Chinese Engine Development

kzh

Just Hatched
Registered Member
what I can read on that 2022 paper is that they tested a small CMC blisk on a RC plane.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2025-06-10 at 15.15.33.png
    Screenshot 2025-06-10 at 15.15.33.png
    632.4 KB · Views: 37
  • Screenshot 2025-06-10 at 15.17.49.png
    Screenshot 2025-06-10 at 15.17.49.png
    924.2 KB · Views: 36

latenlazy

Brigadier
what I can read on that 2022 paper is that they tested a small CMC blisk on a RC plane.
Once again, variable cycle engine development is not dictated by CMC development. It’s primarily dictated by engine cycle design, aka the operating mechanical principles of the engine. What makes variable cycle engines tricky is that their operating mechanics are more complicated, and optimizing them requires a lot of mechanical and aerodynamic study.

But if you’re interested in the state CMC turbine blade development in China you can pull up research papers that can give you a general idea via Google scholar. That one paper from 2022 is far from the full body of work that’s been done for this particular application of CMCs. Just search for 陶瓷基复合涡轮叶片, like I did in the below link.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Tomboy

Junior Member
Registered Member
People obsessed with schlong measuring contests on “maximum thrust at sea level” should take a look at actual important specs for engine performance and associated challenges.

View attachment 153811
Wait a minute, according to this wouldn't F-135 be considered a 6th generation engine by these standards?

F-135 by some decently reliable sources is in the "3600 F" class, which is 2260K, while also this decently recent paper on a certain engine core had an exhaust of 1700K. Doing some quick math(but probably very rough), this engine could potentially have a TIT up to 2300K. Which certainly is interesting, did AECC decide to skip 5th generation and go directly to 6th?
 
Last edited:

kzh

Just Hatched
Registered Member
Most likely ws-19 uses CMCs static parts, not the blades that improve TIT and thus thrust to weight ratio.
 

sunnymaxi

Major
Registered Member
some people always confused with CMC.. its not the Engine itself, it is just the material for hot section in Turbofan Engine like Turbine blades , vanes and combustor liners. and this material is not applicable on every single part of a turbofan because its too complex and high-precision manufacturing processes are required also very expensive. CMCs can also be used in ducts and nozzles where high temperatures and stresses are encountered..

China have thoroughly conquered CMC material and its manufacturing process. now started wide scale production.

There are at least three Chinese companies right now, those are technical enough to produce CMC related material and CMC manufacturing parts.. two are in Xian and one is in Shanghai.

This Shanghai based company started CMC material production base at 4000 square meter area. construction has completed.


shanghiii.jpg

Most likely ws-19 uses CMCs static parts, not the blades that improve TIT and thus thrust to weight ratio.
65656565656.jpg
21212121.jpg

CJ-2000 confirmed to have CMC parts/components include blades.

not hundred percent sure about WS-19 to have CMC Turbine blades.. wait for more information..

@Tomboy @latenlazy ..
 
Last edited:

Alfa_Particle

Junior Member
Registered Member
Most likely ws-19 uses CMCs static parts, not the blades that improve TIT and thus thrust to weight ratio.
That is absolutely NOT how it works.

Rotor or stator, CMCs would still let you run a higher T4 and improve a lot of things. If it's just stators, you're still eliminating or drastically reducing film cooling and internal cooling passages for the stators. You no longer need complex cooling air management for those stationary components. That's less weight already.

You can then redirect the extra cooling capacity to the superalloy rotors. That still enables a higher T4 and improves thermal management/lifespan.

And that's not considering the inherent weight reduction CMC brings.

Besides, current CMCs are still too brittle for them to be able to replace current superalloys on a meaningful scale. CMCs are inherently more suited to be stators anyway. You're getting most of the benefits with significantly less effort.
 

kzh

Just Hatched
Registered Member
That is absolutely NOT how it works.

Rotor or stator, CMCs would still let you run a higher T4 and improve a lot of things. If it's just stators, you're still eliminating or drastically reducing film cooling and internal cooling passages for the stators. You no longer need complex cooling air management for those stationary components. That's less weight already.

You can then redirect the extra cooling capacity to the superalloy rotors. That still enables a higher T4 and improves thermal management/lifespan.

And that's not considering the inherent weight reduction CMC brings.

Besides, current CMCs are still too brittle for them to be able to replace current superalloys on a meaningful scale. CMCs are inherently more suited to be stators anyway. You're getting most of the benefits with significantly less effort.
 

Alfa_Particle

Junior Member
Registered Member
And? Even that video said the F414's CMC applications are limited to the exhausts only lol, and most are just limited to lining and shrouds, aka stationary components (granted it's a fairly old video).

And the XA100 never became the YA100 or the A100, because the program got scrapped. Sure, the stuff can be applied to the XA102, but it's not seeing the YA102 stage until quite some time later.

There's still time before you see CMC rotors in widespread service.
 
Top