blades". Was it turbone or compressor blades..? Cooling turbine blades using water from inside is not a good idea. Unless you do transpiration cooling. But thats not good for aero and its very challenging to implement too.

Also this suggestion of water injection is not for blade cooling but rather cooling of the airflow itself. Its a kind of intercooling.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7851
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Pratyush » 22 Apr 2018 16:32

Question for engine nerds. HAL has designed a 25kn thrust engine. Which I understand is similar to the dry thrust of the jaguars engine, which is to be replaced with an imported engine. Can the HAL engine be used with jaguars is fitted with aft burner.

If not then what are the reasons for this.

Also we have one Bangalore based firm that is designing engine's. From website they have a full range of engine's under design. Including from 25KN to 90 KN?

If they wish to test the prototype, can they do so at GTRE.

Misha
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 3
Joined: 08 Jan 2018 00:25

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Misha » 22 Apr 2018 18:19

vina wrote:Okay. Look like, not too many folks here have actually read this beyond the title in the link or even the exec summary I posted.

A couple of points. No the cg won't shift.There is an entire section about aircraft implementation and if you read carefully, what is being advocated to be stored in is reserve /divert fuel or fuel that will be used last. This is like a fixed weight.

No. Injection into the HPC like the paper says will IMPROVE the smoke number per the references.And no icing etc, injection is not in the engine inlet but rather HPC inlet where it is 153c.

No large pumps either. For HPC inlet use bleed air. Again an entire discussion there with engg comparison with harrier which has a booster pump and injection into the turbine blades. None of all that needed.

Haridas, pass it on to whomever you think will be benefit in any way. No issues.

Paris is stunningly beautiful as always. One of my favorite places how I wish we cared a bit more for our cities and how we conduct ourselves in public and be a bit more cultured. Sigh.

Au revoir folks.


Well this seems to be good idea, my only point is regarding water storage.
Kaveri is approx 42cm shorter than GE 404, so if Kaveri is installed in Tejas Mk1A there will be spare space,
I guess we can have internal SPJ & still left with space required for water.....

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3607
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 28 Apr 2018 12:25

Xposting
jaysimha wrote:DRDO news letter
MAY 2018 volume 38 issue 5

https://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/pub/newsletter/2018/may_18.pdf

This has a news item - GTRE successfully tested Small Turbo Fan Engine at Leh for high altitude performance using a mobile test bed facility.

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby vina » 02 May 2018 23:00

Haridas wrote:Some of us may have connections that may result in reaching the targeted audience. What is your wish list of people you would ideally like them to read this paper? Both technical/managerial and executives/bean-counters.


Back from vacation and checked my mailbox. Looks like that the emails got delivered to most of the people i sent it out to. It bounced from the DG-Aero id and also from the GATET (some gas turbine technology initiative ..xx) id from GTRE. So other than 2 ids, it seem to have got delivered to others. If those ids are active and mails read is another matter though.

To answer your question, ideally it would be the scientist folks /science advisors steering the aero /gas turbine propulsion programs in DRDO/GTRE , the science folks /advisors steering the airframe part (LCA and AMCA) who can take a view at the thoughts around engine and airframe system changes in totality and of course managerial side steering it /coordinating it with all stakeholders at a program level (this would possibly be in Def Ministry , don't know)

Prasad wrote:We could host it on DDR if you like.

What is DDR ?

suryag
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3152
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby suryag » 02 May 2018 23:15

Delhi Defence review

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby vina » 03 May 2018 13:26

Okay. Cleaned up some english /language for clarity /grammar/syntax/readability. Also there was an arithmetic error where the Take Off Gross Weight (TOGW) was overestimated in Appendix C. The TOGW increase is actually less than 300Kg in the maximum case.

The updated document is Water Injection for Enhanced Thrust and Future Growth of GTX type Flat Rated Gas Turbines

Prasad, can you host it ? I will take it off in a few days from my drop box. I usually never mix business and hobbies, made an exception this time. Thanks.

Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 344
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Haridas » 03 May 2018 19:58

vina wrote:Okay. Cleaned up some english /language for clarity /grammar/syntax/readability. Also there was an arithmetic error where the Take Off Gross Weight (TOGW) was overestimated in Appendix C. The TOGW increase is actually less than 300Kg in the maximum case.

The updated document is Water Injection for Enhanced Thrust and Future Growth of GTX type Flat Rated Gas Turbines

Prasad, can you host it ? I will take it off in a few days from my drop box. I usually never mix business and hobbies, made an exception this time. Thanks.

