Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-25T12:22:01.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Climate functions for the use in multi-disciplinary optimisation in the pre-design of supersonic business jet

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2016

V. Grewe ,
A. Stenke ,
M. Plohr  and
V. D. Korovkin
V. Grewe
Affiliation:
volker.grewe@dlr.de, Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt, Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre, Wessling, Germany
A. Stenke
Affiliation:
Institute for Atmospheric and Climate Science, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
M. Plohr
Affiliation:
Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt, Institut für Antriebstechnik, Köln, Germany
V. D. Korovkin
Affiliation:
Central Institute of Aviation Motors, Moscow, Russia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Mitigation of climate change is a challenge to science and society. Here, we establish a methodology, applicable in multi-disciplinary optimisation (MDO) during aircraft pre-design, allowing a minimisation of the aircraft’s potential climate impact. In this first step we consider supersonic aircraft flying at a cruise altitude between 45kfeet (~13·5km, 150hPa) and 67kfeet (~20·5km, 50hPa). The methodology is based on climate functions, which give a relationship between 4 parameters representing an aircraft/engine configuration and an expected impact on global mean near surface temperature as an indicator for the impact on climate via changes in the greenhouse gases carbon dioxide, water vapour, ozone and methane. These input parameters are cruise altitude pressure, fuel consumption, fuel flow and Mach number. The climate functions for water vapour and carbon dioxide are independent from the chosen engine, whereas the climate functions for ozone and methane depend on engine parameters describing the nitrogen oxide emissions. Ten engine configurations are taken into account, which were considered in the framework of the EU-project HISAC. An analysis of the reliability of the climate functions with respect to the simplified climate-chemistry model AirClim and a detailed analysis of the climate functions is given.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 114 , Issue 1154 , April 2010 , pp. 259 - 269
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2010 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Sausen, R., Isaksen, I., Grewe, V., Hauglustaine, D., Lee, D. S., Myhre, G., Köhler, M. O., Pitari, G., Schumann, U., Stordal, F. and Zerefos, C., Aviation radiative forcing in 2000: An update on IPCC (1999), Meteorol Z, 2005, 14, pp 555–561. An agenda for sustainable future in general and business aviation, COM(2007) 869, Commission of the European communities, Brussels, Belgium, 11 January 2008.Google Scholar
3. Grewe, V., Stenke, A., Ponater, M., Sausen, R., Pitari, G., Iachetti, D., Rogers, H., Dessens, O., Pyle, J., Isaksen, I., Gulstad, L., Søvde, O.A., Marizy, C. and Pascuillo, E., Climate impact of supersonic air traffic: an approach to optimize a potential future supersonic fleet – Results from the EU-project SCENIC, Atmos Chem Phys, 2007, 7, pp 5129–5145.Google Scholar
4. IPCC: Special report on aviation and the global atmosphere, in: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Penner, J.E., Lister, D.H., Griggs, D.J., Dokken, D.J., McFarland, M., Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA, 1999.Google Scholar
5. Grewe, V. and Stenke, A., AirClim: an efficient tool for climate evaluation of aircraft technology, Atmos Chem Phys, 2008, 8, pp 4621–4639.Google Scholar
6. Egelhofer, R., Marizy, C. and Bickerstaff, C., On how to consider climate change in aircraft design, Meteorol Z, 2008, 17, pp 173–179.Google Scholar
7. Grewe, V., Plohr, M., Cerino, G., Di Muzio, M., Deremaux, Y., Galerneau, M., De Saint Martin, P., Chaika, T., Hasselrot, A., Tengzelius, U. and Korovkin, V.D., Estimates of the climate impact of future small-scale supersonic transport aircraft – Results from the HISAC EU-Project, submitted to Aeronaut J, 2009.Google Scholar
8. Korovkin, V., Makarov, V., Galerneau, M. and Coat, P., An approach to performance simulation of variable confluence turbofan for future supersonic civil aircraft in multi fidelity distributed environment, ISABE-2007-1319, Beijing, China, 2007.Google Scholar
9. Walsh, P.P. and Fletcher, P., Gas Turbine Performance, ISBN: 9780632063437, 1998 Google Scholar
10. Schumann, U. (Ed), AERONOX, ISBN-92-826-8281-1, 1995.Google Scholar
11. Dodds, W.J. and Bahr, D.W., Combustion System Design, CHAPTER 4 IN: Mellor, A.M. (Ed), Design of Modern Turbine Combustors, Academic Press Limited, London, 1990.Google Scholar
12. ICAO engine exhaust emission database, www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=702pagetype=90 Google Scholar
13. Döpelheuer, A. and Lecht, M., Influence of engine performance on emission characteristics, Paper 20 in Gas Turbine Engine Combustion, Emissions and Alternative Fuels, RTO MP-14, ISBN 92-837-0009-0, 1999.Google Scholar
14. Tilston, J., Larkman, J., Plohr, M., Döpelheuer, A., Lischer, T. and Zarzalis, N., Future engine cycle prediction and emission study, GRD1-2000-25218 (CYPRESS) Final Publishable Report, QinetiQ, 2003.Google Scholar
15. Stenke, A., Dameris, M., Grewe, V. and Garny, H., Implications of Lagrangian transport for coupled chemistry-climate simulations, Atmos Chem Phys, 2009, 9, pp 5489–5504.Google Scholar
16. Stenke, A., Grewe, V. and Pechtl, S., Do supersonic aircraft avoid contrails? Atmos Chem Phys, 2008, 8, pp 955–967.10.5194/acp-8-955-2008Google Scholar
17. Pitari, G., Iachetti, D., Mancini, E., Montanaro, V., De Luca, N., Marizy, C., Dessens, O., Rogers, H., Pyle, J., Grewe, V., