GTRE Kaveri Engine

Not related to Kaveri but still has direct implication:

MIDHANI has set up a 2000 MT near-isothermal forge for forging titanium alloys & other super alloys. Tech was developed by DMRL. This forge will produce turbine discs for Adour engines:
View attachment 36814
View attachment 36813

The press:
View attachment 36816

Adour's HPT discs being forged:
View attachment 36817
View attachment 36819
View attachment 36820
View attachment 36818


1731593270031.png

1731593292148.png
 
And we just very recently bought >200 engine s for both mig 29 ans Su 30 mki.

Is there any chance for us to upgrade engines ?

Perhaps in Su upgrade in second batch 83 ?
HAL has been placing orders for the long lead items ever since aon granted without waiting for final contract award, one due to aerospace market experiencing slowdown and only trying to recover and also to improve their delivery schedule. The 240 al31fp and 80 rd33 all are the same as before spec, only type approved replacement lru in case of obsolete one or unavailable one is to change. Entire supply chain and operating circle is tuned to it, now if you change or upgrade you need to build that circle again, multi year job.
 
DRDO/GTRE had floated a proposal to test out 3-4 full size Kaveri engines (with afterburners) with the Tejas fighters. The IAF has shot down that proposal stating that testing a new unproven engine on a single engine fighter would be very risky. So now there are talks ongoing to requisition some old twin engine fighter from the IAF to test the Kaveri engine. Probable candidates being the MiG-29s & Su-30MKIs. Mig-29 would be a better fit.

If all goes well, & that is a big if, we can hope to see a Kaveri powered Mk-1A within the next 5-6 years.
Why do they want to test it on a fighter jet directly? Why not a flying testbed?
 
IISc-Bengaluru develops indigenous fuel injector for fighter planes, to be tested on AMCA

Chethan Kumar / TNN / Updated: Nov 19, 2024, 13:34 IST

Researchers at the Indian Institute of Science (IISc) have developed a new high performance fuel injector system for fighter aircraft. The injector, designed using 3D printing, produces exceptionally small fuel droplets for efficient combustion. Tested successfully under various conditions, the injector surpasses existing technologies and is slated for use in India's AMCA.
1732067090035.png

IISc's SK Thirumalaikumaran with the new indigenous fuel injector for fighter jets developed at the institute.

BENGALURU: Researchers at the Indian Institute of Science (IISc) achieved a significant breakthrough in aerospace technology by developing a next-generation high-performance fuel injector system for fighter aircraft. It is slated for implementation in Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (Amca), India’s fifth-generation single-seater fighter jet.

“We’ve developed a new high-performance, high-shear swirl injector. It produces exceptionally small droplets, crucial for efficient fuel-air mixing and complete combustion,” Prof Saptarshi Basu, the lead investigator of the project, told TOI.

The innovative technology, developed as part of a Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) Centre of Excellence for Propulsion Technology (CoPT) programme, represents a complete indigenous solution from design to testing. Basu’s team, which includes SK Thirumalaikumaran and Sonu Kumar, worked with DRDO’s Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE).

“The high-shear fuel injector, developed through advanced 3D printing techniques, demonstrated superior performance compared to existing commercial alternatives across all key parameters, including droplet sizing, spray pattern formation, flame stability, and flow field consistency,” Basu said.

The comprehensive development process involved multiple stages of testing and validation using world-class experimental facilities at IISc. “This achievement represents a perfect marriage between fundamental fluid mechanics research and practical applications in aerospace technology. Our team utilised a sophisticated experimental facility capable of handling air supply up to 40 bar and maximum flow rates of 6 kg/second, enabling thorough testing of the injector’s capabilities,” Basu said.

Basu, while pointing out that a final schedule for when it will be tested on AMCA — which is still under development — said that the injector also has the potential to be used in civil aircraft with minimal modifications.

“The development process encompassed multiple technological achievements, including the creation of a high-pressure optically accessible test facility operating at up to 15 bar and advanced flow visualization using simultaneous high-speed PIV [or Particle Image Velocimetry, an optical method of flow visualization] diagnostics,” Basu said.

