Should be around 1300-1400.
Slightly higher than other engines in class. (I am just speculating given TF-6000 will achieve same thrust with lower SFC, logically combustion temperature would be little higher)
Iirc, according to Mr. Aksit current Turkish single crystal blades can withstand up to 1500c. (1800k)
(It was posted in this thread)
To my very basic understanding, usually highest turbine inlet temperature is 100-150 degrees lower then the highest temperature blades can withstand. (For safety reasons and endurance) I could be wrong though, maybe
@Yasar and
@Nilgiri could tell us more.
It depends what you mean by "withstand up to".
Using Mr. Aksit's figure of 1500C for example (under some setting/context and overall tradeoff design elected for maybe the earlier TS-1400 prototype testing), the blade doesn't suddenly melt or lose cohesion at higher temperatures than this.
i.e the largest driving bedrock technologies in blade survival are things like compressor bleed air cooling and thermal barrier coatings (i.e things that allowed turbines to achieve temperature profiles that exceeded the melting point of Nickel superalloys to begin with by drastically reducing what the actual blade alloy itself experiences along with the alloy being picked to have that melting temp as high as possible while retaining all mechanical advantages metals bring).
Single Crystal technology maturation simply helped extend lifetime of the turbine blades (ceterus paribus) by ~ 3 - 5 times (compared to traditionally cast and early directional solidification processes) at the higher end operating temperature range we are talking about to give sense of the buffer "on top" of raw survival addressed by the base mitigation technologies.
The 1500C associates with some picked E(X) expected lifetime of the single crystal blade. You reduced the E(X), you can increase that withstand temperature and vice versa.
Refer to my older post:
https://defencehub.live/threads/tf-...iner-aircraft-projects.5/page-187#post-203889
So there is no hard and easy way to say what the TIT will be in the end from the statements released so far.
The larger underlying tradeoff driving what Yasar mentions in his latest post has to do with there being an "ideal" compression ratio for every TIT w.r.t maximising heat engine work area (i.e available work capacity per mass flow rate).
i.e it is easy to understand why the first large increases in compression ratio (for every TIT, i.e heat engine max) benefit what can be extracted by the turbine....but once the compression ratios get really large this actually starts to decline given the working fluid is heated by compression and starts to diminish what the combustor can "add" (i.e combustion does much better thermal performance with cold air feed than hot air)....though thermal efficiency continues to increase with higher compression ratios (and this often gives extra options for pure turbojet designs that turbofans do not have, past the issue of fan tip velocity restricting fan diameter that way).
In essence you want to both limit how much you rely on compressor bleed air for turbine cooling (i.e allocating 10% for newer design compared to 20% of an older design is a big advantage) and there is also a limit to how big/long you can have the compressor once you have selected a max TIT (or at least a range to study its sensitivity impact on rest of engine).
This has ramifications for a turbofan more than for a turbojet (plain core only) given the fan ideally wants as high work capacity as possible from the core to run off for bypass. Or conversely the ability/tradeoff in doing this is what limits the bypass range on offer...i.e why we see lot of fairly low bypass ranges (i.e augmented turbojet) elected for in many designs well before the fan diameter issue can kick in... given the supersonic profile design driver in small volume problem that lends itself to turbojet as the natural basis.
i.e there are lot of things going on with feedback loops (on rest of engine) w.r.t TIT and turbine design drivers overall. These are only some of them from the thermodynamic profile.
From there its a great many wiggle rooms on offer as the larger design matures, so there is no way to tell at this early stage from statements as the (especially finalised) context is not really available for it from what I can see.
www.savunmasanayist.com
