Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 26 Aug 2010 12:53

Once Kaveri completes its trials and gets certified for flight operations , wonder if we could replace the engine of Rafale with Kaveri if it gets selected , there were talks of replacing the Snecma M88 engine with Kaveri, since Kaveri is a Flat rater engine we might have a better engine in kaveri for our hot/high environment

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 26 Aug 2010 13:20

The GTRE has suffred a lot of Heart achs in the design of the kaveri. I hope and pray, that, this time all the design goals for Kaveri are met and it goes on to form the backbone of the Tejes and the AMCA fleets.

Willy · Post by **Willy** » 26 Aug 2010 14:09

Austin wrote:Once Kaveri completes its trials and gets certified for flight operations , wonder if we could replace the engine of Rafale with Kaveri if it gets selected , there were talks of replacing the Snecma M88 engine with Kaveri, since Kaveri is a Flat rater engine we might have a better engine in kaveri for our hot/high environment

Isnt the Rafale going to get new engines from the french anyway?

Neela · Post by **Neela** » 26 Aug 2010 14:19

k_prasad sorely missed here!

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 26 Aug 2010 19:31

maitya wrote:That's fine, but when are you going to bring out your article/report on it - sorry to be pushy, but it has been quite some time since you have promised this, isn't it?

Its all in the ministers statement. We just need to know how many hours of testing is required and when will it begin and end. They will release that info. Its not right to tell the schedules etc now unless they feel confy.

hariks · Post by **hariks** » 26 Aug 2010 20:38

It is great that the high temp problems have been solved. Hope it is SCB, so that there are no more tech barriers to cross in that area. Now the latest specs would be the interesting part. Also does the current tech we have with high temp blades enable us to increase the thrust - how much growth we can expect if the bypass ratio can be increased etc. It would be great if some gurus can enlighten on these aspects.

It would be awesome if a Tejas flies with Kaveri by first/second quarter of 2011.

rgsrini · Post by **rgsrini** » 26 Aug 2010 21:29

Thanks Katare for confirming that I am senile!

I guess denial doesn't make it go away. Thanks Merlin and Marten.

DS Blades could be either Single or Columnar. No reason to assume they do not have access to SCB.

Is there a reason to assume it is infact SCB? I guess this is the crux of my doubt/question.

The press release has no reference to SCB, I vaguely remember (another proof of dementia/senility) that some reliable BR gurus alluding to breakthrough in SCB, based on their conversation with GTRE folks during AeroIndia or elsewhere. If this is the official confirmation of the same, I have to say it is being masked pretty well.

If you guys know some inside information, then more power to you. From my perspective, "You can't hurry love" (Phil Collins) or better yet "You can’t hurry a mango tree to ripen its fruit" (Indian proverb). I have time on my hands and I can wait for this fruit to ripen.

Good Luck GTRE.

Telang · Post by **Telang** » 27 Aug 2010 20:56

deleted.

rgsrini · Post by **rgsrini** » 27 Aug 2010 22:00

DELETED.

chiragAS · Post by **chiragAS** » 27 Aug 2010 23:05

I remember, some ages back there was this discussion on SCB and some BR folks had said that GTRE have aquired SCB tech,
I guess its implementation is on track.
Hoping the KN figures go up when they release new specs..

rgsrini · Post by **rgsrini** » 27 Aug 2010 23:49

Come on Rahulji, You have deleted my intelligent comeback. I thought I could spread some cheer around.

. hmmm...I guess we are back to the dry subject of themodynamics, metallurgy and turbines.

neeraj · Post by **neeraj** » 28 Aug 2010 04:46

SCB are being manufactured in India for Su30MKI engines. Full TOT given. I read a HAL interview in BRF confirming the same.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 28 Aug 2010 07:41

neeraj wrote:SCB are being manufactured in India for Su30MKI engines. Full TOT given. I read a HAL interview in BRF confirming the same.

