Presented to: REDAC Subcommittee on Environment

By:	Laszlo WindhofferOffice of Environment & EnergyFederal Aviation Administration

Date:  	August 2, 2017

Update on Technology Assessment Efforts 

ASCENT Project 10

Aircraft Technology Modeling and Assessment

ASCENT Project 37

CLEEN II Assessment

Federal Aviation

Administration

‹#›

Federal Aviation

Administration

Outline

ASCENT Project 10 (A10)

Phase I

Overview, Objectives & Approach

Outcomes of Workshops

Example Results

Phase II

Overview, Workplan & Schedule

ASCENT Project 37 (A37)

Progress

Technologies

‹#›

Federal Aviation

Administration

ASCENT 10 Overview: Phase I

Objectives: 

Define a broad set of future scenarios, out to 2050, that bound the demand for future aviation activity 

Evaluate scenarios to capture effects of technology and mission specification changes on fuel burn, emissions, and noise

Provide modeling and assessment mechanism for aircraft technology

Approach:

Develop harmonized fleet assumptions for use in future fleet assessments

Get input from industry, government and academia through workshops

Model vehicles expected to enter fleet through 2050

Leverage previous technology and vehicle modeling work from CLEEN, PARTNER, and NASA programs 

Fill gaps as necessary for scenarios developed

Perform vehicle and fleet level assessments

‹#›

Federal Aviation

Administration

Overview of the Scope of the last few years

Project served initially as follow-on to CLEEN Technology modeling under PARTNER

Main goal was to create set of scenarios for technology assessment that could be applied across tools and analysis needs

Team Approach to Tasks
| Objectives |                                          | Georgia Tech                                                                              | Stanford                                                                                                                | Purdue                                                                           |
|------------|------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 1          | Harmonize Fleet Assumptions              | Lead process, coordinate industry, government participation, provide basis for discussion | Support assumptions definition, provide expert knowledge                                                                | Support assumptions definition, provide expert knowledge                         |
| 2          | Advanced Vehicle and Technology Modeling | Use EDS for public domain technology modeling,Provide tech models to Stanford and Purdue  | Input into public domain technology modeling                                                                            | Develop cost, fuel burn, block hour values for aircraft models from Georgia Tech |
| 3          | Vehicle and Fleet Assessments            | Perform vehicle and fleet level assessments using GREAT and ANGIM                         | Provide trade factors for mission specification changes using SUAVE.  Provide tech factors for some tech modeled in (2) | Fleet-level assessments using FLEET                                              |

EDS – Environmental Design Space

GREAT – Global and Regional Environmental Analysis Tool

ANGIM –Airport Noise Grid Integration Method

SUAVE – Stanford University Aerospace Vehicle Environment

FLEET – Fleet-Level Environmental Evaluation Tool

‹#›

Federal Aviation

Administration

Overview of tasks and distribution of responsibilities to team members

Want to emphasize team effort

Project Focus Areas

Ascent 10 Team

Fleet Benefits Assessment

Use each university’s analysis tools to understand fleet level implications of advanced technology/mission spec. changes on

Fuel Burn

Emissions

Noise

Technology Assessment Assumptions Setting

Work with broader community to define a standardized set of technology and fleet modeling assumptions for future benefits assessments

Subsystem Technology 

Impacts

Technology 

Effects on 

Vehicle

Fleet Level Implications

‹#›

Federal Aviation

Administration

How do we go form subsystem technology impacts to vehicle level to fleet level?