Vina ji, if I may suggest that you must add the following in your papers introduction, or end note so that non technical (non aircraft designers) bean counter (management ) people get the right context. (The first point is compressed in your paper which I think should be per below, the second is absent).

vina wrote:Keep in mind the following while reading the write up.

1. Turbojets are sized for take off thrust. The Kaveri too is sized for that , as per the "original weight estimates" of the LCA. Since it is a turbojet, it is a large sized engine (compared to the turbofans that get put in today, 78 kg/s vs 65 kg/s). Not surprising , given that Turbojets will have lower Net Thrust (SLS , M0, H0) than Turbofans. With the growth in the LCA weight by close to 1.5 tons, the Kaveri means in current form is not useable as it will have less than required take off and climb out thrust
2. The Turbine Entry Temperature hit the limits during take off and initial climb phases. These are the "most demanding" on engines phase of flight . TET rarely is a big limiter in normal conditions of cruise , dash etc..

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby vina » 04 May 2018 07:47

Haridas wrote:Vina ji, if I may suggest that you must add the following in your papers introduction, or end note so that non technical (non aircraft designers) bean counter (management ) people get the right context. (The first point is compressed in your paper which I think should be per below, the second is absent).

vina wrote:Keep in mind the following while reading the write up.

1. Turbojets are sized for take off thrust. The Kaveri too is sized for that , as per the "original weight estimates" of the LCA. Since it is a turbojet, it is a large sized engine (compared to the turbofans that get put in today, 78 kg/s vs 65 kg/s). Not surprising , given that Turbojets will have lower Net Thrust (SLS , M0, H0) than Turbofans. With the growth in the LCA weight by close to 1.5 tons, the Kaveri in current form is not useable as it will have less than required take off and climb out thrust
2. The Turbine Entry Temperature hit the limits during take off and initial climb phases. These are the "most demanding" on engines phase of flight . TET rarely is a big limiter in normal conditions of cruise , dash etc..


Okay. Added those points in the Exec Summary in the paper.
The updated document is here @ Water Injection for Enhanced Thrust and Future Growth of GTX type Flat Rated Gas Turbines

Also, for anyone interested in the engineering analysis and how the calculations were done and the estimates (it is actually an underestimate , but pays to be conservative here) arrived at, I am posting the link for the spreadsheet as well. Though the methodology is described in the paper in detail, seeing the actual calculations might give a better feel for many folks.

It has three tabs. The first "HPC W.I Analysis" is the analysis component wise, LPC, HPC, Combustor and the second tab is "Thrust Aug" which estimates (actually underestimates) the thrust augmentation . The third tab is "Performance" which puts it all together , along with how much will be the weights and TOGW increase etc. Finally the tab EJ200 is for a "sanity check" to compare with the EJ200 which has a mass flow rate of 75Kg/s, which is very similar to the Kaveri with 78 kg/s (EJ200 has a different thermodynamic cycle of course and cutting edge materials and component technology at every level, fan, compressor , turbine, combustor.. you name it).

The spread sheet is here @ Kaveri Engine W.I and Comparison

Do pass on and use in anyway fit , especially for study & learning , analysis etc.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50763
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby ramana » 12 Jun 2018 05:01

So any updates on the Kaveri this month?

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6382
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby habal » 12 Jun 2018 11:45

I read a report that germans, the people who invented the jet fighter, were in talks with China for their turbine blade forging tech. Apparently the impression that I get is that the Chinese are getting extremely good at forging select high temperature turbine fans and certain select parts but are unable to master the compressor tech that germans have mastery on and thus the sum of their parts turbine is not as reliable as expected. Now both parties were in talks to do a ToT, german compressor tech to China and Chinese laser fabrication and forging high temp alloys to germany. If this goes ahead give or take a decade they are going to get ahead of likes of p&w, RR, GE.

https://sg.news.yahoo.com/china-talks-s ... 44775.html

China’s turbine blade breakthroughs have won numerous top national science and technology prizes since 2010. They include the development of a unique hollow structure to make lighter and stronger blades; new single-crystal alloys capable of withstanding high temperatures; and a special membrane that can be applied to a blade’s surface to accelerate cooling. Two of the national science and technology prizes announced by Beijing this week were awarded for work on turbine blades: one for single crystal alloys and the other to do with mechanical grinding.

The Chinese machinery being discussed with the Germans uses ultra-fast laser beams to bore extremely small holes or other fine structures on a turbine blade that allow air to flow through it and take away harmful heat.

After stealth fighters and jumbo jets at Zhuhai Air Show, China’s ‘secret weapon’: jet engines

The scientist in Xian said laser processing was widely used in making jet engines, but China was using a new technical approach that differed from the traditional methods adopted in the US and Britain.