Perhaps. However, the head of EADS mentioned, just 2-3 months ago, that what the Russians provided was not good enough and the the EADS tech being far better India would benefit to a greater extent.

Eurojet may transfer single crystal blade technology to India

Under the license-production of the Russian Sukhoi Su-30MKI, it is believed that Russia transferred some of this technology to India. However, Harmut Tenter, Managing Director of Eurojet claims their own technology is a generation ahead of the competition. This is a complex process in which the entire blade is a single giant crystal which is grown, instead of having been cut. As a result, the blades can withstand up to 200 degree higher temperatures while also improving the efficiency, longevity and performance of the engine.

Willy · Post by **Willy** » 28 Aug 2010 08:41

NRao wrote:
neeraj wrote:SCB are being manufactured in India for Su30MKI engines. Full TOT given. I read a HAL interview in BRF confirming the same.
Perhaps. However, the head of EADS mentioned, just 2-3 months ago, that what the Russians provided was not good enough and the the EADS tech being far better India would benefit to a greater extent.

Eurojet may transfer single crystal blade technology to India

Under the license-production of the Russian Sukhoi Su-30MKI, it is believed that Russia transferred some of this technology to India. However, Harmut Tenter, Managing Director of Eurojet claims their own technology is a generation ahead of the competition. This is a complex process in which the entire blade is a single giant crystal which is grown, instead of having been cut. As a result, the blades can withstand up to 200 degree higher temperatures while also improving the efficiency, longevity and performance of the engine.

Transfer of SCB technology was part of the Sukhoi deal but dont know who in his/her great wisdom said no to it cause of the cost involved.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 28 Aug 2010 08:54

Willy wrote:Transfer of SCB technology was part of the Sukhoi deal but dont know who in his/her great wisdom said no to it cause of the cost involved.

The high cost of ToT might not have yielded follow-on benefits. Even if the production technology and moulds for Sukhoi engine blades were transferred in entirety, I don't think that would give Indian scientists the science to manufacture blades of a different shape and size.

Telang · Post by **Telang** » 28 Aug 2010 11:56

"State of the art" technologies are not the sole property of a particular nation or race. If Eurojet SCB tech is superior to the Russian tech, there could be some tech in the offing, better than that of Eurojet, that could be developed by those who have brains, financial brawn and the will. Traditionally in India, we never believe in investing in research. Traditionally the west invests hugely on research. Once this attitude changes and we start looking inwards for knowledge, skills and resources, may be we could be the ones who shall have our own better tech than that of the Eurojet. Optimistic and time consuming hope, but not an improbable one. It could happen. 2,50,000 engineering graduates come out of colleges from my state alone every year. I hope even a miniscule percentage of this pool, if used gainfully, can take India to the forefronts of technology & science. About a thousand years ago, the Damscus sword was famous and only India, and to be specific my state and to be more specific, my own little region was the one which had the tecnology to forge the steel alloy that was exported to Damascus for making the world famous swords. We do have those genes and I am not disparaged by the ever pessimistic "Lungi dance hallucination" (hence forth known as "LDH". Some one who hallucinates celebration of Indian success as Lungi Dance is suffering from LDH – Lungi dance hallucination. This could be my major contribution after "MUTU" through my previous Avtar).

Yes, LCA planned in 1983 is a reality after more than 25 years of its conception. But it will not be outdated when it enters service. We have not lost any war for want of its services in the meanwhile. So dont whine on what has not been missed. Look at what we are getting NOW.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 28 Aug 2010 12:00

^^^ We did invest in research of SC Blades. We couldn't grow em beyond few inches.

Telang · Post by **Telang** » 28 Aug 2010 12:24

chackojoseph wrote:^^^ We did invest in research of SC Blades. We couldn't grow em beyond few inches.