Need to set common assumptions at each level and understand implications

5

Workshops

‹#›

Federal Aviation

Administration

Held 2 workshops each for Fleet and Technology assumptions

Broad participation from academia, industry, government

Main purpose was to generate input to help setup fleet scenario definitions

6

Fleet Workshop #1

Fleet Workshop #2

Tech Workshop #1

Tech Workshop #2

Fleet Scenario Definitions Setting

Goal: Determine what defines a world view or scenario 

Feedback on descriptors (variables, ranges, and importance)

Bring forward initial worldviews for comment

Goal: Select specific worldviews/scenarios of interest

Feedback on technology insertion opportunities and their timing

Feedback on worldviews and scenarios

Goal: Identify technology maturation and availability for a broad range of technology areas

Feedback on examples of 1st/2nd/3rd generation technologies

Goal: Consensus on technology evolution scenarios

Feedback on specific technology impacts and maturation rates

Technology Workshop Outcomes

‹#›

Federal Aviation

Administration

This is an example of the technology workshop results

Example of one specific technology, created much larger list

Each technology by area, impact ranges, time line, possible actual examples and what it applies to

7

Aircraft Technology

Energy Price

Economic Growth

Fleet Workshop Outcomes

* ‘Frozen technology’ scenario not shown above

Also evaluate with mission specification changes

‹#›

Federal Aviation

Administration

Fleet Scenario “tree”

Each column defines one specific setting at low/nominal/high settings with colors

The right most columns shows the resulting scenarios that the team down selected

There are additional scenarios, but they serve as reference scenarios and don’t apply to being able to explore potential outcome range extremes

8

Scenarios

Nominal

Nominal

Nominal

Current Trends “Best Guess”

High

Nominal

Nominal

Current Trends + High R&D

Low

High

Environmental Bounds “Low”

Low

High

Low

Environmental Bounds “High”

High

Nominal

High Demand + High R&D

Nominal

High Demand + Low R&D

Nominal

Low Demand + High R&D

Low

Nominal

Low Demand +Low R&D

World View Scenarios Assumptions
|                                                   | Demand/Economic Factors |                      |                            |                                   |                                     |                                                                |                              |  | Fleet Evolution Factors  |                     |                     |  | Aircraft Technology Factors                                  |             |                |                               |
|---------------------------------------------------|-------------------------|----------------------|----------------------------|-----------------------------------|-------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------|--|--------------------------|---------------------|---------------------|--|--------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|----------------|-------------------------------|
|                                                   | GDP Growth (%/year)     | Energy Price ($/bbl) | Population Growth (%/year) | International Trade (%/year Asia) | Industry Competetiveness (cent/ASM) | Airport Noise Limitations (% airports noise limited in future) | Cost of CO2 Emissions ($/MT) |  | Fleet Evolution Schedule | Aircraft Retirement | Production Capacity |  | Amount and Speed of Technology R&D Investment (relative) | TRL 9 Dates | Benefit Levels | Mission Specification Changes |
| Current Trends "Best Guess"                       |                         |                      |                            |                                   |                                     |                                                                |                              |  |                          |                     |                     |  |                                                              |             |                |                               |
| Current Trends + High R&D                     |                         |                      |                            |                                   |                                     |                                                                |                              |  |                          |                     |                     |  |                                                              |             |                |                               |
| Current Trends + High R&D + Mission Spec.     |                         |                      |                            |                                   |                                     |                                                                |                              |  |                          |                     |                     |  |                                                              |             |                |                               |
| Current Trends Frozen Tech - In-Production Only   |                         |                      |                            |                                   |                                     |                                                                |                              |  |                          |                     |                     |  |                                                              |             |                |                               |
| Environmental "Bounds" - Low                      |                         |                      |                            |                                   |                                     |                                                                |                              |  |                          |                     |                     |  |                                                              |             |                |                               |
| Environmental "Bounds" - High                     |                         |                      |                            |                                   |                                     |                                                                |                              |  |                          |                     |                     |  |                                                              |             |                |                               |
| High Demand (Including Global) + High R&D     |                         |                      |                            |                                   |                                     |                                                                |                              |  |                          |                     |                     |  |                                                              |             |                |                               |
| High Demand (Including Global) + Low R&D      |                         |                      |                            |                                   |                                     |                                                                |                              |  |                          |                     |                     |  |                                                              |             |                |                               |
| Low Demand (Including Global) + High R&D      |                         |                      |                            |                                   |                                     |                                                                |                              |  |                          |                     |                     |  |                                                              |             |                |                               |
| Low Demand (Including Global) + Low R&D       |                         |                      |                            |                                   |                                     |                                                                |                              |  |                          |                     |                     |  |                                                              |             |                |                               |
| Very High Demand with Noise Limits - Low R&D  |                         |                      |                            |                                   |                                     |                                                                |                              |  |                          |                     |                     |  |                                                              |             |                |                               |
| Very High Demand with Noise Limits - High R&D |                         |                      |                            |                                   |                                     |                                                                |                              |  |                          |                     |                     |  |                                                              |             |                |                               |
| Demand/Economic Factors                                        | Min                | Nominal          | Max       |
|----------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------|------------------|-----------|
| GDP Growth (%/year)                                            | 1.8                | 2.8              | 4         |
| Energy Price ($/bbl)                                           | 41                 | 77               | 181       |
| Population Growth (%/year)                                     | 0.45               | 0.58             | 0.68      |
| International Trade (%/year Asia)                              | 3.3                | 4.3              | 5.9       |
| Industry Competetiveness (cent/ASM)                            | 12                 | 12               | 12        |
| Airport Noise Limitations (% airports noise limited in future) | 4                  | 25               | 95        |
| Cost of CO2 Emissions ($/MT)                                   | 0                  | 21               | 85        |
|                                                                |                    |                  |           |
| Fleet Evolution Factors                                        |                    |                  |           |
| Fleet Evolution Schedule                                       | Single Aisle First | Twin Aisle First |           |
| Aircraft Retirement                                            | Early              | Nominal          | Late      |
| Production Capacity                                            | Limits             | No Limits        |           |
|                                                                |                    |                  |           |
| Aircraft Technology Factors                                    |                    |                  |           |
| Amount and Speed of Technology R&D Investment (relative)   | 0                  | 1.365            | 1.71      |
| TRL 9 Dates                                                    | Early              | Medium           | High      |
| Benefit Levels                                                 | None               | Medium           | High      |
| Mission Specification Changes                                  |                    | None             | Yes (CSR) |

