Design of a Flight Planning System to Reduce Persistent Contrail Formation
Team: Jhonnattan Diaz David GauntlettHarris TanveerPo Cheng Yeh
Sponsors: Center for Air Transportation Systems Research (CATSR), Mr. Akshay BelleMetron Aviation, Dr. Terry Thompson
UV/Visible Sunlight
Infrared Radiation
Earth
(Non-persistent) ContrailPersistent Contrail
1
Agenda
• Context• Stakeholder Analysis• Problem, Need Statement, Mission
Requirements• Design Alternatives• Design of Experiment• Project Management• Questions
2
3
Global Climate ChangeEnergy
Demand
Burning of Fossil
Fuels
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Global Temperature
Increase
Global Climate Change
Melting Ice Caps
Mean Sea Levels Rising Extreme Storms Droughts
Department of Ecology. State of Washingtonhttp://www.ecy.wa.gov/climatechange/whatis.htm
“Global Climate Change.” National Aeronautics and Space Administration. http://climate.nasa.gov/effects
Population Increase
4
U.S. CO2 Emissions• Increasing trend of CO2
emissions
• 1.7 billion metric tons CO2 from Transportation sector
• Air transportation:– 11 % of CO2 emissions
from transportation sources • 1.9 million metric tons CO2
from Air Transportationhttp://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases/co2.htmlhttp://epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/global.html
Projected Passenger Increase
5
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 20350.0
50.0
100.0
150.0
200.0
250.0
300.0
f(x) = 4.21153837664033 x − 8317.79509663502
Projected Passenger Increase
Year
Sche
dule
d Pa
ssen
ger T
raffi
c (M
illio
ns)
6
H2O
Air
Fuel
SOx
HC
Soot
H2O Aerosols
Contrails
NOx
CO2
CH4
O2
Jet A Fuel Combustion Process
Sridhar, Banavar & Chen, Neil. “Design of Aircraft Trajectories based on Trade-offs between Emission Sources.” 2011.
aCnH2n+2 + bO2 + 3.76bN2 → cH2O + dCO2 + 3.76bN2 + heat
Aircraft Engine
Chemical Reactions
Microphysical Processes
Climate ChangeRadiative Forcing
7
The Issue• Studies suggest persistent contrails may have a three to four times
greater effect on the climate than carbon dioxide emissions.• Contrails inhibit the movement of incoming and outgoing radiation
Waitz, I., Townsend, J., Cutcher-Gershenfeld, J., Greitzer, E., and Kerrebrock, J. Report to the United States Congress:Aviation and the Environment, A National Vision, Framework for Goals and Recommended Actions. Partnership for Air Transportation Noise and Emissions Reduction, MIT, Cambridge, MA, 2004.
UV/Visible Sunlight
Infrared Radiation
Earth
8
The Issue
Gossling, Stefan, and Upham, Paul. Climate Change and Aviation- Issues, Challenges and Solutions. 2009.
-Contrails cause greater radiative forcing than CO2-Contrails create induced cirrus clouds-The understanding behind contrails and induced cirrus clouds is relatively low
9
Contrail Types
Aerodynamic
Short Term
Formed by pressure of air moving over
the surface of aircraft
Exhaust
Long Term/Persistent
Formed by mixing of hot, humid exhaust
mixing with cold surrounding air
• Contrail duration varies with respect to wind conditions (wind shear) as well as temperature changes
• Contrail frequency varies with frequency of weather conditions
10
Persistent Contrail Formation Conditions
• Schmidt-Appleman Criterion– Altitude: 29,000ft - 41,000ft – Temperature: below -40℃– Humidity: RHi > 100%
• Ice content/ice capacity (Similar to RHw)• RHi > 100% indicates Ice Super-Saturated Region (ISSR)
• Greater likelihood of persistency in colder months. Palikonda, Rabindra. “Contrail climatology over the USA from MODIS and AVHRR data.” 2002.
Contrail Mitigation Studies
• Technological Changes– Fuel Additives– Jet Engine Redesign– Jet Airframe Redesign
• Operational Changes– Flight Planning Changes: contrail avoidance flight
paths
Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, “The Environmental Effects of Civil Aircraft in Flight,” London, UK, 2002. http://www.rcep.org.uk/avreport.htm.
11
12
Contrail Avoidance Flight Path
Contrail Avoidance Flight Path
Tactical Maneuvering
Strategic Maneuvering
• Tactical Maneuvering– En-Route request to maneuver
around ISSR
• Strategic Maneuvering– Pre-flight plan filed with ATC with
built-in ISSR avoidance
• For this Project: Strategic Maneuvering– Reduces cognitive workload on
ATC– Does not change current flight
planning process
Flight Planning
http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/controller_staffing/media/cwp_2012.pdf
Airline Dispatcher Flight Service Stations
Proposed Flight Plan
Accepted/Rejected Flight Plan
13
Agenda
• Context• Stakeholder Analysis• Problem, Need Statement, Mission
Requirements• Design Alternatives• Design of Experiment• Project Management• Questions
14
15
Stakeholder Analysis
Who is affected if contrail avoidance flight planning is attempted?