The flow of research is not "Research -> No success -> Stop".
It is "Research -> No success -> Further research -> No success -> loop to further research untill -> Success". We have made a beginning. Let us not stop till we see the logical end. No need to whine or LDH in the intermediate space.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 28 Aug 2010 12:57

Telang wrote:The flow of research is not "Research -> No success -> Stop".
It is "Research -> No success -> Further research -> No success -> loop to further research untill -> Success". We have made a beginning. Let us not stop till we see the logical end. No need to whine or LDH in the intermediate space.

Right. I will rephrase. They are still trying to grow. For some reasons they seem to have reached a dead end. At the same time, they are exploring if they can get hold of the tech from else where.

It's not that I don't agree with you. I completely do. I am just adding what I know.

Sona R · Post by **Sona R** » 29 Aug 2010 09:32

We should persist with Kaveri and a 3-way path should be followed
1-A team and group should continue for forward path for Kaveri and it should not involve snecma.
2-GTRE-Snecma combination
3-GTRE+Indian Private sector and some independent retired experts from engine manufacturer like prat&whitney

We need to persist with R&D and it would take a time to bore the fruit

We need to have a multiple teams and not a single team like GTRE that is today

For high temprature parts we can seek help of ISRO.

Only persistence and patience would pay

hariks · Post by **hariks** » 29 Aug 2010 11:52

Does this mean that the current "solution" to the high temp problem does not include SC Blades?
(Or did we get the tech from somewhere else)? Anyway the press release only talked about DS and did not mention SC.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 29 Aug 2010 12:22

K-9 and K-10 are in a phase where speculation is futile.

Telang · Post by **Telang** » 29 Aug 2010 15:08

hariks wrote:Does this mean that the current "solution" to the high temp problem does not include SC Blades?
(Or did we get the tech from somewhere else)? Anyway the press release only talked about DS and did not mention SC.

No one is saying any thing specific. But can Kaveri be flight worthy (with or without SCB) is clarified.
The PIB specifically quotes:

These two major milestones would make ‘Kaveri’ engine certified for flight operations

manum · Post by **manum** » 30 Aug 2010 01:16

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2010/08/ka ... ingle.html

Kaveri's Compressor Blades + The Indian Single Crystal Effort

gaurav.pruthi · Post by **gaurav.pruthi** » 02 Sep 2010 18:52

Self confidence to develop Kaveri engine seems to be meagre................Searching for a foreign partner will took a lot of years... hope engines from GE will be imported at the earliest...

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 03 Sep 2010 12:34

certain Article says that kaveri has been tested for 2000 hours.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 03 Sep 2010 16:56

^^^

The important question is what were the parameters tested and how may of them were consistantly acheaved by the test article. Only that will tell us just how far or close the Kaveri is from operational service.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 03 Sep 2010 22:02

A plane engine takes 2000 - 3000 hours for testing as per the article. Need not be 3000.

My take is that it needs another 500 hours. Its a personal guesstimate. let us see what is the truth.

Willy · Post by **Willy** » 03 Sep 2010 22:37

chackojoseph wrote:A plane engine takes 2000 - 3000 hours for testing as per the article. Need not be 3000.

My take is that it needs another 500 hours. Its a personal guesstimate. let us see what is the truth.

How much of that is supposed to be static testing and how much on a flying testbed?

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 04 Sep 2010 01:03

Am copying and pasting from keypubs forum. The info. here is extremely gratifying and optimistic. As it comes from T. Mohan Rao himself it should be taken at face value. He assures us that the Snecma JV will be extremely useful for the nation. The last bolded paragaraph makes me jump up and down screaming AoA!

The Long Haul

By Atul Chandra

The Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) is a premier Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) lab entrusted with the critical task of designing and developing an operational gas turbine engine for the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA). While the road has been long and arduous, FORCE visited GTRE to get a better understanding of the challenges faced by the team and the milestones that have been achieved till date.