View descriptors become inputs to fleet model

Stakeholder-generated worldviews also useful for future studies

‹#›

Federal Aviation

Administration

The “noise limits” is in red because GREAT and FLEET have the largest difference for these scenarios.

In the result section, I use “noise limits” scenarios to show the different simulation results between FLEET and GREAT

9

Results Across Scenarios: Demand

Significant uncertainty in out years is now bounded by comprehensive ASCENT 10 studies

‹#›

Federal Aviation

Administration

This shows the range of actual demand in seat miles across all scenarios.

Results Across Scenarios: Relative CO2

Technology

Demand

Technology improvements lower emission

Demand drives up emissions

Noise constraint limits AC operations

‹#›

Federal Aviation

Administration

This shows the relative CO2 results for all scenarios

The top row shows the variation by technology level – aka how fast and how much better aircraft become available

The bottom row shows the variation by demand. The very high level is less than high due to other factors reducing emissions, such as noise constraints.

Results Across Models: Relative CO2

General trends in both models are similar.

Technology

Demand

Difference results between models due to different assumptions

Different ways to modelNoise Limits

‹#›

Federal Aviation

Administration

The top row shows the variation by technology level – aka how fast and how much better aircraft become available

The bottom row shows the variation by demand. The very high level is less than high due to other factors reducing emissions, such as noise constraints.