The US, Britain and France are home to the world’s four dominant jet engine makers: General Electric (GE), Pratt & Whitney, Rolls-Royce and CFM.

He said one challenge was to achieve high output while keeping defect rates low. GE, Pratt & Whitney and Rolls-Royce had been researching the manufacture of turbine blades for decades and guarded the technology as one of their top business secrets.

Our machine has outperformed theirs on some benchmarks,” the scientist said. “The Germans have seen and grown interested in our technology.”


Another researcher involved in the negotiations said the export of the blade processing machine would be part of wider jet engine collaboration between the two countries.

“We will buy something else from them in return,” he said. “It can be either hardware or technology. The Germans are very good at the design and engineering of compressors [which send fresh air into the combustion chamber].”

Professor Peng Jiahui, who studied laser processing technology in Huazhong University of Science and Technology, said many Chinese researchers and engineers who had worked at GE, Pratt &Whitney and Rolls-Royce had returned to China and significantly increased the pace of jet engine development.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3607
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 12 Jun 2018 13:08

Germans lack the hot tech in jet engines neither theybhave much money or programs where they can cover the ground. so its a good barter deal for them both.

hanumadu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4022
Joined: 11 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby hanumadu » 18 Jun 2018 21:17

Lokender Singh
@Aakashveer306
Replying to @SJha1618
Progress on Kaveri, please update.


Saurav Jha
@SJha1618
Residual issues with the engine have been fixed according to GTRE, including the ones I wrote about. They still plan to fly it on board a Tejas test vehicle just as a demonstration. I have a feeling they might be able to do it. #IAH]

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7851
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Pratyush » 18 Jun 2018 22:12

Let it fly before we say that all issues are solved.

As in a program of this nature, you can still face a brand new problem. Just when you think that you have sorted out all the issues.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6211
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby nachiket » 19 Jun 2018 00:02

We will never be able to build a world class jet engine without a dedicated engine testbed for GTRE. If we had been even mildly serious about the need for an indigenous engine such glaring shortcomings would have been fixed a long time ago.

jaysimha
BRFite
Posts: 683
Joined: 20 Dec 2017 14:30

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby jaysimha » 19 Jun 2018 11:38

These 2 slides tell about Kaveri engine

National Competence in Marine Gas Turbine Propulsion
Presentation By Cdr C H V Sudhakar, Indian Navy
http://ficci.in/events/22716/ISP/Cdr-CHV-Sudhakar-Navy.pdf

National Competence in Marine Propulsion – The Road Ahead
Presentation By Cdr Manish Singh,Indian Navy
http://ficci.in/events/22716/ISP/NCIMTP-Cdr%20M%20Singh.pdf

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17724
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby chetak » 19 Jun 2018 12:24

JayS wrote:Germans lack the hot tech in jet engines neither theybhave much money or programs where they can cover the ground. so its a good barter deal for them both.


The germans have the money alright.

They just don't see a market big enough or the overpowering need to risk their time and money in a very complex project that may not pay out in terms of ROI or more importantly pay back in terms of specific applications.

Where ever they can, they will derisk in terms of intelligent management to reduce technology and financial risks. Just like all the major aero engine building countries do.

The low cost and low risk protections afforded to the german national security by NATO and the US means that, like Japan, they have the money to spare but have wisely chosen to spend it in areas of nation building without the huge drag of a domestic and expense heavy defence establishment and infrastructure.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17724
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby chetak » 19 Jun 2018 12:31

nachiket wrote:We will never be able to build a world class jet engine without a dedicated engine testbed for GTRE. If we had been even mildly serious about the need for an indigenous engine such glaring shortcomings would have been fixed a long time ago.


Who stopped them from building/acquiring the test bed(s)??. The services have their own testbeds and sometimes more than just one, just like the aero engine PSUs/divisions do.

I simply refuse to believe that GTRE can function/has functioned without a test bed. This is a fundamental requirement that just cannot be avoided.

Unless you mean something else??

Where do you think that the marinised version of the kaveri was tested??

Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 1353
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Bart S » 19 Jun 2018 13:05

chetak wrote:
nachiket wrote:We will never be able to build a world class jet engine without a dedicated engine testbed for GTRE. If we had been even mildly serious about the need for an indigenous engine such glaring shortcomings would have been fixed a long time ago.


Who stopped them from building/acquiring the test bed(s)??. The services have their own testbeds and sometimes more than just one, just like the aero engine PSUs/divisions do.

I simply refuse to believe that GTRE can function/has functioned without a test bed. This is a fundamental requirement that just cannot be avoided.

Unless you mean something else??

Where do you think that the marinised version of the kaveri was tested??


