ACARE goals and DLR-Contributions for Reduction of

Folie 1 CEAS-2007 Rossow

ACARE goalsand DLR-Contributions for Reduction of Aviation Climate Impact

C.-C. Rossow


Outline

Introduction

DLR-Research Topics• Engine• Airframe• Air Traffic Management• Atmospheric Physics

Outlook and Conclusion


World Wide Production of CO2

• Total traffic: ~12% of CO2 emissions• Air traffic: ~ 2% of CO2 emissions• Impact of air traffic will double• Many atmospheric mechanisms still research topics

1.5%12.0%

Home/OfficeWoodsAgricultureWasteEnergyIndustryCars & VansHeavy TrucksSeaAir Traffic

Source: 4th IPCC ReportTotal

Transport


ACARE

Vision 2020, Strategic Research Agenda SRA 1 & 2- Environment- Quality and Affordability- Air Transport System Efficiency- Security- Safety

Goals for the Environment (based on the technological level of 2000)

- Reduction of fuel consumption and CO2 emissions by 50%- Reduction of NOx emissions by 80 %- Reduction of perceived external noise by 50%- Reduction of impact of production, maintenance, and disposal of A/C


Contributions of Industry and Research Community

Today’s aircraft are already very efficient vehicles (A380: ~3-4 liters / pax / 100 km)

Traffic increase requires further improvements (ACARE goals)

Environmental impact of air traffic strongly affected by propulsion technology (fan, turbine, combustion, materials),airframe technology (aerodynamics, structures, systems)air traffic management,physics of the atmosphere

DLR performs research in these fields to reduce environmental impact


Contributions of Industry and Research Community

Potential for fuel burn reduction:

Engines: ~20%

Airframe: ~25%

ATM: ~10%

Source:Jeff Jupp,Mitigating the Environmental Impact of Aviation


Overall engine performance analysis – development of advanced propulsion concepts (increased efficiency, low noise, low emissions)

Development of a high fidelity CFD-code for 3D unsteady aerodynamics, aero-elasticity and aero-acoustics (TRACE)

Source: Rolls-Royce

Engine Technologies – DLR Contributions



UHBR ConceptsImpact of Bypass Ratio (BPR) on engine cruise SFC reduction:

BPR 25: -14.5%BPR 17: -14.2%BPR 12: -11.5%

BPR 25: greater weight and size counteract SFC reductionBPR 17: results in lowest fuel consumption on all flight missionsBPR 12: mission fuel reduction greater than cruise SFC reduction

UH

B 1

.20

UH

B 1

.20

UH

B 1

.20

UH

B 1

.30

UH

B 1

.30

UH

B 1

.30

UH

B 1

.45

UH

B 1

.45

UH

B 1

.45

-16%

-14%

-12%

-10%

-8%

-6%

-4%

-2%

0%3000km 6000km 12000km

Flight Mission Range

Mis

sion

Fue

l [R

educ

tion

vs. R

ef.]

BPR

25

BPR

17

BPR

12

BPR

25

BPR

17

BPR

12

BPR

25

BPR

17

BPR

12


TRACE 3D-Design and Final Geometry of a Geared Fan (BPR = 12)

Fan stage (BLISK Rotor) completed and assembledAero and noise testing starting in 2007 at DLRValidation of geared fan concept and design tools



Engine Technologies – DLR ContributionsLean Combustion for NOx-Reduction

Investigation of RR-D lean burner module with internal staging

Lean piloted burner Ceramic combustor

WHIPOX combustor wall element with effusion cooling


Airframe Technologies – DLR ContributionsDrag Reduction

Source:Geza Schrauf,KATnetKey Aerodynamic TechnologiesFor Aircraft Performance Improvement DLR Flight Physics Research covers all relevant Areas


Mitigate aerodynamic impact of engine-pylon-wing interferenceEstablish configuration-dependent data-base for optimal BPRsDetermine potential/risk of unconventional installations

Engine Airframe Integration

Airframe Technologies – DLR Contributions

EU-ProjectROSAS

EU-ProjectENIFAIR


Hybrid Laminar Flow (HLF, B.L.-Suction)High System Complexity (Proof of Concept)Alternative System DesignsWing and Configuration Design

Natural Laminar Flow (NLF)Wing and Configuration DesignRobustness to Disturbances (Receptivity)Mission Assessment (Speed vs. Fuel)

