New Ultra-Fast Wind Sensors

for Airport:

Technical/Operational Requirements

& Safety AnalysisLennaert Speijker (NLR) and Frederic Barbaresco (Thales Air Systems)

2 /2 /

23/04/2015

� Background

� Operational requirements

� Functional Hazard Assessment

� Technical requirements

� Next steps (in UFO)

� Preliminary conclusions and recommendations

This presentation

3 /3 /

23/04/2015

� Weather hazards could be reduced by improving Wind nowcasting/forecasting and by predicting & alerting Wake Vortex, Wind-shear and Air Turbulence hazards

� UFO system: ultrafast wind and ambient air turbulence monitoring with new emerging technology of :� 3D scanner Radar/Lidar Sensors,

� Upgraded weather channel of ATC Primary Surveillance Radar

� ADS-B Downlink of MET data from aircraft.

� Regulations require demonstration that UFO system can be designed, implemented and operated/used safely

Background

4 /4 /

23/04/2015

Ultra fast wind sensors for atmospheric hazard mitigation (UFO)

Wind shearWake turbulence Cross wind

Operational

Requirements

6 /6 /

23/04/2015

Overview

Items:

1. Operating Method

2. Operational Environment

3. Operational Requirements

Development Process

� Pragmatic and iterative approach

� Align with EUROCAE ED-78a standard for OSED content

� Capture operational requirements

About development of UFO OSED specification

� Use documents from public domain about SESAR Step 3

� Detailed confidential SESAR documents not available /used

7 /7 /

23/04/2015

Aim

Aim: Easy acceptance of UFO content by SESAR projects

Willingto

Upgrade

8 /8 /

23/04/2015 8

Operating Method

Baseline Operating Method

Describe baseline operating method without proposed UFO improvement. Point of departure are public document s.

� Current operations with respect to wake vortices

� SESAR view on wake vortex developments

� ICAO view on wake vortex developments

New UFO Operating Method

Describes how controller, pilot, or support system( s) perform operational function with proposed improvement in UF O OSED

9 /9 /

23/04/2015 9

Baseline operating method

10 /10 /

23/04/2015

UFO operating method

UFO operating method that implements the UFO concept

consist of 3 main processes, namely:

� The wind and EDR monitoring process (14 services)

� The wind shear monitoring process (9 services)

� The nowcast and forecast process (1 service)

11 /11 /

23/04/2015 11

UFO operating Method

12 /12 /

23/04/2015 12

Operational requirements

Operational requirements for UFO operational services

� Requirement specification format:

Identifier

Requirement

Title

Status

Rationale

Category

Validation Method

Verification Method

� Wind and EDR monitoring process: 11 requirements

� Nowcast and forecast process: 5 requirements

� Wind shear monitoring process: 8 requirements

13 /13 /

23/04/2015 13

Operational requirements

Preliminary conclusion

� UFO OSED is complementary to the SESAR Step 3 opera tional concept

� UFO concept gives all weather wake vortex sensing c apability that uses highest possible update rate by combining LIDAR and X-band Radar systems

� UFO concept consist of 3 main processes:

� Wind and EDR monitoring,

� Nowcast and forecast, and

� Wind shear monitoring

Recommendations

� OSED used as input for establishing technical UFO r equirements.

� Further elaboration after obtaining insight in capa bilities and technical requirements of ultrafast wind sensors and possibil ities of ADS-B downlink

� Operational concept integrated by SESAR in the SESA R concept

Functional Hazard

Assessment

15 /15 /

23/04/2015

FHA Purpose and scope

� UFO Functional Hazard Assessment (UFO FHA) describes the hazards identified in relation to the basic function of the UFO system.

� The function of the UFO system is:�To feed the Wake Vortex Decision Support System with

compiled, pre-analysed data about weather situation in the area of interest, collected from the UFO-sensors

� Analysis of the hazards is done independent of the way the system will be implemented.

16 /16 /

23/04/2015

FHA elements

�The FHA basically addresses four elements:

�What are the system generated hazards , that are related to the system performing its intended function?

�What are the hazards, related to a detected failure of the system to perform its intended function?

�What are the hazards, related to an undetected failure of the system to perform its intended function?

�What are the hazards, related to erroneous operation of the system ?

17 /17 /

23/04/2015

FHA Generic Hazard Severity Definitions

Severity Description

No Safety Effect Conditions that would have no effect on safety; that would not affect the operational capability

of the aeroplane or increased flight crew or ATC workload.

Minor Conditions which would not significantly reduce aeroplane safety, and which involve crew/ATC

actions that are well within their capabilities. May include, for example, a slight reduction in

safety margins or functional capabilities, a slight increase in crew/ATC workload, such as

routine flight plan changes, or some physical discomfort to passengers or cabin crew.

Major Conditions which would reduce the capability of the aeroplane or the ability of the crew/ATC to

cope with adverse operating conditions to the extent that there would be, for example, a

significant reduction in safety margins or functional capabilities, a significant increase in

crew/ATC workload or in conditions impairing crew efficiency, or discomfort to the flight crew,

of physical distress to passengers or cabin crew, possibly including injuries.

