Name of the System (NOS) - George Mason University



SYST 490Final Report-64770-15875Design of a Flight Planning System to Reduce Persistent Contrail FormationJhonnattan DiazDavid GauntlettHarris TanveerPaul YehDepartment of Systems Engineering and Operations ResearchGeorge Mason UniversityFairfax, VA 22030-4444December 2, 2013Table of Contents TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u 1.0 Context PAGEREF _Toc373699323 \h 51.1 Global Climate Problem PAGEREF _Toc373699324 \h 51.2 Air Travel Demand PAGEREF _Toc373699325 \h 61.3 Air Traffic Control PAGEREF _Toc373699326 \h 81.4 Aircraft Emissions PAGEREF _Toc373699327 \h 91.4.1 Carbon Dioxide PAGEREF _Toc373699328 \h 91.4.2 Contrails PAGEREF _Toc373699329 \h 111.5 Possible Contrail Mitigation Options PAGEREF _Toc373699330 \h 131.7.1 Operational Changes PAGEREF _Toc373699331 \h 141.7.2 Jet Fuel Additives PAGEREF _Toc373699332 \h 141.7.3 Jet Airframe Redesign PAGEREF _Toc373699333 \h 151.7.4 Jet Engine Redesign PAGEREF _Toc373699334 \h 152.0 Stakeholder Analysis PAGEREF _Toc373699335 \h 162.1 Primary Stakeholders PAGEREF _Toc373699336 \h 162.1.1 Federal Aviation Administration- Air Traffic Organization PAGEREF _Toc373699337 \h 162.1.2 Airlines- Airline Management PAGEREF _Toc373699338 \h 172.1.3 Citizens and Climate Change Advocates PAGEREF _Toc373699339 \h 172.1.4 International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) PAGEREF _Toc373699340 \h 182.2 Tensions Amongst Stakeholders PAGEREF _Toc373699341 \h 182.3 Win-Win PAGEREF _Toc373699342 \h 213.0 Gap Analysis PAGEREF _Toc373699343 \h 244.0 Need and Problem PAGEREF _Toc373699344 \h 265.0 Project Scope PAGEREF _Toc373699345 \h 275.1 Altitude PAGEREF _Toc373699346 \h 275.2 Contrail Type PAGEREF _Toc373699347 \h 275.3 Strategic vs Tactical Maneuvering PAGEREF _Toc373699348 \h 275.4 Flight Route Options PAGEREF _Toc373699349 \h 275.5 Regions with High Likelihood of Contrails PAGEREF _Toc373699350 \h 285.6 Locations Considered PAGEREF _Toc373699351 \h 285.6.1 NOAA Weather Data- Binary Contrail Formation in ISSR PAGEREF _Toc373699352 \h 285.6.2 FAA Flight Database PAGEREF _Toc373699353 \h 306.0 Functional Requirements PAGEREF _Toc373699354 \h 316.1 Requirement Hierarchies PAGEREF _Toc373699355 \h 316.2: Requirements Outline PAGEREF _Toc373699356 \h 417.0 Functional Decomposition PAGEREF _Toc373699357 \h 458.0 System Design Alternatives- Flight Path Design PAGEREF _Toc373699358 \h 558.1 GCD Route PAGEREF _Toc373699359 \h 568.2 Airway (Historical) Route PAGEREF _Toc373699360 \h 568.3 Vertical Path Adjustments (Altitude) PAGEREF _Toc373699361 \h 568.4 Horizontal Path Adjustments (Side-to-Side) PAGEREF _Toc373699362 \h 568.5 Combination of Vertical and Horizontal PAGEREF _Toc373699363 \h 569.0 Simulation Design PAGEREF _Toc373699364 \h 589.1 Simulation Controller PAGEREF _Toc373699365 \h 589.2 Flight Object PAGEREF _Toc373699366 \h 609.3 Flight Database Handler PAGEREF _Toc373699367 \h 609.4 Weather Database Handler PAGEREF _Toc373699368 \h 609.5 Great Circle Distance Router PAGEREF _Toc373699369 \h 619.6 Actual Flight Path Router PAGEREF _Toc373699370 \h 619.7 Contrail Avoidance Routers PAGEREF _Toc373699371 \h 619.7.1 Horizontal Contrail Avoidance Router PAGEREF _Toc373699372 \h 629.7.2 Vertical Contrail Avoidance Router PAGEREF _Toc373699373 \h 649.7.3 Combination Contrail Avoidance Router PAGEREF _Toc373699374 \h 659.8 Contrail Formation Calculator PAGEREF _Toc373699375 \h 659.9 Contrail Coverage Sum Block PAGEREF _Toc373699376 \h 659.10 Optimization of Simulation Resources PAGEREF _Toc373699377 \h 669.11 Physical Processes to be Modeled PAGEREF _Toc373699378 \h 679.11.1 CO2 Emission Model PAGEREF _Toc373699379 \h 689.11.2 Contrail Formation Model PAGEREF _Toc373699380 \h 6810.0 Project Management PAGEREF _Toc373699381 \h 6910.1 Budgeting PAGEREF _Toc373699382 \h 6910.2 Work Breakdown Structure and Schedule PAGEREF _Toc373699383 \h 7111.0 References PAGEREF _Toc373699384 \h 751.0 Context1.1 Global Climate ProblemThe World Health Organization (WHO) projects the world population reaching to 10 billion humans by the year 2100 as depicted in the following graphic.Figure 1: World population is increasing CITATION The11 \l 1033 [1]With an increasing world population, it can be assumed that the global energy demand will increase, causing the increased burning of fossil fuels. Fossil fuels, when burned, produce greenhouse gasses such as carbon dioxide that can stay in the atmosphere for centuries and cause higher global temperatures. The increase in global temperatures causes phenomena such as melting ice caps in the arctic, mean seal levels rising, and erratic weather patterns. The following graphic summarizes the aforementioned information. Figure 2: Global climate change occurs from the factors listed on top and can manifest itself by the factors listed on the bottom1.2 Air Travel DemandWith an increase of air travel in the United States, there has been more attention drawn to the environmental impact on the use of aircraft in the National Airspace System [Waitz et. al. 2004]. The following graphic indicates the general trends of the demand for air travel from 1996 to 2012. The demand in 1996 was for 7,289,449 flights per year. By 2012, there was a demand for 8,441,999 flights - indicating more than a 15% increase in the demand for air travel from 1996.Figure 3: Air traffic demand has increased over the years. Although it has seen a dip, it is expected to increase in the future. [24]Additionally, with an increased in demand, there has also been an increase in the amount of fuel consumed by aircraft. The following graphic displays the total gallons of fuel that were consumed in air travel from 1977 to 2012. From 1977 to 2012, there has been an increase of over 26% for the amount of fuel that aircraft use.Figure 4 Fuel Consumption has increased over the years. Although it has seen some dips, it is expected to increase in the future. [25]While an airline’s primary goal is to increase profits over time, part of an ethical responsibility involves understanding the environmental effects caused by air traffic. 1.3 Air Traffic ControlThe Federal Aviation Administration has designated Federal Airways (FARs) that are decomposed into 2 categories: Very High Frequency (VHF) Omnidirectional Range (VOR), and Colored Airways. The latter is only used in Canada, Alaska, and coastal areas. VORs are predominately used within the continental United States and were established in 1950’s for aviation navigation [21].VORs are subdivided into low altitude designated (Victor airways) areas that covers the range of air space between 1,200 - 17,999 feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL) classification. Class A airspace covers high altitude designated Jet Routes between 18,000 – 45,000 feet above MSL. The idea is that after an aircraft reaches Flight Level 18+ (18,000 feet above MSL), it will be passing through different VORs along the way until they start the arrival descent towards the airport through the Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON). However, a new structure of operations is being studied where in the very near future there is a High Altitude Redesign (HAR) project that will provide pilots with ample flexibility in the way they fly the aircraft once they reach the en route/oceanic phase of cruise altitude to fulfill their needs [21]. The following graphic displays a breakdown of federal airways. The group is mainly concentrating on the jet routes (18,000 feet – 45,000 feet) as will be explained further on.Figure 5: Breakdown of federal airwrays1.4 Aircraft EmissionsWith the increase of air traffic, and in turn, an increase of the amount of fuel that is being consumed, more attention has been drawn towards aircraft-induced environmental effects [Waitz et. al. 2004]. The process of the combustion of jet fuel produces carbon dioxide, sulfer oxides, soot, hydrocarbons, and nitrogen oxides. The following graphic displays the chemical process involved in the combustion process in addition to the global impacts and damages. Figure 6: Jet A fuel combustion processIt is evident from the above graphic that impacts of aircraft emissions can create global climate effects in terms of changes in temperature. The effect of aircraft emissions on the Earth’s climate is one of the most serious long-term environmental issues facing the aviation industry (IPCC, 1999; Aviation and the Environment – Report to the United States Congress, 2004). Estimates show that aviation is responsible for 13% of transportation-related fossil fuel consumption and 2% of all anthropogenic CO2 emissions [14]. The transportation industry as an entirety is responsible for 28% of CO2 emissions in the United States. 1.4.1 Carbon DioxideIt is widely known and understood that an increase of greenhouse gasses contributes to global warming through the greenhouse effects [23]. According to the following image, carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels increase exponentially from 1900 to 2008. Understanding this growth leads to an understanding on the scale of the impact on the global climate. Carbon dioxide creates a net warming effect on the planet.Figure 7 CO2 emissions have increased over the years [18]The following graphic is a result of EPA climate change simulations regarding emissions. Even when emissions are relatively low (low is defined in the simulation), the global temperature still increases. Figure 8: According to multiple simulations, temperature is expect to increase depending on the quantity of emissions over the years [26]Even though the aviation industry is responsible for 2% of CO2 emissions, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) is proposing preventive measures to mitigate the long term effects of aviation’s industry emissions. ICAO is proposing market-based measures in which companies can participate to meet a comprehensive strategy in minimizing greenhouse gas emissions by the year 2020. It is important to comprehend that such a model must be implemented with a financial incentive for a company’s bottom line. Such emissions can be treated as trading commodities in order to achieve the objective of long term, cost effective, and implementation of environmental progress [20].1.4.2 ContrailsIn 1992, linear condensation-trails, otherwise known as contrails, were estimated to cover about 0.1% of the Earth’s surface [22]. The contrail cover was projected to grow to 0.5% by 2050. Contrails contribute to warming the Earth’s surface, similar to thin cirrus clouds formed in the troposphere and have an important environmental impact because they artificially increase the cloud cover and trigger the formation of cirrus clouds; thus altering climate on both, local and global scales.Persistent contrails form cirrus clouds made of water vapor from engine exhaust or the aeroydynamics of a jet aircraft. The initial formation of the persistent contrail originates from