12

Project Outcomes

Successfully completed Project 10 initial intent

Suggested Fleet Scenario inputs for future assessment activities

Technology evolution scenarios for future assessment activities

Conducted long term technology assessment for defined fleet and technology scenarios

Understand bounding of technology and demand on future fleet-wide environmental impacts

Comparison of similarities and differences using multiple fleet evaluation tools (FLEET and GREAT)

Provided framework for deeper investigation of sensitivities to demand and technology drivers

Final ASCENT 10 Phase I report is being finalized

‹#›

Federal Aviation

Administration

A10 Overview: Phase II Supersonic Aircraft

Primary Objectives:

Assess potential environmental impact of supersonic air travel (domestic & global)

Develop demand and forecast through 2050

Analyze existing and future supersonic technologies (e.g. traditional, low sonic boom shaping, etc.)

Provide scenarios with potential changes in fuel burn, CO2, H2O, NOX and noise exposure

Heavily leverage Phase I effort

‹#›

Federal Aviation

Administration

Scope of the project for the coming year

Preliminary analysis of supersonic aircraft impact on environment

Want to leverage prior work 

4 major tasks

ASCENT 10 Supersonic Work Plan

Task 1: Fleet Assumptions & Demand Assessment

Task 2: Preliminary Vehicle-level Impact Assessment

L

Task 4: Fleet-level Impact Assessment

Use A10 Scenarios to identify drivers of supersonic demand for domestic and international (to/from US)

GT/P

Develop estimates of latent demand for supersonic travel as f(performance, cost)

GT/P

User latent demand, perf, and cost to identify airports that could support supersonic travel

GT

Develop daily flight schedules based on bounding scenario, perf, cost

P

GT

Develop estimates of perf and KEI for future technology aircraft

GT

P

Develop multipliers of KEI for aircraft relative to current technology subsonic transports

GT

Develop estimates of performance penalties due to operational restrictions

P

GT

Develop estimates of likely operating altitudes

GT

P

Develop estimates of points of highest # of daily overflights and using estimates of boom overpressure, predict maximum daily exposure

GT

Develop estimates of performance and key environmental indicators (KEI) for current tech aircraft from prior studies

GT

Fleet estimates for fleet of supersonic aircraft

GT/P

Estimate water vapor at likely cruise altitudes

GT/P

Estimate LTO NOx

GT/P

Estimate en-route NOx

GT/P

Estimate scaling factors of arrival and departure noise (DNL) at affected airports

GT

P

Estimate relative impact compared to subsonic for KEI

GT/P

Task Description

LEAD

SUPPORT

LEDGEND

Task 3: AEDT & EDS Vehicle Definitions

Test current version of AEDT ability to analyze existing supersonic models

GT

Test future supersonic vehicle AEDT definitions in AEDT

GT

Develop future supersonic vehicle EDS definitions

GT

‹#›

Federal Aviation

Administration

Breakdown of the 4 tasks by Lead/Support university

15

Schedule

Year 1 Tasks:

Fleet Assumptions and Demand

Identify drivers of demand

Develop estimates of demand using developed scenarios

Develop flight schedules/route possibilities

Preliminary Vehicle Environmental Impact Prediction

Develop Estimates of Key Environmental Indicators (KEI) for future supersonic aircraft

Develop multipliers of KEI for supersonic relative to subsonic

AEDT Vehicle Definition

Test AEDT and provide suggestions

Fleet Impact Assessment

Estimate fuel burn for fleet of supersonic aircraft

Estimate water vapor emissions at likely cruise altitudes

Estimate LTO NOX

‹#›

Federal Aviation

Administration

Planned schedule of all 4 tasks for the first year

Have developed multi year plan for more in-depth analysis and other aspects

16

Schedule

Year 2:

International scope version of domestic year 1 work

Year 3+:

AEDT and EDS development of future supersonic vehicles

Detailed fleet-level impacts assessment 

‹#›

Federal Aviation

Administration

Planned schedule of all 4 tasks for the first year

Have developed multi year plan for more in-depth analysis and other aspects

17

ASCENT 37 – CLEEN II Assessment

Modelling process: 

Exchange of proprietary data with CLEEN II companies to accurately represent technologies at subsystem and vehicle level

Vehicle and fleet-level assessment of CLEEN II and other complementary technologies impacts to fuel burn, emissions, and noise

More involvement by FAA with in-house use of tools. Divide and conquer modeling with GT to cover 8 companies. 