What are their interests and goals?
16
Stakeholder Desires Tensions
Federal Aviation
Administration
(FAA) – Air Traffic
Organization (ATO)
Safety NAS Efficiency
ATO regulations on airlines may increase operational costs
Airline
Management –
Airline Operations
Center (AOC) -
Dispatcher
Maximize profit Minimizing costs Safety
General Public Safety Minimize air transportation costs Minimize Environmental impact
Do not want climate change General public desires safe transportation at the lowest
costs. Airlines want to charge the general public higher
costs to make greater profits
ATC/ATC Union Protect interests of air traffic controllers
Pressure ATO for better working conditions and higher pay
Pilot/Pilots Union Protect interests of pilots Pressure airlines for better working conditions and higher pay
Other Regulatory
Agencies (DOE,
DOT, EPA)
Safety in their respective fields Regulations may increase costs
Congress Legislation promoting American
interests Regulations may increase costs
NOAA Provide weather information for
airline use
ICAO Create global cooperation to reduce aviation’s impact on climate change
17
Stakeholder Interactions
18
Ideal Solution/Win-Win
• Win-win would occur with an ideal solution that would:– Maintain ATO’s desired
level of safety– Reduce airline operational
costs– Reduce environmental
impact
ATO
Maintain level of safety
Reduce Fuel Consumption
Airlines
Low airfare and clean
environment
Public
Although out of the scope of this particular project, it should be noted there is also a need for education regarding the effects of contrails
Agenda
• Context• Stakeholder Analysis• Problem, Need Statement, Mission
Requirements• Design Alternatives• Design of Experiment• Project Management• Questions
19
20
Problem Statement
• Contrails have a negative impact on the environment.
• Lack of system negotiating stakeholders’ needs in order to provide flight paths avoiding ISSR while accounting for tradeoffs between– fuel consumption– travel time– miles of contrails formed
Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, “The Environmental Effects of Civil Aircraft in Flight,” London, UK, 2002. http://www.rcep.org.uk/avreport.htm.
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 206002468
10121416
7.063.5
9.4
14.8
Estimated Radiative Forcing by Con-trails
Contrail Neutral
Years
Radi
ative
For
cing
(m
W/m
^2)
Gap
21
Contrail favorable weather conditions
# of jets
Miles of contrails Radiative Forcing
Contrail Neutral
Marquart et al., 2003: Future development of contrail cover, optical depth, and radiative forcing: Impacts of increasing air traffic and climate change.
% Contrail Coverage
IATA: “Reduce net CO2 emissions by 50% by 2050 compared to 2005.” IATA: “Global cap on our [CO2] emissions in 2020.”
22
Need Statement• Need to provide FAA and AOC with a Decision Support System to
estimate– amount of fuel consumed
• CO2 emissions produced– miles of contrails formed– flight duration
• Need to analyze relationship between – amount of fuel consumed
• CO2 emissions produced– miles of contrails formed– flight duration– percentage of contrail avoidance attempted.
23
Mission Requirements
• MR1: The system shall provide the ability by 2020 to reduce the radiative forcing due to contrails to the 2005 baseline of 7.06mW/m^2.
• MR2: The system shall provide the ability to maintain contrail neutrality after 2020 at the radiative forcing value of 7.06mW/m^2.
MR3: The system shall minimize CO2 emissions, miles of contrails formed, flight duration, fuel consumption.
MR4: The system shall maintain an equivalent level of safety standards for aircraft spacing.
Agenda
• Context• Stakeholder Analysis• Problem, Need Statement, Mission
Requirements• Design Alternatives• Design of Experiment• Project Management• Questions
24
Design Alternatives
Design Alternatives
1. Contrail Avoidance Flight Path
1.1 Vertical Maneuvering
1.2 Horizontal Maneuvering
1.3 Combination Maneuvering
2. Airway Routes
3. Great Circle Distance
(GCD)
25
26
Contrail Avoidance Methods
Z
XA B
RHi>100% Altitudes of Concern(29,000-41,000 ft.)