exhaust gas mixture with ambient temperature and humidity. At cruising altitudes (between 21,000 feet and 41,000 feet), the exhaust mixture freezes, forming ice particles upon contact with the free air, leading to visible contrail formation. Generally, contrails created through the aerodynamics of an aircraft fade within two to three wingspans of an aircraft. Persistent contrails with longer lifetimes and larger horizontal extent are caused in ice supersaturated regions (ISSR) in the upper troposphere with relative humidity levels greater than 100% and temperatures below -40 degrees Celsius. Persistent contrails may affect both the radiation budget and climate in a manner similar to natural cirrus clouds. Persistent contrails are believed to be responsible for the incremental increase of trapped solar radiation in the earth’s surface, which contributes to the effect of global warming. Recent reports [3] state that persistent contrails may have a three to four times greater effect on the climate than carbon dioxide emissions in a short time horizon (10-20 years). Greenhouse gasses are in the atmosphere for longer periods of time relative to contrails, [18] therefore allowing the gasses to mix in the atmosphere, having the same concentration throughout the world. Contrails on the other hand, provide more regional affects since they occur only in select areas of the troposphere that fulfill the conditions for persistent contrail formation. The following image displays the global energy flows in W/m^2 where contrails are represented as clouds. It should be noted that the amount of back radiation due to greenhouse gasses and cloud coverage is more than double the amount of solar radiation. The back radiation is absorbed by the earth’s surface; thereby causing abnormal global heating. Figure 9: The global annual mean Earth’s energy budget for the March 2000 to May 2004 period. The broad arrows indicate the schematic flow of energy in proportion to their importance. [17]The following image displays the net warming effects that aviation has on the earth in terms of radiative forcing. From this Government Accountability Office document, it can be noted that contrails have a net radiative forcing affect that exceeds the effects of carbon dioxide [16].Figure 10: Contrails have a lower scientific understanding than CO2. As a result, the variability on the actual radiative forcing effects is high.It should be noted that the radiative forcing due to contrails may be higher than the radiative forcing due to carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Because of the lower scientific understanding regarding contrails as compared to other greenhouse gasses, the true effects of contrails remain unknown- as depicted by the large variance bars. Furthermore, contrails can also induce cirrus clouds, therefore having another indirect impact on the radiative forcing levels. 1.5 Possible Contrail Mitigation OptionsThe team is aware that other contrail mitigation methods in addition to operational changes have been considered by researchers; however, this study will only be concerned with flight path changes. These methods include using fuel that requires lower freezing points than Jet A fuel, changing the airframe of an aircraft, and also changing the aircraft engines. The time horizon for reducing contrails, as discussed in the gap analysis section of this report is to reduce the miles of contrails formed by the year 2020- rerouting of aircraft can be done in a quicker time interval as opposed to introducing a new technology. Additionally, it is less costly to implement the rerouting of aircraft as opposed to researching and experimenting with technology changes. Furthermore, if new technology is introduced, then every single current aircraft will have to be retrofitted with the technology, and the technology will have to be implemented on all future aircrafts as well. Therefore, for the purpose of this project, the team is only concentrating on operational changes for flight paths. However, for the sake of completion, other mitigation options are also briefly discussed.1.7.1 Operational ChangesAs emphasized earlier, this study will solely concentrate on operational changes to reduce persistent contrail formation. Operational changes include changes to the actual flight path of the aircraft to avoid regions that are highly likely to produce contrails. As described in the graphic below, there are two major types of aircraft maneuvering- tactical and strategic. Tactical maneuvering occurs when pilots request permission from air traffic controllers, while en-route, to make changes to their flight plan. Strategic maneuvering involves filing a flight plan prior to departure to accommodate for regions that the aircraft may want to avoid. This type of maneuvering reduces the cognitive work load on air traffic controllers because they do not have to evaluate whether permission should be granted to an aircraft to make maneuvers while also remaining attentive to other air traffic in the area. 1.7.2 Jet Fuel AdditivesThe formation of contrails occurs when hot engine exhaust mixes with ambient temperature and humidity. As aforementioned, the decomposition of jet emissions consist of carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur oxide (SO2), soot, and water particle (H2O). At cruising altitudes, the exhaust mixture freezes and forms ice particles upon contact with the surrounding air. This leads to the formation of visible contrails. The number of ice particles formed in contrails and their climate impact may be reduced by lowering soot emissions and sulfur content of aviation fuels, but the efficiency of such a measure has not yet been quantified [4]. The jet fuel additives provides the optimal ratio of Sulfur (S) content mixture within jet fuel (CnHm+S) during the jet fuel combustion in order to product an ideal combustion that will reduce contrail formation. The following figure shows the number of soot and ice particle per kg of fuel in contrails versus fuel sulfur content (FSC) behind the following aircraft: ATTAS (black squares), B737 (black circles), and A310 (black diamonds). The symbols with dashed lines approximate the mean soot particle emission indices measured for three aircraft in non-contrail plumes. The grey rectangles with error bars denote the number of ice particle formed per kg of fuel burned in contrail for B737 and the ATTAA [4].Figure 11: Mean soot particle emissions depending on the amount of sulfur for different aircraft represented by the varying shapes.[4]1.7.3 Jet Airframe RedesignJet airframe redesign will not affect the persistent contrails that are being studied for this project. Airframe redesigns will only affect the contrails that are formed by the pressure differences of air over the body of the aircraft, not the persistent contrails formed by aircraft exhaust.1.7.4 Jet Engine RedesignThis change can cause for more efficient fuel burn- however, studies by the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution in “The Environmental Effects of Civil Aircraft in Flight” have shown that more efficient fuel-burn engines produce three times more water vapor, leading to more contrails being formed. 2.0 Stakeholder AnalysisAfter careful consideration and strenuous research for designing a system to manage and create new and optimal flight plans for contrail neutrality by 2020, the group has identified the stakeholders that will be involved and impacted with the implementation of the Flight Planning System (FPS). The stakeholders are the Federal Aviation Administration (more specifically the Air Traffic Organization department), airline management for airlines utilizing the National Air Space (NAS), the consumers of air travel, and other citizens concerned about climate change. 2.1 Primary StakeholdersThe following is a description of key stakeholders impacted by the flight planning system.2.1.1 Federal Aviation Administration- Air Traffic OrganizationUnder the umbrella of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), there is a complex network that is constructed for the operations of everyday commercial aviation in the National Airspace System (NAS). A major component of this network is composed of the Air Traffic Organization (ATO), which operates facilities such as Air Traffic Control System Command Centers (ATSCC), Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCCs), Terminal Radar Approach Control Facilities (TRACONs), and Air Traffic Control Towers (ATCTs). The branches of the Air Traffic Organization (ATO) are necessary to perform essential services starting from the flight plan to the takeoff of the aircraft following through all the way to the final descent of the aircraft. The primary objective of the ATO and all its branches is to ensure safe and efficient transportation in the increasing density of the National Airspace System [21]. The following diagram displays a visual breakdown of the Air Traffic Organization that was explained above. The breakdown does not take into account other offices within the FAA or the ATO- it only takes into account the offices listed above. Figure 12: Offices within the ATO for navigation purposes. This image is not a total hierarchy, only a representation of the information presented in this section2.1.2 Airlines- Airline ManagementAlthough it is in the best interest of an airline to provide users (customers) with safe transportation, airlines exist primarily to make a profit. Their main concern is to provide customers with faster flight times at lower operational and fuel costs. At the same time, for the continuity of operation, airlines are subjected to regulations set forth by the FAA.2.1.3 Citizens and Climate Change AdvocatesBecause the effects of condensation trails exist mainly on a regional level, citizens and climate change advocates may be concerned about the net heating conditions in their particular areas contributing to global warming. Additionally, with the rerouting of aircraft, citizens may be concerned with noise and other forms of pollution from aircraft flying at lower altitudes over their houses.2.1.4 International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) is an agency developed by the United Nations that sets standards and regulations for the safety and efficiency of international air space. Currently, the ICAO is comprised of 191 countries that promote security and environmental protection all around the world.Apart from the safety and efficiency objectives, another main goal of the ICAO is to develop a sustainable business model that would enable it to construct a policy framework that would impart a systematic strategy for a sustainable enterprise. This is an important aspect given the trends of rising oil prices, rising demand for air travel, and rising operating cost for airline companies.Another objective of the ICAO is to promote environmental policies taking into consideration technological factors pertaining engine emissions. Emissions are increasingly becoming a topic of interest given the rising levels of greenhouse gas emissions, and the potential of contributing to global warming. The ICAO is mitigating these problems with the help of restructuring operational procedures, and with the help of financial tools is studying the possibilities of moving towards a carbon market based trading market. 