Download Design of a Decision Support System to Reduce Persistent Contrail

Design of a Flight Planning System
to Reduce Persistent Contrail
Formation
Team:
Jhonnattan Diaz
David Gauntlett
Harris Tanveer
Po Cheng Yeh
UV/Visible Sunlight
Infrared
Radiation
Earth
Sponsors:
Center for Air Transportation Systems Research (CATSR), Mr. Akshay Belle
1
Metron Aviation, Dr. Terry Thompson
Agenda
• Context
• Stakeholder Analysis
• Problem, Need Statement, Mission
Requirements
• Design Alternatives
• Design of Experiment
• Project Management
• Questions
2
Global Climate Change
Population
Increase
Energy
Demand
Burning
of Fossil
Fuels
Greenhouse
Gas
Emissions
Global
Temperature
Increase
Global Climate
Change
Melting Ice
Caps
Mean Sea
Levels Rising
Extreme Storms
Droughts
“Global Climate Change.” National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
http://climate.nasa.gov/effects
Department of Ecology. State of Washington
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/climatechange/whatis.htm
3
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 Transportation
http://epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/global.html
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases/co2.html
4
Projected Passenger Increase
Scheduled Passenger Traffic (Millions)
Projected Passenger Increase
300.0
250.0
y = 4.2115x - 8317.8
200.0
150.0
100.0
50.0
0.0
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
2035
Year
5
Jet A Fuel Combustion Process
aCnH2n+2 + bO2 + 3.76bN2 → cH2O + dCO2 + 3.76bN2 + heat
CO2
CH4
NOx
Chemical
Reactions
O2
H2O
H2O
Air
Fuel
Aircraft
Engine
SOx
HC
Aerosols
Microphysical
Processes
Climate Change
Radiative Forcing
Contrails
Soot
6
Sridhar, Banavar & Chen, Neil. “Design of Aircraft Trajectories based on Trade-offs between Emission Sources.” 2011.
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
UV/Visible Sunlight
Infrared Radiation
Earth
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.
7
The Issue
-Contrails cause greater radiative forcing than CO2
-Contrails create induced cirrus clouds
-The understanding behind contrails and induced cirrus clouds is relatively low
8
Gossling, Stefan, and Upham, Paul. Climate Change and Aviation- Issues, Challenges and Solutions. 2009.
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
9
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.
10
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
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
12
Flight Planning
Airline
Dispatcher
Proposed Flight Plan
Flight Service Stations
Accepted/Rejected Flight Plan
13
http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/controller_staffing/media/cwp_2012.pdf
Agenda
• Context
• Stakeholder Analysis
• Problem, Need Statement, Mission
Requirements
• Design Alternatives
• Design of Experiment
• Project Management
• Questions
14
Stakeholder Analysis
Who is affected if contrail avoidance flight
planning is attempted?
What are their interests and goals?
15
Stakeholder
Federal Aviation
Desires
 Safety
 NAS Efficiency
Tensions
 ATO regulations on airlines may increase operational
costs
Administration
(FAA) – Air Traffic
Organization (ATO)
Airline Management 

– Airline Operations 
Maximize profit
Minimizing costs
Safety
Center (AOC) Dispatcher



Safety
Minimize air transportation costs
Minimize Environmental impact


ATC/ATC Union


Pilot/Pilots Union

Protect interests of air traffic
controllers
Protect interests of pilots
Other Regulatory

Safety in their respective fields

Congress

NOAA

Legislation promoting American

interests
Provide weather information for
airline use
Create global cooperation to reduce
General Public

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
Pressure ATO for better working conditions and higher
pay
Pressure airlines for better working conditions and higher
pay
Regulations may increase costs
Agencies (DOE,
DOT, EPA)
ICAO