A
B
X
Y
A
B
X
Y Z RHi>100%
Horizontal Adjustment
Altitude Adjustment
Combination Adjustment
Red: Travel Through Contrail RegionsBlue: Contrail Avoidance
Value Hierarchy
Creating a Flight Plan
Aircraft SafetyAmount of
Fuel Consumed
Flight Duration
Total Miles of Contrails Formed
*Note: CO2 emissions are a linear factor of amount of fuel consumed27
Assume safety levels will be maintained
28
Sample Use CaseAnticipated Users: --Airlines--Air Traffic Control
User System NOAA
Input Origin/Destination
Input AircraftRequest Weather Data
Send Weather Data
Contrail Avoidance Flight Path
Great Circle Distance Flight Path
Airway Routes
Fuel Consumption per path
Contrails Formed per path
Flight Duration per Path
Agenda
• Context• Stakeholder Analysis• Problem, Need Statement, Mission
Requirements• Design Alternatives• Design of Experiment• Project Management• Questions
29
30
Design of Experiment• Control:
– Great Circle Distance (GCD) 0% Avoidance
• Independent Variables:– Flight Plans
• Airway Flight plan Actually filed plan• Contrail Avoidance Flight plan
– Altitude Adjustment– Horizontal Adjustment– Combination Adjustment
• Dependent Variables:– Fuel Consumption– Miles flown through contrail regions– Flight Duration– Carbon Dioxide Emissions
Design of Experiment
• Procedure– Each aircraft (≈ 22,000) will be flown with each of
the alternative flight routes– CO2 emissions and miles of contrails formed will
be summed for all flights for each alternative flight route to view total effect on NAS
– Tradeoff analysis will be completed between each of the dependent variables• Currently in the process of devising tradeoff analysis
31
Scope and Assumptions
Scope
1 Day of Flights (24 hours)
Continental United States
US Domestic Passenger Jet aircrafts
Utilizing NOAA Weather Data (RAP)
Experimental Assumptions
Contrails will only form en-route
Constant en-route airspeed
Uniform Aviation Fuel – (Jet A)
ISSR will always produce contrail (binary regions)
Contrail albedo and optical density will not be considered
32
33
System Requirements The system shall accept flight path data as an input. The system shall accept NOAA .grib2 weather data as an input.
The system shall identify the location and the dimension of the ISSR. The system shall perform vertical avoidance, horizontal avoidance,
and combination avoidance. The system shall output contrail distance formed, amount of
fuel used, CO2 emitted, and total flight time. The system shall be able to model contrail avoidance paths. The system shall be able to model airway routes. The system shall be able to model the great circle distance.
34
High Level Simulation I/O
RAP Data From NOAA
35
• Matrix obtained from .grib2 files
• .grib2 files obtained through publicly available FTP from NOAA
• ISSR Data
• Graphical representation of RHw weather data
• Temperature data is in similar format
• Lambert Projections
36
Contrail Avoidance System
• Uses predicted weather data to avoid areas with a high chance to yield persistent contrails.
• The system shall be able to determine which weather cells must be avoided to reduce contrail formation.
• Inputs– Flight Object– Weather Object
• Outputs– Fuel Consumption– Miles Contrail Formed– Flight Time
37
Physical Processes Modeled
• Velocity• Thrust • Drag• Fuel Consumption • CO2 Emissions• RHi for persistent contrail formation
Anticipated Results
• More contrail avoidance maneuvers will cause more fuel burn
• Each alternative will be weighed on value hierarchy weights
38
Anticipated Recommendations
• Recommend flight plan with optimum tradeoff between– Miles of contrails produced– Amount of fuel burned– Amount of CO2 produced– Flight duration
39
40
Project Management
Work Breakdown Structure• Project Management• Research• Problem Statement• Needs Statement• Context Analysis• Stakeholder Analysis• System Alternatives• Requirements• CONOPS• System Modeling and Design• Simulation• Results Analysis• Deliverable Preparation• Poster• Youtube Video• Conference Preparation
• 16 major topics decomposed into subtasks– 131 total tasks
41
Scheduling
• Critical Path– Need Statement– Stakeholder Analysis– System Alternatives– Simulation– Results Analysis
42
Budgeting• Cost/engineer
– Baseline cost: $45/hour/engineer– GMU overhead: $2.13 multiplier– Total cost/engineer: $95.74/hour/engineer
• Worst Case Plan:– Hours: 1,457– Cost: $139,500
• Best Case Plan:– Hours: 730– Cost: $69,750
43
44
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38$0.00
$20,000.00
$40,000.00
$60,000.00
$80,000.00
$100,000.00
$120,000.00
$140,000.00
$160,000.00
Earned Value Management
AC
EV
Best Case PV
Worst Case PV
Weeks
Dolla
rs
45
0 2 4 6 8 10 120.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
5.00 CPI & SPI
CPISPIControl
Weeks
46
Next Phase Plan
• Continue developing contrail avoidance algorithm• Begin Programming Simulation: 11/25/2013• Value Hierarchy Weights• Consider wind optimal routes• Working in Partial Contrail Avoidance• Devise tradeoff analysis• Analyze NOAA Rapid Refresh Data for patterns
and trends
47
Risks
• High Risk, High Impact:– Contrail avoidance and flight path algorithms
complication may exceed comprehension• Mitigation: Request expert help
• Medium Risk, High Impact:– Simulation coding not being done on time
• Mitigation: more hours
• Medium Risk, Medium Impact:– Deliverables not completed on time
• Mitigation: more hours
48
Questions?
Top Related