Chinese Engine Development


free_6ix9ine

Junior Member
Registered Member
But there was a news that Japan was seeking cooperation with Rolce Royce of UK for the XF-10 engine. That would mean that a testbed XF-9 isn't a mass production engine. There were also some mentions of SiC SiC Composites to further achieve better heat tolerance and therefore efficiency and thrust rating.

IMHO, the Japanese XF-9 is a testbed to develop certain advanced technologies (high electrical power generation, composites etc) but I doubt if Japan would go solo for equipping its F-3 fighters with IHI engines. The better results XF program gives Japan, the better its position in negotiations with a foreign partner.

I'm sure Pratt and Whitney won't pick up IHI for a JV. They'd want to sell Japan an entire engine. Idk about GE, but I don't think GE is that interested.

But a Japan - UK JV is on the horizon and it does sound like it is going to materialize. Especially, as of recently UK and Japan went through the sale of ARM to Softbank.

My bet is on a IHI - Rolce Royce JV. This means that Tempest and F-3 would sport the same engines (or share a good deal of technology). Rolce Royce is also well established in mass producing and servicing engines so Japan would want such a partner rather than solely bet on IHI.
I doubt the XF-9 will be used in the end in any plane. To me it proves that Japan is fully capable of going on their own to develop jet engines in the F-119 class, but because they are "forced" to buy the F-35s, because of their relationship with the US, it won't ever even be used in any plane.

Same with the UK, rolls-royce basically has no business from the UK airforce, because they've decided to buy the F-35, since it cost too much for the UK to develop their own fifth gen fighter. I doubt rolls-royce will partner with IHI on furthering the XF-9 or XF-10, there just isn't demand for such an engine, especially since both countries have chosen to go down the F-35 route.
 

Tirdent

Junior Member
Registered Member
Same with the UK, rolls-royce basically has no business from the UK airforce, because they've decided to buy the F-35, since it cost too much for the UK to develop their own fifth gen fighter. I doubt rolls-royce will partner with IHI on furthering the XF-9 or XF-10, there just isn't demand for such an engine, especially since both countries have chosen to go down the F-35 route.
The lift fan in the F-35B is RR-designed and if the GE/RR F136 alternative engine had not been canned, the RAF would presumably have fitted it to their F-35s, giving RR a handsome share in the UK fleet.
 

Hendrik_2000

Brigadier
Agreed. But regardless, I still an advanced civil gas turbine power generation industry will help China in the future, by providing access to foreign technology to shore up some of the current deficiencies such as MTBO. Power generation gas turbines and jet engines are a pretty mature industry, there is no need to start from scratch if we can leverage foreign technology.

A power generation gas turbine industry will also provide China with economy of scale for developing jet engines as well, same materials, same production processes, same talent pool, etc. There is alot of overlap in the two, so the cost of developing new engines will come down as well.

Also, we don/t know much about the WS-15 in terms of specs. But the Japanese have much more experience than China with gas turbines, so I wouldn't be surprised if the XF-9 has better performance than the WS-15 (besides max. thrust), such as MTBO, fuel efficiency, etc.
I completely agree that Civilian gas turbine industry will enriched military aero turbine development But the problem is the structure on Chinese power industry 70% of the power generating station in China is powered by coal for the simple reason that coal is plentiful and cheap The become defacto primary source of energy

China does not have plenty of natural gas well and until recently the gas infrastructure is not that well developed They make concerted effort to change the mix of energy by importing huge amount of gas from central asia and now Russia. But it will take a while to develop the infrastructure like trunk pipe line, feeder line to the cities, port LNG gas re gasification, LNG bulk carrier etc

Without adequate gas source there will be no combines cycle power plant and the implication is no Gas Turbine industry
Japan is different their primary source of energy is GAs they import huge amount of gas from Qatar, Australia, Russia. And they have the infrastructure. that is why Mitsubishi has very developed Gas Turbine production.
China did has a highly developed generating power industry thing like boiler, steam turbine, heater etc They are up there with the best in the world and has been exporting GS all over the world

You cannot develop industry out of vacuum there must need before it developed
 

free_6ix9ine

Junior Member
Registered Member
The lift fan in the F-35B is RR-designed and if the GE/RR F136 alternative engine had not been canned, the RAF would presumably have fitted it to their F-35s, giving RR a handsome share in the UK fleet.
Exactly, its RR designed lift fan, but that's it. The lift fan is a smaller component than the entire engine. No pun intended, but RR got shafted when they cancelled the F136. But I guess the US would be too proud to accept a joint venture engine on their F-35's.
 

ougoah

Captain
Registered Member
While China tries to catch up to the West in the coming decades over traditional engine technology, it should also be looking to develop other alternatives that could eventually replace it altogether. For instance,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
The risks involved in chasing leapfrog tech that's totally revolutionary is that all that time, money, and talent will go wasted with sometimes very little payoff. That's why it's easier and quicker to catch up and then maintain some lead in an established field of technology. These exotic and experimental propulsion are interesting but most projects are still focused on catching up when it comes to engines. Once that's done, maybe there's less risk to diversify the engineering talent.
 