Operational ParametersAnti-Contamination / De-IcingSurface Quality and Integrity

Airframe Technologies – DLR ContributionsLaminar Flow Control Research at DLR

x/c

Cp_

3D

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

t/c=10.7t/c=11.7t/c=12.7

phi=19°, M=0.74,Re=20 mill, CL=0.72Aerofoils: a9.4_eh (t/c=11.7) and derived

Cp(M=1.3)

Cp*

thick line with trans.thin line without


Airframe Technologies – DLR ContributionsWeight Reduction

Weight Reduction⇓

Fuel Reduction⇓

CO2 Reduction

Costs [%]

Weight [%]

10 20 3010

20

30

-10-20-30-40

-10

-20

-30

New Metal Technologies

Future Fibre Composite Technologies

Today‘s Fibre Composite Technologies

Today‘s Metal Technologies

Challenges

30% Reduction in Structural Weight:15% Reduction in Fuel Consumption (Estimate for 250 PAX, 6500 km configuration with pre-design tool PrADO)

Technology Potential


Airframe Technologies – DLR ContributionsWeight Reduction

Light WeightMaterials

Light WeightStructures

Manufacturing Technology

Ligh

t Wei

ghtD

esig

n

Mat

eria

ls S

cien

ce

Material Requirements

Chain of Research Areas to enable A/C Weight Reduction

DLR Research Portfolio covers complete chain of Research Areas


Air Traffic Management – DLR ContributionsOperational Improvement

Optimization of Air Space Structure to avoid route extensionsReduction of HoldingsUse of efficient Approach and Departure ProceduresAvoid traffic jams at runway heads before take-offOperational TowingUse of on-board fuel cells

Reduction of unnecessary fuel consumption during all flight phases from Gate-to-Gate


Airframe Technologies – DLR ContributionsReduction of Route Extensions

Average route extension in Europe per flight: 48,6 km Additional distance flown in 2006 in Europe: 441 million kmAdditional CO2 Emission of ~ 4%

Example: Route Hamburg – Toulouse

Direct Extensions

TMA Interface Total 2006

Extension (%) 4,0% 1,9% 5,9%

Extension per Flight 32,9 km 15,7 km 48,6 km

Additional Distance 298 M km 143 M km 441 M km

Additional CO2 Emissions 3,2 M t 1,5 M t 4,7 M t

Source: Eurocontrol, Performance Review Report 2006

- Flight on airways vs. “Direct Routing”: 52,8 NM- 2470 Kg CO2 Reduction (6,2%) on a A330-300


Airframe Technologies – DLR ContributionsEfficient Airport Traffic Management

Reduction of time when engines are running on the groundReduction of long departure queues by use of a Departure Manager (DMAN)

Reduction of ~ 5 tons of fuel per hour and runway in high traffic situations

Improved Planning

With DMAN


Conclusions and OutlookEngines: Propfan / Open Rotor Technology

UDF-Test onMD-80

(1987)

‚Re-Inventing the Propeller‘:15-25% SFC-Reduction

Noise, Safety (blade loss)

Engine /Airframe Installation

Reduced Cruise Speed ( M~ 0.75-0.8)


Conclusions and OutlookAirframe: New Configurations

Fuel-EfficientDesign

Low NoiseDesign

Potential and ChallengesBWB: + 20% L/D; - 15% Weight (?!)

Noise: < - 10 dB (fuel burn penalty ?)

Press. Cabin, PAX; S&C; H.L.; Airport

Family concept (+ of Cayley‘s paradigm)

Noise Regulations (dB vs €)

Economical / Ecological BC‘s:

Strong incentive required

BWB: • tanker A/C (mil.)• freight (unmanned ?)• fully laminar flow (?)


Conclusions and OutlookAirframe: Operations

Potential and ChallengesChain of med. flights: -10% to -20% (?)

Aerial Refueling: -10% to - 40% (?)

Formation flights: -10% (?)

Infrastructure (A/P, tanker fleet, etc.)

Flexibility, reliability, vulnerability

Safety (control, redundancy, etc.)

Economical / Ecological BC‘s:

Strong incentive required

Achievable with current technology


Conclusions and Outlook

Today’s air transport system is highly matured and efficient

Drastic system changes require high incentives (economics)

Concrete boundary conditions for design required (ecology)

Global legislation for ATM and ecological targets necessary (politics)

Physics does not make ACARE goals unachievable (John Green)

There are however no low-hanging fruits anymore:

• Continuous research: on-off / on-off switching not efficient

• ‘long-breath’: instead of break-through long (deep) drilling…

• Progress not achievable by pure ‘multidisciplinary assembly’

• Long way from laboratory via demonstration to product


© Airbus S.A.S. 2007

Documents

ACARE goals and DLR-Contributions for Reduction of