2.2 Tensions Amongst StakeholdersThe primary goal of the Air Traffic Organization is to maintain a determined level of safety for the successful air travel operations within the National Airspace System. The airline management’s main goal is to maintain financial viability while satisfying user demand. Additionally, customers (citizens/public) demand safe transportation, with minimal monetary costs for air travel. Although there is a high degree of communication and collaboration amongst these stakeholders, undoubtedly there will be conflicts along the workings of all operational agencies that encompass the model of transporting passengers safely, efficiently, and in an environmentally conscious manner in order to come up with a cohesive solution to the problem of contrail neutrality. The following table summarizes stakeholders, their conflicts, and possible mitigation options between the conflicts. The highlighted portion represents the primary stakeholders.StakeholderDesiresTensionsFederal Aviation Administration (FAA) – Air Traffic Organization (ATO) SafetyNAS Efficiency ATO regulations on airlines may increase operational costsAirline Management – Airline Operations Center (AOC) - DispatcherMaximize profitMinimizing costsSafetyGeneral PublicSafetyMinimize air transportation costsMinimize Environmental impactDo not want climate changeGeneral public desires safe transportation at the lowest costs. Airlines want to charge the general public higher costs to make greater profitsATC/ATC UnionProtect interests of air traffic controllersPressure ATO for better working conditions and higher payPilot/Pilots UnionProtect interests of pilotsPressure airlines for better working conditions and higher payOther Regulatory Agencies (DOE, DOT, EPA)Safety in their respective fieldsRegulations may increase costsCongressLegislation promoting American interestsRegulations may increase costsNOAAProvide weather information for airline useICAOCreate global cooperation to reduce aviation’s impact on climate changeFigure 13: Stakeholder desires and tensions table. The yellow represents primary stakeholdersThe following graphic summarizes the interactions amongst all the stakeholders. The general public would support attempts to reduce contrail formation because of the negative climate impacts associated with radiative forcing. Airlines would potentially be against any system reducing contrail formation because of possible increased operational costs.Figure 14: Stakeholder interactions2.3 Win-WinIn order to create a system to satisfy all three primary stakeholders, there needs to be a solution that reduces fuel consumption, environmental impact, and maintains the same level of safety desired by the Air Traffic Organization (ATO). In the diagram below, the center of the venn diagram in is where the ideal solution exists. center265430Figure 15: Ideal solution is in the center of this diagram in the overlapping regionFrom the perspective of the general public, the only way to create new legislation regarding environmental concerns is through the legislative branch of the United States of America. These legislations may mandate government agencies such as the Department of Transportation, Environmental Protection Agency, and the Department of Energy to execute any necessary measures. In 1970, Congress passed the Clean Air Act (CAA) when evidence was provided regarding pollutants through airborne contaminants that can affect the health of citizens. Under the CAA, federal and state laws are able to enforce emissions from different sources such as factories and cars. Although Title 42 of the USC Chapter 85, subchapter II of the Clean Air Act has numerous descriptive standards and benchmarks for emissions for motor vehicles, the broad language and vague delineation of aircraft emission standards has left the aviation industry with very little emission regulations. Because aircraft emissions are a global problem organizations such as the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) aim to create cooperative decisions on a global scale. In 2008, the European Union (EU) decided to independently regulate greenhouse gas emissions from aircraft by means of an Emission Trade System (ETS) in order to decrease the CO2 emissions produced by all aircraft leaving and entering the EU. By 2012, president Obama and Congress signed a law prohibiting any type of participation of any EU mandates. As it is becoming apparent, there is a lack of uniformity of who should regulate greenhouse gasses and how regulations would be mandated and implemented throughout the globe. This realization is the main objective of the win-win situation for the stakeholders (specially the airline industry) in the Design of a Flight Planning System to Reduce Persistent Contrail Formation.In creating such a system, legislation can be enacted to regulate standards for new engines, existing engines, airframes, as well as operational standards. For new technology, the innovation of engine design and airframes will deliver efficiency and close the gap of greenhouse gas emissions. However, for existing aircraft engines, the continued level of fuel burn will hinder the goal of carbon neutrality. Operational standards provide a cost effective and rapid incorporation of testing that will be beneficial as a first step approach to greenhouse gas emissions. Another aspect is to promote regulatory tools such as Carbon Emission Trading that will allow the EPA to regulate emissions, and move towards a system that would be uniform in conjunction with measures taken by the EU and in the near future (2020) to be adopted around the world with the facilitation of the ICAO CITATION Ric \l 1033 [2].Adopting and enforcing rigid guidelines and regulations from the federal government on airlines will impose great compliance costs (such as increased fuel costs) not only on airlines, but regulatory agencies, and the general public demanding environmental change by means of taxes and tariffs. As economists are studying different alternatives, they are in consensus that a less rigid, and more “flexible” approach to this issue would enable the stakeholders to gradually adapt to a new system. Economists have been studying the .EU’s ETS for some time and can see the value on emissions trading as the best cost effective for all parties to adopt. Because aviation’s environmental impact is global, airlines have to become more open to the idea of environmental responsibility as a whole, and economists believe that the most cost-conscious approach to flexible regulation will be a market based economy based on the global trade of pollutants.3.0 Gap AnalysisFigure 16: Gap quantifying radiative forcing due to contrails. This gap can be closed by reducing the miles of contrails.The group has determined that there are three major driving factors that can have significant impact on the contrail coverage in the sky. The first driving factor is the number of aircraft demand in the sky (at cruise altitude). In addition to the air traffic density, the quantity and types of engines being used may have a significant consequence on the coverage of contrails. The third driving force for contrail coverage is regarding the temperature and humidity conditions existing in the cruising altitude.Keeping these driving factors in mind, it has been determined that the goal of the project is to reduce the radiative forcing due to contrails to 7.06 mW/m^2 as depicted in the above graphic. The blue curve represents the projected radiative forcing due to contrails up to 2050. The red line depicts what the group has decided to call a “contrail neutral” level. The logic behind this gap analysis follows from the International Air Transport Association’s pledge to reduce carbon emissions to obtain carbon neutrality by 2020 to a baseline level of 2005. For the contrail neutral scenario, a 2005 baseline has been specified at 7.06 mW/m^2, and the system’s goal is to drive the estimated radiative forcing curve down to that value by 202, the same time IATA pledges to obtain carbon neutrality. In order to decrease the amount of radiative forcing due to contrails, any system would have to decrease the miles of contrails that are produced as the aircraft travels through ISSR. Decreasing the miles of contrails decreases the percentage of contrail coverage over the NAS, which would then decrease the effects of radiative forcing. The goal of this project is to reduce the miles of contrails that are formed, to indirectly reduce the radiative forcing levels. 4.0 Need and ProblemWith an increase in the demand for air travel resulting in the environmental impacts discussed in the Context Analysis, there is also a need for determining flight paths to reduce the amount of persistent contrails that can form. Currently there is no existing system that provides flight paths for aircraft to avoid Ice Supersatured Regions (ISSR) while accounting for the tradeoffs between fuel consumption, the amount of time aircraft are in the air, as well as the miles of contrails that are formed by ISSR avoidance flight plans. In order to solve the problem of radiative heating due to contrails, the ultimate goal of the project is to design a system for the user to create a flight plan that reduces persistent contrail formation while taking into consideration the tradeoffs of fuel consumption and airspace demand. 5.0 Project ScopeThe complex problem of contrail reduction has been scoped to a manageable scale with certain assumptions being made. The assumptions include locations of contrail formation, flight levels of aircraft, as well as flight timings.5.1 Altitude The range of altitude of the study has been scoped from 29,000 feet to 41,000 feet. The reasons behind this range are based on average cruising altitude for commercial aviation jets, and because contrails have a higher likelihood of formation due to the atmospheric temperatures being below -40 degrees Celsius. The limit on height is due to the ceiling of many commercial aircraft such as the Boeing 737 being at 41,000 feet.5.2 Contrail TypeThe project scope will be limited to only contrails formed by the exhaust of jet engines, excluding contrails originated by the aerodynamics of jet aircraft. Unlike water vapor exhaust that can form persistent contrails, aerodynamic contrails are not persistent and dissipate within 2 to 3 wingspans behind the aircraft. 