SamuraiBlue

Captain
I doubt the XF-9 will be used in the end in any plane. To me it proves that Japan is fully capable of going on their own to develop jet engines in the F-119 class, but because they are "forced" to buy the F-35s, because of their relationship with the US, it won't ever even be used in any plane.
The XF-9 will power the F-3. It is going through various test right now and will power the F-3 proto-type around 2026ish to be mass produced in 2030.
 

gadgetcool5

Junior Member
Registered Member
The risks involved in chasing leapfrog tech that's totally revolutionary is that all that time, money, and talent will go wasted with sometimes very little payoff. That's why it's easier and quicker to catch up and then maintain some lead in an established field of technology. These exotic and experimental propulsion are interesting but most projects are still focused on catching up when it comes to engines. Once that's done, maybe there's less risk to diversify the engineering talent.
Maybe, but the risk of trying to catch up in an established field of technology is that you waste decades and still end up unacceptably behind because the market leaders were also advancing at the same time. I mean look at Russia. They are ahead of China in engine development and have been working on the Il-76/86/96 since the Cold War yet it still isn't competitive.

When there isn't much to lose, it might make sense to diversify. The advantage of new technology is that there isn't as much institutional knowledge and know-how built up from decades that you have to reproduce. And while it may also take decades to master, the end result is that you are actually ahead instead of still behind.
 

by78

Brigadier
This might become relevant in the future if further developed. Posting it here since there is no other appropriate thread I can find.


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

On Jul 24, 2020
Resolving alloys’ strength-ductility trade-off and thermal instability

Discovery-of-disordered-nanolayers-in-intermetallic-alloys.jpg
230506skkqtk5xn10dg999.png


Credit: Photo source: DOI number: 10.1126/science.abb6830

Intermetallic alloys potentially have high strength in a high-temperature environment. But they generally suffer poor ductility at ambient and low temperatures, hence limiting their applications in aerospace and other engineering fields. Yet, a research team led by scientists of City University of Hong Kong (CityU) has recently discovered the disordered nanoscale layers at grain boundaries in the ordered intermetallic alloys. The nanolayers can not only resolve the irreconcilable conflict between strength and ductility effectively, but also maintain the alloy’s strength with an excellent thermal stability at high temperatures. Designing similar nanolayers may open a pathway for the design of new structural materials with optimal alloy properties.
This research was led by Professor Liu Chain-tsuan, CityU’s University Distinguished Professor and Senior Fellow of the Hong Kong Institute for Advanced Study (HKIAS). The findings were just published in the prestigious scientific journal Science, titled “Ultrahigh-strength and ductile superlattice alloys with nanoscale disordered interfaces“.
Just like metals, the inner structure of intermetallic alloys is made of individual crystalline areas knows as “grains”. The usual brittleness in intermetallic alloys is generally ascribed to the cracking along their grain boundaries during tensile deformation. Adding the element boron to the intermetallic alloys has been one of the traditional approaches to overcome the brittleness. Professor Liu was actually one of those who studied this approach 30 years ago. At that time, he found that the addition of boron to binary intermetallic alloys (constituting two elements, like Ni3Al) enhances the grain boundary cohesion, hence improving their overall ductility.

A surprising experimental result

In recent years, Professor Liu has achieved many great advances in developing bulk intermetallic alloys (intermetallic alloy is also called superlattice alloy, constructed with long-range, atomically close-packed ordered structure). These materials with good strengths are highly attractive for high-temperature structural applications, but generally suffer from serious brittleness at ambient temperatures, as well as rapid grain coarsening (i.e. growth in grain size) and softening at high temperatures. So this time, Professor Liu and his team have developed the novel “interfacial nanoscale disordering” strategy in multi-element intermetallic alloys, which enables the high strength, large ductility at room temperature and also excellent thermal stability at elevated temperatures.
“What we originally tried to do is to enhance the grain boundary cohesion through optimizing the amount of boron,” said Dr Yang Tao, a postdoc research fellow at CityU’s Department of Mechanical Engineering (MNE) and IAS, who is also one of the co-first authors of the paper. “We expected that, as we increased the amount of boron, the alloy would retain ultrahigh strength due to its multi-element constituents.”
According to conventional wisdom, adding trace amounts (0.1 to 0.5 atomic percent (at. %)) of boron substantially improves their tensile ductility by increasing grain-boundary cohesion. When excessive amounts of boron were added, this traditional approach would not work. “But when we added excessive amounts of boron to the present multicomponent intermetallic alloys, we obtained completely different results. At one point I wondered whether something went wrong during the experiments,” Dr Yang recalled.
To the team’s surprise, when increasing boron to as high as 1.5 to 2.5 at. %, these boron-doped alloys became very strong but very ductile. Experiment results revealed that the intermetallic alloys with 2 at. % of boron have an ultrahigh yield strength of 1.6 gigapascals with tensile ductility of 25% at ambient temperatures.
By studying through different transmission electron microscopies, the team discovered that when the concentration of boron ranged from 1.5 to 2.5 at. %, a distinctive nanolayer was formed between adjacent ordered grains. Each of the grains was capsulated within this ultrathin nanolayer of about 5nm thick. And the nanolayer itself has a disordered atomic structure. “This special phenomenon had never been discovered and reported before,” said Professor Liu.
Their tensile tests showed that the nanolayer serves as a buffer zone between adjacent grains, which enables plastic-deformation at grain boundaries, resulting in the large tensile ductility at an ultrahigh yield strength level.