Kaveri Programme

The Gas Turbine Research Centre as it was called way back in 1959 consisted of a modest team of 10 engineers, scientists and 20 technicians entrusted with designing a centrifugal type gas turbine engine generating 1000 kg (2200 lb) of thrust. This engine ran for the first time on a test bed at Kanpur in 1961, by the end of that year the entire establishment moved to Bangalore and was renamed as Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE). From that infant stage, today, GTRE has grown to house more than 1,250 technical personnel whose primary responsibility is to design and develop an aero gas turbine engine for military applications besides carrying out advanced research in subsystems for the same.

The project ‘Design and Development of Kaveri Engine’ was sanctioned on 30 March 1989 is yet ongoing and has incurred an expenditure of more than Rs 3,000 crore.

The programme can in hindsight be termed as having been highly optimistic considering the fact there was a complete lack of knowhow ranging from design and development of a modern aero engine to technology and materials, not to mention a nonexistent vendor base capable of supplying high quality aero components on a consistent basis initially. However, aero engine development world over has always been a technology-intensive and time consuming task and the lessons that have been learnt so far are sure to be put to good use in the coming years. The effort has also resulted in numerous spinoffs over a variety of applications and the creation of a large knowledge pool with regards to gas turbine engines and associated sub systems.

The Kaveri is a twin spool, low bypass ratio, augmented turbofan generating a dry thrust of 52 kN (11,690 lb) and reheat thrust of 81 kN (18,210 lb) weighing approximately 1250 kg. A quick comparison with engines that the Kaveri must match by the time it enters service before the end of this decade is given below.

The Eurojet 200 and F414-GE-400 are already in a competition for the ‘Tejas’ engine contract while Snecma will partner GTRE in the quest to develop a higher thrust variant of the Kaveri engine. The Eurojet 200 is a twin spool turbofan with an afterburner thrust of 20,000 lb and 13,500 lb without reheat weighing 1,000 kg. The GE F414-400 has a maximum reheat thrust of 22,000 lb and weighs 1,109 kg. The Snecma M-88-2 offers 17,000 lb of thrust with reheat and 11,250 lb without reheat and weighs 1977 lbs. However a Snecma brochure does say that improvements could increase the thrust to 20,000 lb.
Interestingly, while the General Electric (GE) engine powers the twin engine F/A 18 ‘Super Hornet’ and the single engine Saab Gripen, the other two engines power twin engine fighters only. Also the GE and Snecma engines are used in fighters that also have naval variants in the ‘Super Hornet’ and Rafale respectively unlike the Eurojet 200 which is used on the Eurofighter.

Challenges

According to director, GTRE, T Mohana Rao the, “materials required for a gas turbine engine are extremely complex. They have to be light and strong at high temperatures. An exotic alloy called Ti-64 is used for the low pressure compressor and parts of the high pressure compressor. Another alloy is used for the high temperature sections at elevated temperatures of 900 degrees centigrade for the high pressure compressor blades. Titanium, super alloys and maraging steel, all form essential components of an aero engine and a lot of these materials were developed for the Kaveri programme along with DMRL Hyderabad and Midhani.Now we have 12 important alloys for air worthiness and use on aircraft that have been certified by Centre for Military Airworthiness and Certification (CEMILAC) and RCMA. This has taken a decade to develop and we used to import all these materials previously.”

Some of the other crucial technologies that are required for a modern combat aero engine are single-piece bladed compressor disks (blisks), single crystal high pressure turbine blades, powder metallurgy disks, ceramic coatings and composite materials. These are essential to provide the high thrust, reliability and low weight demanded of present fighter engines. Many of these technologies are not available readily and the task of developing this type of technology in house has proved to be insurmountable. However, with the entry of Snecma one can expect the programme to have access to newer technologies.

Infrastructure

The most important benefit to have been realised out of developing the Kaveri engine has been the creation of invaluable infrastructure for the design, manufacture, testing and certification of a modern military aero engine.