The team conducted comprehensive testing under various pressure conditions with both gas and liquid fuels, consistently demonstrating the injector’s superior performance over existing solutions.

The project, Basu said, not only yielded multiple scientific papers and patents but also served as a valuable training ground for several students in advanced aerospace technology. “The successful development received high praise during the CoPT review, marking it as a significant milestone in India’s journey toward self-reliance in critical defence technologies. Technical results revealed optimal measurements at different air-to-liquid ratios, confirming the injector's exceptional performance,” Basu said.

IISc-Bengaluru develops indigenous fuel injector for fighter planes, to be tested on Amca | Bengaluru News - Times of India
 

I believe with the BrahMos aerospace afterburner, we will definitely have a working engine soon. A few more tweaks are needed to reduce the weight. If possible around 100 kg will be good enough. After the successful Manik engine fabrication, I think BrahMos Aerospace is proving its capabilities in aero engine fabrication. HAL should use these engines for HLFT-42.
 
The changes/design modification come from GTRE, BATL executes it as per spec, I think they still also have to certify the QA with GTRE nominated inspection agency for every stage inspection & QA check. What I mean here is its not entirely their free hand work where you can use your own expertise and make suitable design/spec changes as needed. So how much improvement can be expected ?

Lack of actual details on kaveri imo hints at it being in a standstill sort of situation. Lets see the dry version first, how it works on the ucav platform, trails etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion

Yep. Have argued this for a long time:

So why doesn't the Kaveri today use SC blades ? Well using SC blades with the engine as is and without making any design changes wouldn't allow us to extract maximum benefits of the SC blades. As such the thrust will increase but thrust to weight ratio, which is already not good, will fall further.

The Kaveri was designed from ground up with the DS blades and thus it is sub-optimal with SC blades. What can be done however, is to design the Kaveri from ground up with SC blades. Such an endeavour would be expensive and the Kaveri wouldn't remain Kaveri anymore.

GTRE Kaveri Engine
 

1735124608244.png

1735124624754.png


So is the new iteration of the Kaveri due to be tested on an FTB based on a new design ?
There is no single umbrella program for an upgraded Kaveri right now. But funding is being released for various peripherals that directly affect the program. That's why we get updates every now & then about a new injector, new alloy, new hydraulic press etc.

The current version of Kaveri (both dry Kaveri & with the new AB) has an upgraded design compared to the older engine that was flight tested in Russia many years ago.
 

View attachment 39127
View attachment 39128


There is no single umbrella program for an upgraded Kaveri right now. But funding is being released for various peripherals that directly affect the program. That's why we get updates every now & then about a new injector, new alloy, new hydraulic press etc.

The current version of Kaveri (both dry Kaveri & with the new AB) has an upgraded design compared to the older engine that was flight tested in Russia many years ago.
So in your estimate what should be the output in KN in terms of dry & wet thrust this upgraded design of the Kaveri should be aiming for ?

~ 55 KN & ~ 85 KN perhaps mimicking GE F-404 TF's output ?
 
So in your estimate what should be the output in KN in terms of dry & wet thrust this upgraded design of the Kaveri should be aiming for ?

~ 55 KN & ~ 85 KN perhaps mimicking GE F-404 TF's output ?
Let the thrust match with the expected engine thrust of 404 and 414... added weight could be compensated by less payload, at least an indigenous and reliable engine with us. Hope GTRE is working on the project in mission mode.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shan
So in your estimate what should be the output in KN in terms of dry & wet thrust this upgraded design of the Kaveri should be aiming for ?