5.3 Strategic vs Tactical ManeuveringThe team has restricted the recommendations of the system to provide strategic preflight plans for contrail reduction in contrast to tactical maneuvering. Although tactical maneuvering is a plausible alternative, preflight planning radically minimizes the random actions worked into the system for changing a flight plan in midflight that can have significant variable fuel consumption.5.4 Flight Route OptionsThe system will generate five separate flight routes as alternatives for the dispatchers to choose from. The first path that the system will produce is the great circle distance (GCD) route. The GCD route is calculated by taking the shortest route on a sphere between two points. The second route is the route that the aircraft would normally fly, called airway routes. Airway routes are based on jetways as well as the location of beacons that aircraft fly towards. The third alternative makes horizontal maneuvers of ice supersaturated regions (ISSR) into account. The fourth alternative route makes vertical maneuvers of ISSR into account. The last alternative route that the system will output is the combination of both the horizontal and vertical adjustments.5.5 Regions with High Likelihood of ContrailsFor the sake of modeling, regions that have a high likelihood of contrails forming (i.e. regions that may need to be avoided) will be considered circular. The reasoning is explained in the section regarding horizontal adjustments to a flight path.5.6 Locations ConsideredThe system will allow the user to decide between five separate flight routes based on their objectives. Due to the massive availability of weather data from NOAA and flight data from the FAA, the scope of the system will be limited to only the continental United States.5.6.1 NOAA Weather Data- Binary Contrail Formation in ISSRThe NOAA weather data is obtained from the Rapid Refresh (RAP) weather database. This database is broken up into a three-dimensional grid. Each cell within this grid has dimensions of 13km x 13km x 1km (length, width, height). From this database, the system uses both relative humidity with respect to water (RHw), and temperature in Kelvin to determine the relative humidity with respect to ice (RHi) to determine ISSR. The figure below displays a sample of the relative humidity with respect to water.Figure 17: Relative Humidity with Respect to Water at a specific isobaric pressureThe colored area displays where the data is available over the United States. This relative humidity with respect to water data is then combined with the following temperature data.Figure 18: Temperature in Kelvin at a specific isobaric pressureUsing the Schmidt-Appleman criterion explained in the physical processes section of this report, the system is able to calculate the areas that are likely to form contrails when an aircraft flies through. In the figure below, these areas are displayed in red. The black areas are areas that are not likely to form persistent contrails when an aircraft flies through the region.Figure 19: Red regions represent RHi>100% (ISSR) in a small portion of the RHw represented in the RHw image. This study will assume binary contrail formation. Anytime the RHi is at least 100% an ISSR will be created. The assumption is that contrails will always be formed in that region.5.6.2 FAA Flight Database The system will run a simulation based on 24 hours of of flight data obtained from FAA. The system will use this flight data to test many different days of weather. By using the same flight data, the system is able to just test the effects of different weather on the total miles of contrails formed, the amount of fuel used by each aircraft, as well as the flight duration and carbon dioxide emissions. The data is obtained from the ETMS flight database, and is received in the form of comma separated values sheets.6.0 Functional Requirements6.1 Requirement HierarchiesThe following image represents a hierarchical view of functional requirements.Figure 20: Hierarchical view of functional requirementsThe simulation’s top level requirement states that the system shall reduce the amount of contrails, measured by area covered, produced by commercial aircraft flying domestically in the United States. In order to fulfill this high-level requirement, the simulation is decomposed into four functional requirements. Some of these functional requirements are broken down further. The hierarchy below shows this breakdown.Moving from left to right, the contrail reduction requirement is decomposed into the alternative solutions, flight system, traceability, and simulation controller requirements. The alternative solutions requirement states that the system shall be able to accept any alternate solution in order to produce measurable results. The flight system requirement states that the system shall be able to accept a flight input from a user, and return the miles/width of contrails formed as well as the extra fuel needed for contrail avoidance. The scalability requirement requires that the system shall be scalable- in other words, it will be able to run using multiple cores. This will ensure that the simulation can be used to test various solutions while maintaining a large sample size. Lastly, the simulation controller requirement states that the simulation shall contain a “controller” that handles all of the timing and any calculations external to the flight object. Both, the flight system and simulation requirements, are broken down into sub requirements that will be explained further.The flight system breakdown, seen on the next page, contains all of the requirements necessary to meet fulfill the flight system requirement.Figure 21: Hierarchical view of functional requirements for the systemThe high level flight system requirement (FR.2) requires that all of its child requirements be met in order for FR.2 to be met. The table below shows each of the FR.2.x level requirements and their respective definitions. The FR.2.x.y level requirements will be explained further down.FR.2.1GCD RouterThe system shall provide a method for routing aircraft along the great circle distance.FR.2.2Contrail Avoidance RouterThe system shall provide a method to route the aircraft along a route that avoids contrails.FR.2.3Current WeatherThe system shall provide a weather handler capable of providing the weather information to the system prior to take off. This weather data will include a “prediction” for weather during the flight.FR.2.4In Flight WeatherThe system shall be capable of providing the simulation with the weather data during the course of the flight. This data will be used for validation of the system.FR.2.5Contrail DistanceThe system shall be capable of determining how many miles of contrails were formed given a flight route.FR.2.6Contrail WidthThe system shall be capable of determining how many miles of contrails were formed given a flight route.Figure 22: Tabular breakdown of functional requirements for the systemIn order for the FR.2.x level requirements to be met, they must be broken down further. Each of the requirements is explained and decomposed as necessary through this section.Firstly, the great circle distance router (GCD Router) is designed to find the shortest path a flight can take to get from its origin airport to its destination airport. In order to perform this task, it must be broken down into two parts. The first part is a requirement to be able to calculate the great circular distance. After the GCD Router has the desired path, this must be transferred to a series of waypoints for the aircraft to use. The GCD flight path requirement states that the system shall be able to convert a given curve to a flight path. Figure 23: Requirements for GCD RouterA similar breakdown is used for the contrail avoidance router, however since this router is more complicated, a few extra requirements are introduced. The system must be able to evaluate weather for any given cell and any given time. This functionality allows the system to evaluate what cells would be ideal to fly through. In order to use this information though, the system must be able to determine where an aircraft will be at any given time. This is done by the Location at Time requirement, which states that the system shall be able to get weather data for a given cell and a given time. After determining cell data along the GCD Route, the system shall be able to evaluate flight path options to choose the best one for the specific flight.Figure 24: Requirements for Contrail Avoidance RouterPrior to takeoff, the system must be able to predict the weather for the duration of the flight. FR.2.3 addresses this need; however, this requirement must be broken down further in order for the simulation to be designed. The two major parts of this functional requirement are being able to get the weather available prior to takeoff, and then being able to gather the predicted weather data for any specific time and weather cell. Figure 25: Requirements for how weather data is usedThe system will only be able to access the weather data that is available prior to takeoff; however, in order to validate the system, actual weather data will be used to figure out where and when contrails form. In order to do this, the “Weather at Time and Location” requirement listed in the above is reused. In order to provide more data for analysis, a requirement was included to ensure that the differences between the predicted and actual weather are stored (FR.2.4.2).Figure 26: Requirements for how weather data is usedAfter determining which cells form contrails, the system shall be able to determine the length of contrails formed by that flight. In order to determine this, the system shall know which cells form persistent contrails out of the weather cells that the aircraft used. After determining which cells formed persistent contrails, the system shall be able to determine what distance of contrails will be formed.Figure 27: Requirements for contrail distance calculatorAfter determining distance, the system must determine the width of contrails formed in order to calculate the area covered by the flights contrails. In order to do this, the system shall be able to determine the number of engines on the aircraft, and use this data to determine the width of the contrails.Figure 28: Requirements for contrail width calculationsThe Simulation Controller requirement is broken down into the three following sub requirements (hierarchy presented on the next page):The system shall be capable of handling and managing the weather database acquired from NOAA. The system shall be capable of handling and managing a flight database. The system shall be capable of calculating the coverage of contrails.Figure 29: Requirements for simulation controllerThe weather handler requirement must be broken down further. In order to handle the weather database, the system shall be able to gather present weather information at a given location. The system shall also be able to get the predicted information at an