Foreign Object Damage (FOD) Test Rig: The FOD test rig is used to understand effects of different sized objects that are ingested by the engine at high speeds. The military requirement for an aero engine is that when an object weighing two lb impacts the rotating blades at 12,000 rpm and 0.4 Mach, then the engine should be able to recover 95 per cent of its thrust in five seconds. The Kaveri engine meets this specification. The force of that impact is equivalent to 20 tonne and one can only imagine the standards required to be met to keep an aero engine operating after such an impact. The rig has also been used for the Delhi Metro (to test the windscreen), NAL ‘Saras’ programme, HAL 'Dhruv', IJT and LCA windshield testing.

Rapid Prototyping:
GTRE has developed an excellent rapid prototyping facility which can manufacture the required part in a few hours, which normally took a few months. This can then be used to conduct initial studies on the prototype and speed up the development process. Stereo lithography and fused deposition modelling using 3D CAD model data is undertaken here.

Spin Testing:
Another technology mastered by GTRE has been spin testing of rotors. For this, spin pits and all the associated testing equipment is available at GTRE. This equipment has also been used by HAL for cyclic spin testing of the ‘Adour’ Low Pressure (LP) and High Pressure (HP) turbine rotors and has realised revenue of Rs 3.8 crore.

The overriding impression at GTRE was the impressive strides that have taken place in the creation of required infrastructure to design and develop our very own military aero engine. The Kaveri programme can now call on the knowledge garnered over the years, talented manpower, increased funding and entry of a foreign engine house to provide assistance. The vision of having the Tejas powered by the indigenous Kaveri engine towards the end of this decade may yet be realised.

‘We Are Going For An Upgraded Version of the Kaveri Engine Over The Next Two Years’
Director, Gas Turbine Research Establishment, T. Mohana Rao

What is the status of the Kaveri engine as of now?

The Kaveri engine is undergoing ground testing now while the simulated flight testing has already been completed. The flying test bed trials are expected to start sometime in this month. The engine has completed about 2000 hours of ground testing so far and has been delivering the designed thrust as part of ground testing. The engine has also been fully certified for ground testing condition except for the flying test bed. Once flying trials are completed, it will be a major milestone for the project

What developments do you see taking place over the next few years with respect to the Kaveri engine?

The engine that has been developed at this stage will definitely have some utility. Once it is configured further, at some level, it will have a variety of applications ranging from aircraft to marine to power generation. We are going for an upgraded version of the Kaveri engine over the next two years. There is a lot of scope for us to design and develop a higher thrust class of engine and we are waiting for the contract with Snecma to go through. The requirements of the IAF will be the first priority for us while developing any type of higher thrust engine.

Can you mention any developments on the partnership with Snecma?

I would like to defer this question till such time as we sign the contract. Then we will come out with exactly what the benefits are. However, I can assure that this will be very beneficial for the country.

What are the benefits that have accrued from the Kaveri engine programme?

Firstly we are able to design a gas turbine engine today for a particular specification which was not possible two decades ago. The very fact that we are capable of developing an aero engine is the reason why other engine houses around the world are now prepared to join hands with us for jointly developing a higher level engine. Our design capability in this field is now well-established.

We have established all the facilities required to do the analysis for a gas turbine engine. An excellent material base has been created and the core materials for the engine have been certified to air worthy quality in coordination with Defence Metallurgical Research Laboratory (DMRL) and Mishra Dhatu Nigam (Midhani). There is also a certified Aeronautical Materials Test Laboratory (AMTL) in Hyderabad which is state-of-the-art and can cover the entire gamut of material testing required. Excellent infrastructure for manufacturing the Kaveri engine in house has also been made here at GTRE.

Five engine test beds for aero engines are in operation and can simulate conditions in Bangalore and elevated conditions up to two km altitude at a Mach No of 0.40 forward speed conditions. Two of these test beds have been internationally calibrated where the GE engine for the LCA has been tested. The calibration level has been set so that any international engine can be tested here and we can establish and declare the thrust.

We have also created a large vendor base both within and outside Bangalore who can manufacture, inspect and deliver precision aero components. The number of vendors has now reached 300 approximately and high quality routine parts can now be delivered to us by our vendors.