Why is the disordered nanolayer formed?

The team found that the further increase in boron has substantially enhanced the “multi-element co-segregation” – the partitioning of multiple elements along the grain boundaries. With the advanced three-dimension atom probe tomography (3D APT) at CityU, the only one of its kind in Hong Kong and southern China, they observed a high concentration of boron, iron and cobalt atoms within the nanolayers. In contrast, the nickel, aluminium and titanium were largely depleted there. This unique elemental partitioning, as a result, induced the nanoscale disordering within the nanolayer which effectively suppresses the fractures along grain boundaries and enhances the ductility.
Moreover, when evaluating the thermal response of the alloy, the team found that the increase in grain size was negligible even after 120 hours of annealing at a high temperature of 1050°C. This surprised the team again because most of the structural materials usually show the rapid growth of grain size at high temperature, resulting in strength decrease quickly.
A new pathway for developing structure materials for high-temperature uses
They believed that the nanolayer is pivotal in suppressing growth in grain size and maintain its strength at high temperature. And the thermal stability of the disordered nanolayer will render this type of alloy suitable for high-temperature structural applications.
“The discovery of this disordered nanolayer in the alloy will be impactful to the development of high-strength materials in future. In particular, this approach can be applied to structural materials for applications at high-temperature settings like aerospace, automotive, nuclear power, and chemical engineering,” said Professor Liu.
 

SamuraiBlue

Captain
I think some people needs to chill for a moment. (Not towards the above article bt people talking about battle with the US in another thread)

80 Years From Invention, China Is Struggling With Jet Engines
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The jet engine has a long and storied history. Its development occurred spontaneously amongst several unrelated groups in the early 20th Century. Frank Whittle submitted a UK patent on a design in 1930, while Hans von Ohain begun exploring the field in Germany in 1935. Leading on from Ohain’s work, the first flight of a jet-powered aircraft was in August 27, 1939. By the end of World War II, a smattering of military jet aircraft had entered service, and the propeller was on the way out as far as high performance aviation is concerned.

With the invention of the jet engine so far in the past, one could be forgiven for thinking that the technology has long been mastered around the world. However, recent reports show that’s not the case. China is a great example,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Closely Guarded Secrets

In the age of the Internet and open source, technology moves swiftly around the world. In the consumer space, companies are eager to sell their product to as many customers as possible, shipping their latest wares worldwide lest their competitors do so first. In the case of products more reliant on infrastructure, we see a slower roll out.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, while services like media streaming can take time to solve legal issues around rights to exhibit material in different countries. In these cases, we often see a lag of 5-10 years at most, assuming the technology survives to maturity.

In most cases, if there’s a market for a technology, there’ll be someone standing in line to sell it. However, some can prove more tricky than others. The ballpoint pen is one example of a technology that most of us would consider quaint to the point of mediocrity. However, despite producing over 80% of the world’s ballpoint pens, China was unable to produce the entire pen domestically. Chinese manufactured ballpoint tips performed poorly, with scratchy writing as the result. This attracted the notice of government officials, which resulted in a push to improve the indigenous ballpoint technology. In 2017, they succeeded,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


The secrets to creating just the right steel, and manipulating it into a smooth rolling ball just right for writing, were complex and manifold. The Japanese, German, and Swiss companies that supplied China with ballpoint tips made a healthy profit from the trade. Sharing the inside knowledge on how it’s done would only seek to destroy their own business. Thus, China had to go it alone, taking 5 years to solve the problem.

There was little drive for pen manufacturers to improve their product; the Chinese consumer was more focused on price than quality. Once the government made it a point of national pride,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
For jet engines, however, it’s somewhat of a different story....... to read further, click on the link above
It&s actually nothing new we known about this for a while now. It's not about the future but where we stand now.
 

Top