given location and time. In order for both of these steps to the system shall be able to interface with both the RAP and RUC databases provided by NOAA.Figure 30: Requirements for weather handler mechanismThe flight database handler requirement is broken down by three sub requirements. The system shall be able to get the aircraft type (aircraft type determines the number of engines producing emissions) from the flight database. The system shall be able to get the origin and destination information from the flight database. The system shall be able to get the flight schedule from the flight database.Figure 31: Requirements for flight database handler mechanismIn order to fulfill the requirement to calculate contrail coverage, the system shall be able to calculate and sum the contrail distance formed from the flights. The system must also be able to calculate the width of contrails, and how many miles of each width were formed.Figure 32: Requirements for contrail coverage calculations6.2: Requirements OutlineThe following is an outline of all the requirements presented above.Alternative Solutions:The simulation shall be able to accept any of the alternative solutions in order to produce a result.Flight System: Each system designed shall accept a flight, and return an amount of extra fuel needed and miles of contrails formed.GCD Router: The system shall provide a method for routing aircraft along the great circle distance.GCD Calc: The system shall be capable of calculating the great circle distance given any two points on a sphere.GCD - Flight Path: The system shall be capable of forming a flight path from the calculated great circle distance.Contrail Avoidance Router: The system shall provide a method to route the aircraft along a route that avoids contrails.Weather Evaluation: The system shall be able to determine which cells of air must be avoided based on a given time.GCD Calc: ?The system shall be capable of calculating the great circle distance given any two points on a sphere.Location at time: The system shall be able to determine what location it will be at for any given time during the flight. Will be based off of the flight path up to that point.Flight path evaluator: The system shall be able to compare weather to avoid, as well as the GCD route in order to determine the best route to take.Current Weather: The system shall provide a weather handler capable of providing the weather information to the aircraft before takeoff.Takeoff Weather: The system shall be capable of providing the weather information to the system that is available prior to takeoff.Weather at time and location: Given a time, and cell the weather handler shall be able to return a predicted weather, with statistics.In flight weather: The system shall be capable of providing the simulation with the weather data during the course of the flight.Actual weather at time and location: The system shall be capable of getting the actual weather data for a specific cell at a certain time.Weather Comparator: The system shall be able to compare the actual weather to the predicted weather in order to determine the accuracy of the systemContrail distance: The system shall be capable of determining which weather cells the aircraft flew through, and for how many miles the aircraft was in each cell.Weather Cells used: The system shall be capable of determining which weather cells the aircraft flew through, and for how many miles the aircraft was in each cell.Cell contrail formation: Given a cell and weather information, the system shall be able to determine the probability of persistent contrails being formed.Distance formed: Given the cells, and contrail formation methods, the system shall be able to determine the miles of contrails formed by a specific flight.Contrail width: The system shall be capable fo returning the width of contrails formed by the aircraft during its flight.Engine Count: Given the flight information, the system shall be able to determine how many engines the aircraft has.Width Calculation: Given the number of engines, and any other necessary aircraft information, the system shall be able to determine the width of contrails formed by the flight.Scalability: The simulation shall be scalable via threading.Simulation Controller: The system shall be able to manage and control a simulation in order to gather test and reliability results.Weather Handler: The system shall be able to handle the weather database in order to provide the necessary information to flight planner and simulation.Present weather at location: The system shall be capable of returning the current weather information for a given location.RAP Interface: The system shall be capable of interfacing with the RAP database provided by NOAA.RUC Database: The system shall be capable of interfacing with the RUC database provided by NOAA.Predicted Weather at location: Given a time and location, the system shall be able to return the predicted weather at the specified location and time.Flight database handler: The system shall be able to handle and manage the database of flight objects in order to control the clock of the simulation.Aircraft type: The system shall be capable of getting the type of aircraft used for the specific flight.Origin/Destination: The system shall be capable of getting the origin and destination of the flight.Schedule: The system shall be capable of getting the schedule for a given flight.Coverage Calculation: The system shall be able to calculate the percentage of ground covered over the given time frame for any solution tested.Contrail distance: The system shall be able to sum and track the total distance of contrails formed by the many flights in the set time frame.Contrail Width: The system shall be able to track the width of each of the miles of contrails formed.7.0 Functional DecompositionIn order to meet the functional requirements, the functional architecture is displayed below. It appears similar to the functional requirements hierarchy; however it is more heavily weighted on methods and databases in order to cover some of the work.Figure 33: Functional DecompositionSimulation Controller: Handles all of the simulation including inputs and outputs.Flight Object: Handles a single output at a time.Flight Database Controller: Interfaces with the flight database in order to gather necessary data.Weather Database Controller: Interfaces with the weather database in order to gather necessary data.Scalability: Handles all of the optimization for the simulation.In order for the flight object to perform the tasks required of it, it is broken down into sub methods and tasks. These methods are similar in layout as the functional requirement, and are designed to meet their respective requirements.Figure 34: Flight Object DecompositionThe following is an outline of descriptions for all the functions represented in the previous diagram.Flight Object: Handles one flight in order to produce the correct output.GCD Router: Routes the aircraft through the great circle path.GCD Calculator: Calculates the great circle distance and path.GCD - Flight Path: Converts the distance to a usable flight path.Avoidance Router: Routes the aircraft in such a way that avoids contrail formation.GCD Calculator: Calculates the great circle distance and path.Weather Evaluator: Evaluates weather cells to determine which are likely to form contrails.Location at Time: Determines which location the aircraft would be at for a given time; based on distance traveled along flight path.Flight Path Evaluator: Determines the optimal flight path for the aircraft to follow in order to avoid contrails.Current Weather: Gathers the weather data available to the aircraft prior to take off.Preflight weather access: Accesses the weather database in order to gather the needed weather data.Weather Data at Time and Location: Gathers data for a given weather cell at a given time.End of Flight weather: Gathers weather data necessary to determine if contrails formed. Actual Weather at ?time and location: Gathers RAP and RUC data for the given location and time.Weather Comparator: Compares actual weather data to the predicted weather data.Contrail distance calc: Records the distances of contrails formed.Weather Cells used: Determines which weather cells were used by an aircraft.Cell Contrail formation: Determines if an aircraft formed a contrail.Distance Formed: Determines the miles of contrails a flight formed.Contrail width calculator: Calculates the width of contrails formed by an aircraft.Engine Counter: Determines the number of engines an aircraft has.Width Calculation: Determines the width of the contrails formed by an aircraft.Due to the scale of the simulation and system, the system must be able to be scaled. This will allow the system to run large numbers of data at once as well as be run on various computers. In order to do this, the system must be able to be threaded. The threading method will handle this. All of the outputs must then be able to be placed into a comma separated values (csv). This last step will allow multiple computers to work together to produce the final output.Figure 35: Scalability function decompositionThe scalability functions above are described by the following outline:5. Scalability: Provides the ability to thread the simulation, as well as output everything to a standard format CSV, in order to allow a large sample size to be used.5.1. Threading: Enables the simulation to run multiple flights at once, one flight per core for the computer being used; increases the sample size of flights used.5.1.1 Split Out: Splits the system into n-1 threads, where n is the number of processor cores the computer being used has. 5.1.2: Reconvene: Rejoins the data output from each of the threads.5.2: CSV Outputs: Outputs all of the information in order for the system to be able to use multiple computers at the same time in order to run the simulation, and increase the sample size.The following is a table of decomposition of all the system functions.FunctionDescriptiondecomposed bydecomposes1 Flight objectThe object that will handle a single flight at a time1.1 GCD Router1.2 Avoidance Router1.3 current weather1.4 End of flight weather1.5 Contrail distance Calc1.6 Contrail Width Calculator4 Simulation Controller1.1 GCD Routertakes in flight object returns route for aircraft to take (possibly using a csv, though route format will be decided at a later date)1.1.1 GCD Calculator1.1.2 GCD - Flight Path1 Flight object1.1.1 GCD CalculatorThis method accepts a sphere radius, as well as any two given points. Can be simplified to both GPS coordinates of the origin and destination airports. Will then be used to determine the shortest path between the two points on the sphere.1.1 GCD Router1.2 Avoidance Router1.1.2 GCD - Flight PathAccepts the GCD curve generated by the GCD calculator and converts this to a usable flight path.1.1 GCD Router1.2 Avoidance Routertakes in flight and weather