What is the update on the Kaveri marine engine for the Indian Navy?

The Kaveri marine engine is a spin off on the Kaveri engine. This was based on a requirement of the Indian Navy for 10-12 mw of power generation for naval applications. The Kaveri core engine has been used and we have developed one prototype which is undergoing tests at the naval dockyard in Vizag. BHEL will undertake manufacture of this marine engine once all development tests are complete. Marine engines need to last for 40,000 to 50,000 hours compared to aero engines which typically have a life of 2000 to 3000 hours. The marine environment also has creates very high vibrations and the challenge is to isolate these vibrations of 50-100 g to an acceptable 2-3g for the engine. The other challenges were the saturated salt environment with 100 per cent humidity and high inlet temperatures and corrosion. The engine has to work reliably despite all these factors.

Can you tell us more about the indigenously developed air turbine starter developed by GTRE?

The air turbine starter is a crucial technology that has been developed in house by GTRE. The Kaveri engine has to be started on ground using a pneumatic starter with high pressure air at around 4 atmospheres from a ground system being supplied to start the engine and get it to around 40 per cent speed after which we cut the starter. This starter was earlier supplied by Garret and due to sanctions — the supplies were stopped as well as maintenance and repair of the starters had stopped. Hence, we had to develop a starter with a higher capacity as the capacity of the Garret starter was limited. We went ahead and jointly developed this with a Bangalore-based company called Turbotech. While the Garret starter was qualified for 500 starts our indigenously developed air turbine starter is giving more than 1000 starts before a major overhaul.

What is the relationship between GTRE and HAL?

HAL has been our manufacturing partner from day one. HAL Koraput has produced items like the fan disc for the Kaveri engine while the HAL engine factory is manufacturing the jet pipe and afterburners. In fact, whatever parts that HAL could develop and manufacture from a prototype level, they have done. They have been our preferred partners from the inception of the Kaveri engine programme. Wherever they have not been able to support us due to constraints of time or availability we have sought outside vendors. When the Kaveri engine will need to move to serial production then that task to manufacture it will go to HAL

What has been the learning for GTRE from the Kaveri engine programme?

We have been able to design, develop and manufacture our own aero engine. So far we have made nine Kaveri engines and four core engines. Testing has been going on extremely well. We did have a lot of problems related to design, strength and safety earlier, now almost 98 per cent of those problems are behind us. We started virtually from scratch two decades ago and did not have the knowhow to manufacture this type of product. This resulted in the time frame for development being long as a result of wrong expectations which further led to cost overruns. Any gas turbine engine would take around 25-30 years to develop and at a cost of Rs 15-20000crore. With all our limitations, we have taken 22 years with limited resources in materials, manpower and funds at the same time creating a substantial infrastructure which will be of use to the nation.

Developing of the required materials was an essential step for the Kaveri engine, followed by setting up the required design capability in house. This capability has to be audited and proven by engine houses from abroad. But no engine house from abroad came forward to help us in design enhancement and design audit. We had to go to Russia to Central Institute of Aviation Motors (CIAM) to help us in auditing of the design and make some course corrections.

Technologies like friction welding and inertia welding were not available initially but slowly due to advances in our own technology we may get access to such technology. Apart from this, other high technologies like BLISK (a combination of blade and disc) and high temperature thermal barrier coatings, among others, were not available to us. As a result, we had to make do with whatever technology was available with us at that time. We also learnt that for small orders for certain components, manufacturer’s abroad were not enthused and we were given low priority for these parts causing delays in their arrival.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 04 Sep 2010 07:40

Willy wrote:How much of that is supposed to be static testing and how much on a flying testbed?

Based on the above by Mohan Raju. Here are my revised gustimates.