Progress to date:

Georgia Tech has almost completed Aurora modelling, report coming soon

Georgia Tech working with GE-MESTANG to obtain initial data for simulations

FAA made significant progress on simulations:

GE-FMS Optimum Cruise:  Completed initial calculations and sent results to GE

Delta Leading Edge Protective Coating Simulations: Conducted initial simulations

Single vehicle

Aircraft fleet

‹#›

Federal Aviation

Administration

The ASCENT 37 project is a simulation effort of the benefits of the key technologies that the OEMs are employing.  These key technologies are designed to reduce fuel burn, NOx emissions and aircraft noise generation.  

Steps taken in the 2016-2017 year towards the simulation effort are:

Exchanging proprietary data with CLEEN II companies so can simulate their vehicles and fleet benefits accurately

Conducting simulations of the key technologies on a single vehicle as well as on a fleet of aircraft

FAA is more involved with modeling of the 8 companies.

Additionally the progress achieved are:

Georgia Tech almost completed the Aurora modelling and the report is coming soon

Georgia Tech is working with GE-MESTANG to get data.

FAA has made significant progress on simulating the key technologies below:

GE-FMS Optimum Cruise

FAA has completed initial baseline vehicle calculations and sent results to OEM

For the Delta Leading Edge Protective Coating Simulations:

FAA has, with Georgia Tech assistance, conducted initial fuel burn savings simulations

18

UTAS Thrust Reverser

CLEEN II Technologies being Modeled

Aurora Flight Sciences: D8 Subsonic Transport Aircraft

Boeing: Structurally Efficient Wing (SEW)

Delta Tech Ops/MDS Coating Technologies/America’s Phenix:                   

Leading Edge Protective Coating for Turbofan Blades

GE: TAPS III Combustor

GE: FMS Technologies

GE: More Electric Systems and Technologies for Aircraft in the Next Generation (MESTANG) 

Honeywell: Compact Combustor System

Honeywell: Advanced Turbine Blade Outer Air Seal (BOAS) System

Rolls Royce: Advanced RQL Low NOx Combustion System

Pratt & Whitney: High Pressure Compressor Aero-Efficiency Techs

Pratt & Whitney: High Pressure Turbine Aero-Efficiency & Durability Techs

UTAS: Thrust Reverser Technology

Boeing  SEW

Coated

Uncoated

Delta  Tech Ops / MDS / America’s Phenix

GE TAPS III

Rolls Royce – RQL Combustor

Pratt & Whitney HPC & HPT

Honeywell

Advanced Turbine BOAS

Compact Combustor System

Aurora D8 Fuselage

‹#›

Federal Aviation

Administration

This slide shows the list of technologies that are being developed under CLEEN II

Aurora, Boeing and Delta are working on structural design improvements and aircraft weight reductions

GE TAPS III, Honeywell, Rolls Royce and Pratt & Whitney have aircraft engine compressor, combustor or turbine design changes

UTAS, FE-FMS and GE-MESTANG are special technologies. 

19

Laszlo Windhoffer

Emissions Division

Federal Aviation Administration Office of Environment and Energy

Email: laszlo.windhoffer@faa.gov

‹#›

Federal Aviation

Administration

# image2.jpeg

# image12.png

# image5.png

# image6.emf

# image7.png

# image8.jpeg

# image9.png

# image10.emf

# image11.png

# image13.png

# image14.emf

# image15.emf

# image16.emf

# image17.emf

# image18.emf

# image19.jpeg

# image20.jpeg

# image28.png

# image29.png

# image21.png

# image22.jpeg

# image23.png

# image24.jpeg

# image25.png

# image26.png

# image27.png

# image30.jpeg

# image1.jpeg