objects returns route to take same issues as gcd router1.1.1 GCD Calculator1.2.2 Weather Evaluator1.2.3 Location at Time1.2.4 Flight Path Evaluator1 Flight object1.2.2 Weather EvaluatorWill accept a gcd flight path, and will evaluate the weather cells. Will need to expand to other cells if the ones on the flight path are too likely to form contrails.1.2 Avoidance Router1.2.3 Location at TimeWorks in conjunction with the weather evaluator, as the flight path is adjusted, determines a new time for each cell for the weather evaluator to make its decision.1.2 Avoidance Router1.2.4 Flight Path EvaluatorBased on the weather evaluator's results, combined with the GCD calculator, determines the optimal flight path for producing fewest contrails.1.2 Avoidance Router1.3 current weathermethod to contain and calculate the current weather. This is the weather available before the aircraft takes off.1.3.1 Preflight weather access1.3.2 Weather at time and location1 Flight object1.3.1 Preflight weather accessAllows the system to access the database in order to get weather data that would be available before the flight departs.1.3 current weather1.3.2 Weather at time and locationGiven a specific time and location, the system returns the pertinent weather information.1.3 current weather1.4 End of flight weatherWeather handler that contains the weather data available after the aircraft has landed. Will only be used to calculate contrail formation.1.4.1 Actual Weather at time and location1.4.2 Weather Comparator1 Flight object1.4.1 Actual Weather at time and locationGiven a specific time and location the system will gather the exact data from the RAP and RUC data sheets.1.4 End of flight weather1.4.2 Weather ComparatorGiven the actual and predicted weather, records the differences in a way that can be accessed later.1.4 End of flight weather1.5 Contrail distance CalcThe calculator determines how many miles of contrails were formed based on route and weather data.1.5.1 Weather Cells used1.5.2 Cell contrail formation1.5.3 Distance formed1 Flight object1.5.1 Weather Cells usedBased on the flight path, determines which weather cells were used by an aircraft.1.5 Contrail distance Calc1.5.2 Cell contrail formationGiven a cell and time, determines if a aircraft formed a contrail.1.5 Contrail distance Calc1.5.3 Distance formedGiven a flight path, and cell information, uses the cell contrail formation method in order to determine the miles of contrails formed by a flight.1.5 Contrail distance Calc1.6 Contrail Width CalculatorCalculates the width of the contrails formed by the specific flight/aircraft.1.6.1 Engine Counter1.6.2 Width Calculation1 Flight object1.6.1 Engine CounterBased on the aircraft, return the number of engines.1.6 Contrail Width Calculator1.6.2 Width CalculationBased on engine count, and other necessary datum, determine the width of contrails formed by a flight.1.6 Contrail Width Calculator2 Flight Database ControllerThis object will interface with the flight database in order to gather, maintain information.4 Simulation Controller3 Weather Database ControllerHandles and manages the weather database4 Simulation Controller4 Simulation ControllerHandles all of the various parts of the simulation, including timing and output.1 Flight object2 Flight Database Controller3 Weather Database Controller5 Scalability5 ScalabilityThis will provide the scalability options.5.1 Threading5.2 CSV Outputs4 Simulation Controller5.1 ThreadingSeperates each flight to a different core in order to run multiple flights at the same time.5.1.1 Split out5.1.2 Reconvene5 Scalability5.1.1 Split outAllows the system to split into n-1 threads to run n-1 flights at once. Must be able to start all of the various flight objects simultaneously5.1 Threading5.1.2 ReconveneRejoins the data output from each of the threads.5.1 Threading5.2 CSV OutputsOutputs all information to be combined with a seperate computers output after the simulation has run.5 ScalabilityFigure 36: Tabular format for functional decomposition8.0 System Design Alternatives- Flight Path DesignContrail formation frequency heavily depends on the weather and humidity in the cruising altitude (troposphere 10-12 km) [1]. The flight path adjustment alternatives provide a flight paths that avoid regions in which an aircraft is prone to creating persistent contrails. The goal of the system is to provide a strategic flight plan for each individual commercial flight. The input of the system is the integration of the Rapid Refresh (RAP) weather system developed by the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and historical flight paths obtained from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The flight path computation for the aircraft involves using humidity and temperature provided by the RAP database to calculate areas with a relative humidity with respect to ice (RHi) that is greater than or equal to 100% [13]. The system will also perform a tradeoff between creating a flight path, the fuel consumption, as well as the amount of emissions in the creation of an optimal flight path.The following alternative diagram shows the different flight path alternatives considered by the system. Each is described below the diagram.Figure 37: Five alternatives for the flight path design8.1 GCD RouteThe first route considered by the system is the great circle route. This route is the most optimal for the aircraft to fly without taking any avoidance measures into account. The flight path is routed along the shortest route possible between the two airports which results in a straight line.8.2 Airway (Historical) RouteThe system will have access to previous flight data. By using this historical flight data the system is able to test the flight path that is regularly taken by the aircraft. Including this route allows the system to compare to other trajectories.8.3 Vertical Path Adjustments (Altitude)This path adjustment/contrail avoidance method will adjust the aircraft's altitude in order to avoid flying through the contrail producing region. Temperatures tend to increase as an aircraft travels higher into the troposphere- the layer of the atmosphere that is used as the cruising altitude. Therefore, decreasing an aircraft’s altitude may place the aircraft at an altitude that is not as likely to create contrails because of the temperature and humidity thresholds.8.4 Horizontal Path Adjustments (Side-to-Side)The horizontal adjustment flight path maneuvers the aircraft in a horizontal direction by traveling around the regions where there is a high likelihood of contrail formation. With this directional change, the heading and banking angles change, which optimal cruising altitude is maintained for fuel consumption. The shortest route in maneuvering horizontally to avoid contrail formation is maneuvering at each local minimum tangent to the point of the circular region of avoidance.8.5 Combination of Vertical and HorizontalThis flight path will allow the aircraft to maneuver through varying altitudes as well as horizontally depending on the likelihood of contrails forming at a particular region. The system will also take into account the tradeoff between fuel and carbon dioxide emissions (the team is currently working on finding the proper threshold for tradeoff).8.6 Value HierarchyThe utility of each alternative route will be studied with the following values in mind:Figure 38: Value hierarchy to evaluate each alternativeThe best anticipated alternative flight path is a path that consumes the least amount of fuel, has the shortest flight duration, and makes the least miles of contrails. Aircraft spacing safety is an important value for the system; however, safety will be handled by air traffic control, not the system. By the end of SYST 495, the group will have constructed a utility vs. cost graph for each alternative route to evaluate the best alternative.9.0 Simulation DesignThe following section describes a high level overview of the proposed simulation design. The following diagram shows the various inputs and outputs to and from the simulation.Figure 39: High level input/output for the simulationThe inputs to the system are two databases- Rapid Refresh Database (RAP) available from NOAA and the flight schedules obtained through a FAA flight tracker system. The simulation then uses four different mechanisms in order to produce the total flight time, total fuel used, and total miles of contrails formed for each of the alternative routes. These routes are explained in greater detail later with regards to the simulation, but are the great circle distance, actual flight route, horizontal avoidance method, altitude avoidance method, and a combination of horizontal and altitude avoidance method. The main controller of the simulation is the simulation controller. The simulation controller then calls upon the other three mechanisms as required. When the simulation is ready for new data, the database handlers are called. When the system has the data needed to test a flight, the flight object will be called. This allows the system to be scaled up to test large numbers of aircraft.9.1 Simulation ControllerAs described above, the simulation controller manages and controls all aspects of the simulation. To accomplish this, the simulation controller must have the ability to trigger the various parts of the simulation. The scope of the simulation states that a full day of flight data will be tested against many different days of weather data. This is made possible by the simulation controller. The simulation controller shall know which days to test with the relevant flight data. Using the two database handlers, the simulation will be able to pull the necessary data to test each flight on each day. The simulation controller will first gather all of the flight information from the flight database. Depending on the amount of data, and RAM available to the simulation, the flight database handler may be called upon multiple times. After gathering the flight data, the simulation shall retrieve one day’s worth of weather data at a time. This weather data includes the actual weather data, as well as the predicted weather data for the continental united states. The simulation will then create a new flight object for each flight each day. This will create a very large number of flight objects, and is where the scalability will likely help the most. By creating a new flight object on open CPU’s, the simulation will be able to run a large number of flights at once. Once a flight object is finished, the simulation controller shall gather all of the output data from each flight. This includes flight time, fuel used, and miles of contrails produced. By combining this information with the information from the other flights using the same routing methods, the controller is able to generate the total flight time, fuel used, and miles of contrails formed by each of the alternative routers. All data used