1) Static 1900 hours have been performed by the 9 engines @GTRE.
2) Static 1000 hours "might" be further achieved by the 8 engines @GTRE.
3) K-9 at Flying test bed hours could be 100 hours as of now.
4) K-9 New tests could be any where between 40 sorties to 80 sorties on the IL-76 testbed. Should we consider it as 100 hours of resting?
5) K-9 Additional 100+ hours on PV-1 (Hope fully PV-1 has so much lifetime left)
6) K-9 Additional 100 hours on one of the LSP's.

I was reading up all the chatter on Kaveri. One word that is eluding is "Initial or final certification." (unless someone can point that out for me), I don't think we are talking about a final certification yet.

IMO at 4000 hours (approx) we can talk of final certification.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 04 Sep 2010 12:00

Tejes,

Would like to know the timlen of the article posted by you if you can get it from AFM then it will be great.

TIA

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 04 Sep 2010 12:10

Pratyush, sorry no date was posted on that article but it was posted by a person who gave credit to Austin who I assume is BRF's Austin. Yo Austin, are you out their birader?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 04 Sep 2010 14:10

That is last month FORCE article on Kaveri and I certain they will not be too happy if they come to know since its a copy right issue, but it gives a good insight and latest in Kaveri development.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 06 Sep 2010 21:52

nukavarapu wrote: They were also planning to increase the reheating quotient in the core, for which they realized they would need BLISKs and TBCs. Have not heard yet about what GTRE is planning to do with obtaining/developing BLISKs and/or TBCs.

We have TBCs. I can assure you that.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 06 Sep 2010 21:54

Telang wrote:
hariks wrote:Does this mean that the current "solution" to the high temp problem does not include SC Blades?
(Or did we get the tech from somewhere else)? Anyway the press release only talked about DS and did not mention SC.
No one is saying any thing specific. But can Kaveri be flight worthy (with or without SCB) is clarified.
The PIB specifically quotes:

These two major milestones would make ‘Kaveri’ engine certified for flight operations

Neither DSB or SCB is required as such for the Flight certification.

Rishirishi · Post by **Rishirishi** » 07 Sep 2010 02:49

have the 1250 dudes in GTRE, managed to produce anything useful?

Just wondering.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 07 Sep 2010 08:18

Rishirishi wrote:have the 1250 dudes in GTRE, managed to produce anything useful?

Just wondering.

Isn't it amazing?

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 07 Sep 2010 09:49

The efforts of GTRE may have been a disappointment. But look at the conditions under which they are working. The materials they need to work are not available in the country. So they develop the know how through Midhani. The forges to build turbine blades bont exist. They have to be build.

This effort is from scratch the same effort for a forign company today will cost billions on $. Please look at the budget of GTRE for Kaveri.

Seems like a faliure. I dont think so. Delayed yes it is. A work in progress yes it is. Failure it is not.

JMT

ShivaS · Post by **ShivaS** » 07 Sep 2010 12:21

Sorry state of affairs we dont have to develop from scratch, just scratch the heads together!

what is the size of forgings that need to be made for jet engine?

will they be greater that 3 meters? 5 Meters? (i think no more than 2.5 meters)

What is the max dia of the forgings
will they be greater than 1.5 meters? ( I think no more than 1 meter)

{ the above for the turbine shafts } yes they may be Ti Al or some super alloy material
SO high temp forging
So accurate heat treatment annealing etc, so specialized salt baths and furnaces

now to the SCB, I am assuming they are based on investment casting ( the famous tanjore Nataraja was made like that with special alloy of Cu Zn Tin)

There are OFPs who have state of the art forge shops gathering cobwebs, there are private sector companies like Bharat forge, Telco, Ashok Leyland

We are where we are because
'Where there is no will there is no way'

Remember we did not require TOT to be make Kutub Minar out of 99.9999 % carbon free wrought iron, and investment castings of intricate and excellent quality...

read here
http://www.appropedia.org/images/thumb/ ... -Cmsx6.jpg

http://www.appropedia.org/Single_Crystal_Turbine_Blades

BRF members need to do more research and post, we only talk generics lets talk specifics...