~ 55 KN & ~ 85 KN perhaps mimicking GE F-404 TF's output ?
I had made a prediction on this before. It is an optimistic prediction:
Collating what we know of the K10 engine so far the specs they are targeting for are as follows:

Dimensions: L=3.49m, D=0.9m (same as K9)
Dry weight: 1100 kg (down from 1235 kg)
LP compressor pressure ratio: 4:1 (up from 3.4:1)
HP compressor pressure ratio: 6.75:1 (up from 6.4:1)
Overall pressure ratio: 27:1 (up from 21.76:1)
Maximum Thrust: Dry= 57-58 kN, Wet= 88-90 kN [my guess]
Thrust to Weight ratio:
Dry= 5.38:1 (up from 4.29:1) Wet= 8.29:1 (up from 7.8:1) [my calculation based on the guess]
Turbine Entry Temperature:
1550-1580 deg C (up from 1430 deg C)
Mass flow: 78 kg/s (same as K9)
Bypass ratio: 0.16:1 (same as K9)

GTRE Kaveri Engine

Unless we start producing bulk metallic glasses & CERMETs, this is sort of the maximum limit of what we can achieve with an engine of this dimension.
 
So in your estimate what should be the output in KN in terms of dry & wet thrust this upgraded design of the Kaveri should be aiming for ?

~ 55 KN & ~ 85 KN perhaps mimicking GE F-404 TF's output ?
Kaveri with 51KN dry and 81KN wet is superior to GE F404 with 89KN thrust. The present ones fitted in LCA Mk1 are 1072 kgs in weight. If the weight can be brought down to 1100kgs for Kaveri, it will outdo F404 anyday.
 
Kaveri with 51KN dry and 81KN wet is superior to GE F404 with 89KN thrust. The present ones fitted in LCA Mk1 are 1072 kgs in weight. If the weight can be brought down to 1100kgs for Kaveri, it will outdo F404 anyday.
Can you elaborate on this ? Why exactly do you think Kaveri will be superior to the GE TF ? Is it coz it will be flat rated as opposed to the GE TF ? Besides what about the fact that the Kaveri was supposed to be a VCE - Variable Cycle Engine ? Are we still aiming for it to be VCE ? What're your views ? @Gautam
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sathya
I had made a prediction on this before. It is an optimistic prediction:


GTRE Kaveri Engine

Thanks for this information. BTW - does the K-9 Kaveri weigh 1235 kgs or is it 1180 & how do we get it to ~ 1000 kgs +/-50 kg ?
Unless we start producing bulk metallic glasses & CERMETs, this is sort of the maximum limit of what we can achieve with an engine of this dimension.
What're we the steps we're undertaking to produce these bulk metallic glasses , what's the application & how's it different from ceramic matrix composites ( CMC ) ? Is CERMET the same as CMC ?
 
Besides what about the fact that the Kaveri was supposed to be a VCE - Variable Cycle Engine ?
Kaveri is a leaky turbojet right now. The proposal for a VCE is still a proposal.
Are we still aiming for it to be VCE ?
We are aiming to operationalize the Kaveri first & foremost.

Theoretically, a leaky turbojet can be converted to a VCE. But this would require a big upgrade to the hot section of the engine. VCE would allow the bypass ratio to be increased, with that the TET would also increase. If the hot section of the engine cannot survive a higher TET, VCE would be pointless.
Thanks for this information. BTW - does the K-9 Kaveri weigh 1235 kgs or is it 1180
Kaveri prototype 8 (K8)- 1430 kg (equiaxed blades & vanes)
Kaveri prototype 9 (K9)- 1235 kg (DS blades & vanes. This prototype was flight tested in Russia)
upgraded Kaveri prototype 9 (K9)- 1180 kg (new distortion tolerant fan, single crystal blades & vanes, YSZ-LZ TBC, modified gearbox)
Kaveri prototype 8 (K10)- 1100 kg (target weight)
how do we get it to ~ 1000 kgs +/-50 kg ?
Modification to the design, especially the afterburners. Inclusion of 3D printed parts in cold section of the engine.
What're we the steps we're undertaking to produce these bulk metallic glasses
Lab scale production. Used for ablative testing so far.
what's the application
By itself BMGs may not be as effective. But, BMG when sandwiched with CMC can make excellent TBC material.
how's it different from ceramic matrix composites ( CMC ) ?
BMGs are metals except they don't have crystalline atomic matrix. They have an amorphous matrix like glasses. BMGs are incredibly tough, very lightweight & have better high temp creep resistance than CMCs.
Is CERMET the same as CMC ?
CERMET is a subset of CMC.