I believe he is talking about a flying testbed.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17724
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby chetak » 19 Jun 2018 22:22

Bart S wrote:
chetak wrote:
Who stopped them from building/acquiring the test bed(s)??. The services have their own testbeds and sometimes more than just one, just like the aero engine PSUs/divisions do.

I simply refuse to believe that GTRE can function/has functioned without a test bed. This is a fundamental requirement that just cannot be avoided.

Unless you mean something else??

Where do you think that the marinised version of the kaveri was tested??


I believe he is talking about a flying testbed.


That's a very different kettle of fish.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6995
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Indranil » 19 Jun 2018 22:30

DMRL seems to have built a new batch of HPT SCB blades and vanes for the new cores. They are calling for manufacturing of a new transit case.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6211
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby nachiket » 19 Jun 2018 23:35

Bart S wrote:I believe he is talking about a flying testbed.

Yes, sorry. A flying testbed is what I meant. The only option they have now is to take the engine to Russia to test on their IL-76 testbed after waiting for and buying flight time on it.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1104
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Gyan » 19 Jun 2018 23:51

jaysimha wrote:These 2 slides tell about Kaveri engine

National Competence in Marine Gas Turbine Propulsion
Presentation By Cdr C H V Sudhakar, Indian Navy
http://ficci.in/events/22716/ISP/Cdr-CHV-Sudhakar-Navy.pdf

National Competence in Marine Propulsion – The Road Ahead
Presentation By Cdr Manish Singh,Indian Navy
http://ficci.in/events/22716/ISP/NCIMTP-Cdr%20M%20Singh.pdf


It says Kaveri Achieved 82kn

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50763
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby ramana » 19 Jun 2018 23:52

In air in flying test bed or ground?

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2844
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby chola » 20 Jun 2018 00:43

Crossposting from chini mil thread on the flying testbed that sexy Natasha sold the PRC but not us.

chola wrote:
habal wrote:Now China have self-developed inhouse quad engine platforms like Y20 xian for testing their engines, they don't even need services of IL76 testbed anymore.


Actually, they are using the IL-76 as we speak to test out the WS-20 for their Y-20. I’m pretty sure they will eventually build a testbed out of the Y-20. But right now, that IL-76 is invaluable.

Image

This platform being used by the chinis can be traced very specifically back to Russia and the Gromov Flight Research Institute at Ramenskaye — the same fvcking place the Kaveri was tested:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/nxgphotos/6654972165/

Ilyushin Il-76-976
Moscow Zhukovesky (Ramenskaye) - UUBW
August 2001.
LII, 76456 (c/n 0063471125, f/n 5602)
Ilyushin Il-76-976.

One of five "Aircraft 976" built from the conversion of five new Il-76MDs. Despite the external similarities with the A-50 Mainstay, 'aircraft 976' were not AWACS aircraft but were used in the Airborne Control and Measuring Station -ACMS role by Lii to track missile test launches.

In 2004, 76456 was converted to an Il-76LL engine testbed and sold to the Chinese Air Force for use by the CFTE. It is used to test the WS10 turbofan engine - used on the J10 and J11 fighters.


So the question is why weren’t we able to buy one from the Russians for the Kaveri project like the chinis did for the WS-10 (and the WS-20 and the WS-15, once it stops exploding)? Why weren’t we able to test our engines whenever we want in India?

Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 1353
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Bart S » 20 Jun 2018 01:00

Is this something that we necessarily need Gromov's help with? Would a used Boeing 747 serve the purpose? Or is it really the Gromov/TSAGI expertise that we need?

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2844
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby chola » 20 Jun 2018 01:59

Bart S wrote:Is this something that we necessarily need Gromov's help with? Would a used Boeing 747 serve the purpose? Or is it really the Gromov/TSAGI expertise that we need?



I would say we need an institution like Gromov who specializes in teaching engines. Not sure just having a spare 747 around would give us an instant solution. Both the chinis and GTRE went to Gromov to get their respective engines tested so we know that this particular Russian institution is experienced in this endeavor. Gromov altered a series of Il-76s to test engines.

They sold the chinis one from that series and it is a game changer IMHO as you can see in the photo. They no longer need to go to the Russians to test the WS-20 as they did with the WS-10.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50763
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby ramana » 20 Jun 2018 04:38

Bart S wrote:Is this something that we necessarily need Gromov's help with? Would a used Boeing 747 serve the purpose? Or is it really the Gromov/TSAGI expertise that we need?



The flying test bed is chock full of instruments and has the safety of three other engines.

And to build a flying test bed for one engine is not a business case.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: anjan and 29 guests