for the simulation will be historic data. This allows the team to validate weather predictions against the actual simulation output. Using the weather data, the team will be able to determine whether contrails were created when aircraft flew through a certain area of the sky. If the team’s simulation results match up with reality, then it will be determined that the system will be able to correctly avoid forming contrails. However, if the simulated historical weather is highly inaccurate (threshold for accuracy will later be determined in the year), then the system will produce inaccurate contrail formation results. The flight data follows a similar pattern and will contain flights in the geographic areas that the team is studying for a specified time frame. In order to control and run the simulation, the controller will access the flight database, and obtain the “next” flight. It will then use the data from this flight in order to create a flight object.9.2 Flight ObjectThe flight object will be run many times by the simulation controller. Each instance of the flight object shall calculate the five different alternate flight routes. Each flight path must then output the amount of fuel used, flight duration, and miles of contrails formed. This information will later be combined with the information from other flights that used the same avoidance method in order to determine totals for each routing method. To do this, the flight object must receive the flight and weather information. The flight information contains the type of aircraft, origin airport, destination airport, as well as the time and date of the flight. Based on the type of aircraft, the flight object shall be able to apply aircraft maneuvering equations such as thrust and drag to determine how much fuel was used by a certain flight. The fuel used by a flight, however, is not solely dependent on the type of aircraft, but the weather as well. In order ultimately determine the fuel costs of each route, the weather data available to the aircraft must be used. By using the weather data provided by NOAA, and assuming the weather data to be factual, the system is able to determine how many miles of contrails were formed as well as the amount of fuel and time used to accomplish the flight.9.3 Flight Database HandlerThe flight database handler shall be able to handle the FAA flight database in order to give the simulation controller a list of flights. The information that will be handed to the controller will involve the aircraft model, origin airport, destination airport, historically accurate flight path, and nominal flight information.9.4 Weather Database HandlerThe weather database handler will receive the database files from the NOAA RAP database. This information will be received in the form of GRIB2 files. After parsing these files to CSV values for the temperature and relative humidity with respect to water values, the weather database handler must then combine the two sets of values into one relative humidity with respect to ice. The database handler must then be able to provide the simulation controller with the correct CSV for the time frame requested. The handler must also be able to provide the csv for the predicted weather values.9.5 Great Circle Distance RouterIn order to calculate the shortest route that an aircraft can fly from one airport to another, the great circle distance is taken into account. In mathematical terms, the great circle distance is the shortest line that can join any two points on a sphere. Due to the spherical nature of the Earth, these equations can be applied in order to determine the shortest route between two points (airports). After computing the shortest curve between the two airports, the system will then be able to prepare the flight path based off of this route. The process for generating the GCD route is as follows:?σ=arccos?(sinφ1sinφ2+cosφ1cosφ2cos?λ)where φand λ are the latitude and longitude for the airports. ?λ is the difference in longitude between the two airports. To calculate the distance between the two airports, and therefore the route distance, the following equation is used:d=r?σwhere d is the distance and r is the radius of the earth.9.6 Actual Flight Path RouterIn order to compare the contrail avoidance flight paths to that of the current flight paths flown by airliners, this route must be taken into account. In order to determine this route, One day worth of flights will be collected from the FAA flight database. Each of the many flights that were flown for the day that is accepted will be run through the various routers. This process will allow the avoidance and GCD routes to be compared with the actual flight routes.9.7 Contrail Avoidance RoutersAs discussed earlier, the Ice Supersaturated Regions, (ISSRs) will be treated as a binary value. Each region will either cause persistent contrails when an aircraft flies through the region, or the region will not form persistent contrails when an aircraft flies through it. Once the weather data has been broken down into a matrix of 1’s and 0’s, the system can determine routes that take into account contrail avoidance. It must be considered that when avoiding contrails, some amount of fuel will need to be burned in order to fly the extra distance required by these routes than by the GCD, and perhaps the actual flight path routes. Due to this, three different avoidance methods are being considered. The three avoidance methods (Horizontal avoidance, vertical (altitude) avoidance, and a combination of horizontal and vertical avoidance) are presented with greater detail below.9.7.1 Horizontal Contrail Avoidance RouterThe first avoidance strategy involves adjusting the flight path to fly around the contrail producing regions in the longitude and latitude planes with horizontal maneuvering. In the image below, the red path is that which would be flown by the GCD. No attempts are made to avoid the contrail producing regions. These regions are displayed as grey ovals. The blue path takes horizontal avoidance into account. As the image shows, the aircraft attempts to avoid the majority of the contrails by flying to the left and right of the contrail producing regions.Figure 40: Horizontal Avoidance MethodThis method, when started early, will require very little extra fuel as the aircraft does not have to change its flight altitude in order to avoid the contrail avoidance regions.The following image represents a hypothetical horizontal avoidance route of an aircraft with effects on aircraft traveling time as depicted in the following table.Figure 41: Hypothetical horizontal avoidance exampleIn the table below, some preliminary calculations for avoiding contrails are displayed. Some very broad assumptions are made by these calculations. Firstly, in the image above, the ISSR, displayed in blue, is circular in shape. This assumption will likely never be true in practice; however for calculating preliminary time and fuel characteristics, it is a necessary assumption. The second assumption is that the deepest part of the circle that the aircraft flies through, is 10 miles in. This number was chosen as an easy number to work with for later calculations. A banking angle of 35 degrees was selected, as that is the nominal banking angle provided by a Boeing 737. For the purpose of fuel and flight speed, the Boeing 737 aircraft was also selected for this sample calculation. This selection was made due to the popularity of the 737, and the large amount of data available for the aircraft. The earlier that the aircraft attempts to avoid the ISSR, will determine the impact of the contrail avoidance maneuver on flight duration. Additionally, in the table below, the angle that the aircraft turns, theta, is varied from 5 to 30 degrees. In the table below, the effect of these turn angles can be seen on time and distance that the aircraft must make in order to wholly avoid the contrail producing region.Figure 42: Effects on flight duration with angle changes in horizontal maneuveringThe table shows that the earlier that the correction is made, smaller theta values, there is less of an effect on the amount of fuel needed to avoid the region. However as the aircraft has less time to react to a contrail producing region, the correction starts to take a large amount of extra time and will cause a significant distance increase. This in turn will increase the amount of fuel that the aircraft burns in order to complete the maneuver.9.7.2 Vertical Contrail Avoidance RouterA second option available to aircraft is to fly either over or under the ISSR regions. In the image below, the red path is the path flown using the GCD route. The GCD route does not take contrail avoidance into account. The blue path shows the aircrafts attempts to avoid the contrail regions by adjusting the aircraft's altitude.Figure 43: Vertical AvoidanceThese regions will only form when the temperature is below -40 degrees, and the air is super saturated with Ice. As the height of the aircraft increases, the combination of ice and temperature can change to no longer produce contrails. These changes, while affected by the same calculations as the horizontal selection, are smaller. Since the aircraft must fly within a certain range of altitudes, these are the only options for the aircraft. If the amount of contrails formed is lowered by vertical maneuvers, it could be possible to reduce the amount of contrails formed by making smaller adjustments to the flight time and distance. However as the aircraft changes altitude the aspects of how the aircraft fly are changed. Since the air is denser at lower altitudes, the aircraft is not able to fly as fast due to drag limitations, and must work harder to fly through the air. At higher altitudes the aircraft must fly faster in order to force enough air over the wings to create lift. This is proven by the aircraft physical model formulas described in the physical processes section of this report.9.7.3 Combination Contrail Avoidance RouterThe third method to avoid contrail producing regions that the system will take into consideration is a combination of vertical and horizontal adjustments. Following the similar pattern as defined by the previous two sections, the image below shows an aircraft avoiding contrail producing regions by taking into account both horizontal and altitude adjustments.Figure 44: Combination of Horizontal and Vertical AdjustmentsBy taking into consideration the combination of avoidance techniques the system is able to plot the most efficient route through the regions that do not produce contrails. However this comes at the cost of the complexity of maneuvers required to move in all three dimensions.9.8 Contrail Formation CalculatorAfter creating the two flight plans (actual/great circle and contrail optimized), the flight object will then call the “contrail distance formed” method. This method will generate the miles of contrails each