Regulations may increase costs
16
Stakeholder Interactions
17
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
Low airfare and
clean
environment
Public
Reduce Fuel
Consumption
Airlines
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
18
Agenda
• Context
• Stakeholder Analysis
• Problem, Need Statement, Mission
Requirements
• Design Alternatives
• Design of Experiment
• Project Management
• Questions
19
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.
20
Gap
Radiative Forcing
(mW/m^2)
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1980
14.8
9.4
Contrail Neutral
7.06
3.5
1990
2000
2010
Contrail favorable
weather conditions
Miles of contrails
Estimated
Radiative
Forcing by
Contrails
Contrail
Neutral
2020
2030
2040
2050
2060
Years
IATA: “Reduce net CO2 emissions by 50% by 2050
compared to 2005.”
IATA: “Global cap on our [CO2] emissions in 2020.”
% Contrail Coverage
Radiative Forcing
# of jets
Marquart et al., 2003: Future development of contrail cover, optical depth, and radiative forcing: Impacts of increasing air traffic and climate
21
change.
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.
22
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.
23
Agenda
• Context
• Stakeholder Analysis
• Problem, Need Statement, Mission
Requirements
• Design Alternatives
• Design of Experiment
• Project Management
• Questions
24
Design Alternatives
Design
Alternatives
1.1 Vertical
Maneuvering
1. Contrail
Avoidance
Flight Path
2. Airway
Routes
1.2 Horizontal
Maneuvering
1.3
Combination
Maneuvering
3. Great Circle
Distance
(GCD)
25
Contrail Avoidance Methods
Altitudes of
Concern
(29,000-41,000 ft.)
RHi>100%
Z
Red: Travel Through Contrail Regions
Blue: Contrail Avoidance
Altitude Adjustment
A
Y
B X
B
Horizontal Adjustment
X
A
Y
Z
RHi>100%
B
A
Combination Adjustment
X
26
Value Hierarchy
Assume safety
levels will be
maintained
Aircraft Safety
Creating a
Flight Plan
Amount of
Fuel
Consumed
Flight
Duration
Total Miles of
Contrails
Formed
*Note: CO2 emissions are a linear factor of amount of fuel consumed
27
Anticipated Users:
--Airlines
--Air Traffic Control
Sample Use Case
User
System
NOAA
Input Origin/Destination
Input Aircraft
Request Weather Data
Send Weather Data
Great Circle Distance Flight Path
Airway Routes
Contrail Avoidance Flight Path
Fuel Consumption per path
Contrails Formed per path
Flight Duration per Path
28
Agenda
• Context
• Stakeholder Analysis
• Problem, Need Statement, Mission
Requirements
• Design Alternatives
• Design of Experiment
• Project Management
• Questions
29
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
30
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
1 Day of Flights (24 hours)
Continental United States
Scope
US Domestic Passenger Jet aircrafts
Utilizing NOAA Weather Data (RAP)
Contrails will only form en-route
Constant en-route airspeed
Uniform Aviation Fuel – (Jet A)
Experimental Assumptions
ISSR will always produce contrail (binary regions)
Contrail albedo and optical density will not be
considered
32
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.
33
High Level Simulation I/O
34
RAP Data From NOAA
• 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
35
Contrail Avoidance System
• Uses predicted weather
data to avoid areas with
a high chance to yield
persistent contrails.
• Inputs
– Flight Object
– Weather Object
• Outputs
• The system shall be able
to determine which
weather cells must be
avoided to reduce
contrail formation.
– Fuel Consumption
– Miles Contrail Formed
– Flight Time
36
Physical Processes Modeled
•
•
•
•
•
•
Velocity
Thrust
Drag
Fuel Consumption
CO2 Emissions
RHi for persistent contrail formation
37
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
Project Management
40
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
Earned Value Management
$160,000.00
$140,000.00
$120,000.00
Dollars
$100,000.00
AC
$80,000.00
EV
Best Case PV
$60,000.00
Worst Case PV
$40,000.00
$20,000.00
$0.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435363738
Weeks
44
CPI & SPI
5.00
4.50
4.00
3.50
3.00
2.50
CPI
SPI
2.00
Control
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
0
2
4
6
Weeks
8
10
12
45
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
46
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
47
Questions?
48