Hazardous Conditions, which would reduce the capability of the aeroplane or the ability of the crew/ATC to

cope with adverse operating, conditions to the extent that would be:

• A large reduction in safety margin or functional capabilities;

• Physical distress or excessive workload such that the flight crew/ATC cannot the relied

upon to perform their tasks accurately or completely, or;

• Serious or fatal injury to a relatively small number of the occupants other than flight crew

Catastrophic Conditions which would result in multiple fatalities, usually with the loss of the aeroplane.

18 /18 /

23/04/2015

FHA main results

� Analysis general and strategic functional hazards s hows that most effects in this stage can be designated minor

� Analysis tactical functional hazards shows a differ ent view. Undetected function loss can lead to hazardous situ ations. Feeding the decision support system unreliable data generates hazards up to “hazardous”

� The mutual dependency between UFO “data-feeding” an d the functioning, specifically the reliability, of the d ecision support system is extremely high

� The essence of the UFO safety issue lies in the int egrity of data, the integrity of the prediction process and in the combination of both

19 /19 /

23/04/2015

FHA main conclusions and recommendations

� The FHA shows that the most critical function of th e system

relates to the UFO tactical system functions.

� Assurance of correct functioning of the now-cast pr ocess

appears to be the main challenge for implementation of the UFO

system concept

� Definitive conclusions only possible after setting of safety

criteria & safety objectives has been further resea rched

� The Preliminary System Safety Assessment is require d to show

the feasibility of the conceptual design of the sys tem in order to

meet the safety objectives from FHA

X-band Radar

& 1.5 micron Lidar

Technical Requirements

21 /21 /

23/04/2015

RADAR/LIDAR TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS: WIND HAZARDS

� 3D Wind (Surface Wind, Aloft Wind)� Influence on Wake-Vortex Transport

� Risk on Aircraft stability (wind Burst, High Cross-Wind, CB Downdraft)

� Wind Speed (m/s) /Direction (°) Mean, standard Deviation and Min/Max (in space & in time)

� Atmospheric Turbulence (EDR: Eddy Dissipation Rate)� Influence on Wake-Vortex Decay

� Risk on Aircraft stability (Turbulent eddies larger than 100 m and smaller than 3000 m)

� EDR in m2/s3 (from 10-3 m2/s3 strong turbulence to 10-6 m2/s3 weak turbulence)

� Wake-Vortex in Ground Effect (contra-rotative roll- ups)� Risk on Aircraft Roll Acceleration

� Position and Circulation in m2/s of each roll-up (Strength trough Γ5-15 retrieval)

� Initial Spacing between roll-ups (10 wingspan behind aircraft, 10 s after aircraft)

� Wind-Shear (sudden change in wind speed/direction)� Risk on Aircraft Stability

� headwind/tailwind change of 7.5 m/s or more / wind direction change of 60° or more

� Micro-Burst (downdrafts)� Risk on Aircraft Stability (downdrafts of up to 6,000 feet per minute in Convective Rain)

� wind direction change of 45 knots or more, in a matter of seconds

� Rain Rate (Precipitation Intensity in mm/h)� Main parameters of Radar/Lidar capabilities

22 /22 /

23/04/2015

Requested 3D Volume Exploration

3°

500 m

10 Km

VOLUME FOR ULTRA-FASTWIND & EDR MONITORING

(Altitude > 500 m) VOLUME WHERE WIND & EDRIS PROVIDED BY WEATHER FORECAST

(MHRPS in SESAR P12.2.2.)

0.5 to 2.5 km

+/-30°

Wind/EDR UPDATE RATE : 10 s / 1 mnIn Critical Area (Alt. < 100 m)

Wind/ EDR UPDATE RATE : 1 mn / 5 mnIn Glide Slope (Alt. > 100 m)

0 to 5°/6°

0 to 10°

23 /23 /

23/04/2015

Radar 3D Volume Exploration

3°

500 m

10 Km

VOLUME FOR ULTRA-FASTWIND & EDR MONITORING

+/-30°UPDATE RATE : 10 s

In Critical Area (Alt. < 100 m)

UPDATE RATE : 30 sIn Glide Slope (Alt. > 100 m)

Every 1°/2°On +/-30°

Every 1°/2°Àn 5°/6°

Every 2°

Every 2° on 10°

Range Res=150 m

Range Res= 25 & 5 m

(Wind/EDR & WV)

24 /24 /

23/04/2015

RADAR Wind/EDR RETRIEVAL (Touchdown for WV IGE)

WIN

D/E

DR

(T

ou

chd

ow

n f

or

WV

In

Gro

un

d E

ffe

ct):