flight path formed. After gathering the contrail mileage data that each flight path formed, the flight object can add in the aircraft type in order to determine the percentage of contrails that were covered by that particular aircraft dependent upon the type and number of engines. Finally, the historical contrail coverage by the historical flight plan and the new adjusted contrail optimized flight plan is combined into a single output object.9.9 Contrail Coverage Sum BlockOnce the simulation controller retrieves the “contrail percentages” object, it can sum the percentages with all the other coverage percentages being calculated. This will formulate data and statistics that are ready for analysis by the team. The data from the sum block will include a database of information for the percentage of contrail coverage by the historical flight path, percentage of contrail coverage by the contrail avoidance flight path, differences of contrail coverage between the two flight paths contrail coverage percentage, and then an overall summary of the results.9.10 Optimization of Simulation ResourcesThreading will provide an easy source for optimization for this project. There are two options to perform threading- thread each flight object in order to run (n-1) flights simultaneously, where n is defined as the number of cores on the machine. The other option is to thread the flight path calculations. A possible third option is to combine the two previous options.9.11 Physical Processes to be ModeledThe system must be able to model the effect of flight path changes on the fuel consumption and time of aircraft. To do this, aircraft equations will be applied with specific BADA (Base of Aircraft Data) coefficients for the specific aircraft. These equations allow constants to be taken in, and calculate the total flight duration as well as fuel consumption.In order to calculate thrust (T) and fuel consumption (f) for the flight paths, the following formulas will be used:T=D=0.5ρv2sCDf= ηTCfcrD is drag, v is the true air speed, and ρ is air density. η is the thrust specific fuel consumption, which is calculated through the following formula [16]. η= cf1(1+vCD)CD is the coefficient of drag, and is calculated via:CD=CD0,CR+CD2,CR(CL)2CL is the coefficient of lift, and is calculated via:CL=2mgρv2sAs an aircraft adjusts in its flight path, to avoid regions where contrails are likely to form, the motion and position are calculated by the following equations:x=vcosψcos?(γ)y=vsinψcosγh=vsin(γ)v=1m[Tcosα-D-mgsinγ]ψ=1mv(Lsinθ+Tsinαsinθ)γ=1mv[L+Tsinα-mgcosγ]The variables for the model are horizontal position (x) and (y) and altitude of the aircraft (h), the true airspeed (v), the flight path angle (γ) and the heading angle (ψ). The contrail inputs to the model are the engine thrust (T), the angle of attack (α) and the bank angle (θ). (m) is the mass of the aircraft and (g) the gravitational acceleration. L and D denote respectively the lift and drag forces, which are functions of the state and angle of attack.9.11.1 CO2 Emission ModelThe following mathematical model will be utilized to calculate CO2emissions for a particular flight path:CO2 Emission=f*c,f is the fuel consumed, c is a chemical constant (C02 produced by stoichiometric combustion of known amount of fuel. c= 3.175 kg CO2kg fuel ).9.11.2 Contrail Formation ModelIn order to determine if persistent contrails will be formed, the following formula will be used [3]:RHi=RHw6.0612e18.102T/(249.52+T)6.1162e22.577T/(273.78+T)RHi or relative humidity with respect to ice is a measure which allows the team to determine if and when contrails will form. A value of over 100% means that persistent contrail formation is considered favorable. The value RHw is relative humidity with respect to water, and is obtained from the RAP data [3].In order to estimate the contrail emission from the exhaust, the Schumann (2002) Ice Water Content to RHi will be used:IWCgm-3=ρaXiRHi100-1where ρa is the density of air, Xi is the saturation mixing ratio with respect to ice at the ambient temperature, and RHi is the percentage of relative humidity with respect to ice.10.0 Project Management10.1 BudgetingIt was imperative to perform preliminary research that would give us an idea of the budgeted cost of the entire project, and as it can be expected, labor is the most important component for the cost of the project. Our project employs 4 systems engineers that are responsible for the research and development of direct labor for the system. Each engineer earns an hourly rate of $45.00 times the George Mason University overhead/fringe multiplier of 2.13, for a total cost of $95.74 per engineer.The duration of the project will encompass 38 weeks starting on August 28, 2013 and ending on May 1, 2014. The first part of the project (fall semester) will rely heavily in research and development of the proposed alternatives for the design of the system with a preliminary simulation for the model. The second part of the project (spring semester) will mostly deal with simulation, refinement, and risk analysis for final implementation, and verification of the final recommendation to stakeholders.The planned average amount of hours worked per engineer per week is 15, with the exception of presentations and deliverables to clients, when the average hours per engineer will increase to 20 hours per week. The planned values are broken down into Best Case and Worst Case values. The group has an earned value that is currently higher than both the planned and actual costs. The actual costs are also higher than the planned costs. Preliminary estimates for a worst case plan include 1,457 engineer hours, and a total cost of $139,500 for the project. Preliminary estimates for a best case plan include 730 engineering hours, and a total cost of $69,750 for the project. The following graphic displays the best and worst case planned values, earned value, and actual cost. The following graphic displays CPI vs SPI. The group is at a higher ratio than 1 for both cases.10.2 Work Breakdown Structure and ScheduleThe following is a high level overview of the work breakdown structure (WBS). WBSTask Name1Management2Research3Problem Statement4Needs Statement5Context Analysis6Stakeholder Analysis7System Alternatives8Requirements9CONOPS10Design11Simulation12Results Analysis13Deliverable Preparation14Poster15Youtube Video16Conference PreparationThe following is the project schedule with a gantt chart. Each of the larger tasks in the WBS is broken down into smaller tasks that are shown later in the report. The critical tasks for this project are actually subtasks for the larger tasks, and are not shown in the image below.The following is a more detailed breakdown of the WBS:11.0 References BIBLIOGRAPHY [1] The New York Times, "U.N. Forecasts 10.1 Billion People by Century’s End," 3 May 2011. [Online]. Available: . [Accessed 29 October 2013].[2] N. Richardson, "Aviation, Carbon, and the Clean Air Act," Columbia Environmental Law.[3] D. J. C. A. M. J. J. S. a. D. J. Q. Travis, "US jet contrail frequency changes: influences of jet aircraft flight activity and atmospheric conditions," Int. J. Climatol, p. 27: 621–632. doi: 10.1002/joc.1418, 2007. [4] D. J. A. M. C. R. G. L. Travis, "Regional Variations in U.S. Diurnal Temperature Range for the 11–14 September 2001 Aircraft Groundings: Evidence of Jet Contrail Influence on Climate," J. Climate, vol. 17 , p. 1123–1134, 2004. [5] H. N. a. N. C. Banavar Sridhar, "Aircraft Trajectory Optimization and Contrails Avoidance in the Presence of Winds," Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, vol. 34, no. 5 , pp. 1577-1584, 2011. [6] U. Schumann, "Formation, properties and climatic effects of contrails," Comptes Rendus Physique, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 549-565, 2005. [7] J. H. T. P. ROBERTO PAOLI, "Contrail formation in aircraft wakes," Journal of Fluid Mechanics, vol. 502, pp. 361-373, 2004. [8] B. K. Ulrike Burkhardt, "Process-based simulation of contrail cirrus in a global," JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, vol. 114, pp. ,doi:10.1029/2008JD011491, 2009. [9] J. K. A. R. P. A. D. P. PATRICK MINNIS, "Contrails, Cirrus Trends, and Climate," MINNIS ET AL., vol. 17, pp. 1671-1684, 2004. [10] D. B. P. D. P. F. ANDREW HEYMSFIELD, "CONTRAIL MICROPHYSICS," AMERICAN METEOROLOGICAL SOCIETY, pp. 465-472, 2010. [11] W. K. S. P. F. J. Hermann Mannstein, "CONTRAIL CIRRUS COVERAGE AND RADIATIVE FORCING," Proc. ‘Envisat Symposium, p. 23–27, 2007. [12] K. Sassen, "Contrail-Cirrus and Their Potential for Regional Climate Change," Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, vol. 78, no. 9, pp. 1885-1903, 1997. [13] I. M. K. Geoffrey C. Bower, "MULTI-OBJECTIVE AIRCRAFT OPTIMIZATION FOR MINIMUM COST AND EMISSIONS OVER SPECIFIC ROUTE NETWORKS," 26th INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF THE AERONAUTICAL SCIENCES, 2008. [14] P. Minnis, "CONTRAILS AND CIRRUS CLOUDS," NASA Langley Research Center, 2005. [15] N. Y. C. H. k. N. Banavar Sridhar, "Energy Efficient Contrail Mitigation Strategies for Reducing the Environmental Impact of Aviation," 10th USA/Europe Air Traffic Management Research and Development Semiar (ATM), 2013. [16] N. Y. C. H. K. N. Banavar Sridhar, "Fuel Effecient Strategies for Reducing Contrail Formations in United States Airspace," 29th Digital Avionics Systems Conference, 2010. [17] D. H. L. D. J. G. D. J. D. M. M. I. W. G. I. a. I. Joyce E. Penner, "avaiation and the blobal atmosphere," interngovermental panel on climate change, 1999. [18] S. A. J. C. J. L. H. A. A. Tang, "An Assessment of BADA Fuel Flow Methodologies for In Trail Procedure Evaluation Publication," New South Wales, University of New South Wales. [19] J. T. F. J. K. Kevin E. Trenberth, "Earth's Global Energy Budget," American Meteological Society, p. 314, 2009. [20] "EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency," April 2013. [Online]. Available: .[21] "Federal Aviation Administration," [Online]. Available: . [Accessed September 2013].[22] "Market-Based Measures," International Civil Aviation Organization, [Online]. Available: .[23] M. S. Nolan, Fundamentals of Air Traffic Control, Fifth Edition. [24] "Contrails and Cirrus Clouds from Aviation," Carbon Offset Research & Education, [Online]. Available: .[25] "Introduction to Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Aviation," CORE Carbon Offset Research & Education, [Online]. Available: .[26] "U.S. Air Carrier Traffic Statistics- Domestic Passenger - Revenue Departures Performed (Jan 1996 - Jun 2013)," Research and Innovative Technology Administration, [Online]. Available: .[27] "Airline Fuel Cost and Consumption (U.S. Carriers - Scheduled)," Research and Innovative Technology Administration, [Online]. Available: .[28] "Future Climate Change," United States Environmental Protection Agency, [Online]. Available: . ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download