Alt

itu

de

< 1

00

m

Vo

lum

e

Slant Range

Min 500 m

X-b

an

d E

lect

ron

ic S

can

nin

g R

ad

ar

Max 2.5 km

Azimuth

Line of sight perpendicular to runways

Min (-) 235°

Max (+) 45°

Elevation

Line of sight 5° from the horizon

Min 0°

Max 10°R

eso

luti

on

/Acc

ura

cy

Range

Resolution 25 m

Accuracy 10 m

Azimuth

Resolution 2°

Accuracy 1°

Elevation

Resolution 2°

Accuracy 1°

Wind Speed

Resolution 1 m/s

Accuracy 0.5 m/s

Wind Direction

Resolution 1 °

Accuracy 0.5 °

EDR

Resolution 10-6 m2/s3

Accuracy 0.5 10-6 m2/s3

Tim

e

Wind Update Rate 10 s

Integration Time 1 mn

EDR Update Rate 1 mn

Integration Time 5 mn

25 /25 /

23/04/2015

RADAR Wind/EDR RETRIEVAL (Glide Slope until 10 km for WV NGE)

WIN

D/E

DR

(G

lid

e u

nti

l 1

0 k

m f

or

WV

Ne

ar

Gro

un

d E

ffe

ct):

Alt

itu

de

< 5

00

m

Vo

lum

e

Slant Range

Min 500 m

X-b

an

d E

lect

ron

ic S

can

nin

g R

ad

ar

Max 10 km

Azimuth

Line of sight Glide Slope

Min (-) 30°

Max (+) 30°

Elevation

Line of sight 3° (direction of glide)

Min 0°

Max 5°/6°R

eso

luti

on

/Acc

ura

cy

Range

Resolution 150 m

Accuracy 50 m

Azimuth

Resolution 1° to 2°

Accuracy 1°

Elevation

Resolution 1° to 2°

Accuracy 1°

Wind Speed

Resolution 1 m/s

Accuracy 0.5 m/s

Wind Direction

Resolution 1 °

Accuracy 0.5 °

EDR

Resolution 10-6 m2/s3

Accuracy 0.5 10-6 m2/s3

Tim

e

Wind Update Rate 1 mn

Integration Time 2 mn

EDR Update Rate 5 mn

Integration Time 10 mn

26 /26 /

23/04/2015

� Different quantities to be measured have been identified in the project: wind, EDR and wake vortices

� Three main areas of interest can be defined

� Warning area (360° monitoring around airport) below 500m

� Approach and takeoff path area below 500m

� Critical area below 100m

RADAR/LIDAR TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS: WIND HAZARDS

27 /27 /

23/04/2015

LIDAR WIND PROFILING and SCANNING

WIND / EDR PROFILINGRange from Ground to 500mideallyResolution from 20 to 50mAccuracy of wind speed betterthan 0.5m/sMeasurement frequencyshould be at least 1 Hz whenretrieving turbulence quantities

WIND / EDR 3D SCANNINGSeveral requirements must bedistinguishes according toobjectives and needs

28 /28 /

23/04/2015

LIDAR Wind/EDR RETRIEVAL (Touchdown for WV IGE)

29 /29 /

23/04/2015

LIDAR Wake Vortices Measurements (Touchdown for WV IGE)

30 /30 /

23/04/2015

LIDAR Wind/EDR RETRIEVAL (Glide Slope until 10 km for WV NGE)

ADS-B DownlinkTechnical Requirements

32 /32 /

23/04/2015

ADS-B Downlink Requirements

Domain Value Resolution (value)Resolution

(spatial)Frequency

TMA

EDR 0.02 m2/3/s 100 m 1 Hz

Wind 0.5 m/s 100 m 1 Hz

Wind direction 0.7 ° 100 m 1 Hz

Temperature 0.125 °C 100 m 1 Hz

Glidepath (along)

EDR 0.02 m2/3/s 100 m 0.7 Hz

Wind 0.5 m/s 100 m 0.7 Hz

Wind direction 0.7 ° 100 m 0.7 Hz

Temperature 0.125 °C 100 m 0.7 Hz

Glidepath (vertical)

EDR 0.02 m2/3/s 100 m 0.4 Hz

Wind 0.5 m/s 100 m 0.4 Hz

Wind direction 0.7 ° 100 m 0.4 Hz

Temperature 0.125 °C 100 m 0.4 Hz

33 /33 /

23/04/2015

Next steps (in UFO)

Operational Requirements� Process comments, if any, from users of UFO system,

supporting Performance based operations (SESAR step 3)

Technical Requirements� Verify/check compliance of technical requirements wi th

operational requirements (output is ‘matrix of comp liance’)

Safety Case Development� Complete/test new approach for assessing the safety of

atmospheric hazards through a universal risk metric� Perform Preliminary System Safety Assessment (PSSA)� Perform Safety Benefits Analysis for ultra fast win d sensors

34 /34 /

23/04/2015

Preliminary conclusions & recommendations

� Operational requirements for use of the UFO system

� Technical requirements derived for UFO sub-systems

� X-band RADAR

� 1.5 micron LiDAR requirements

� ADS-B downlink requirements

� Consolidation of operational requirements and techn ical requirements planned towards the end of 2015

� Safety analysis and benefits analysis still ongoing

� It is recommended to upgrade SESAR P6.8.1 OSEDs (Fl exible

and Dynamic Use of Wake Vortex Separations) with re gard to

the use of Ultrafast Wind Sensors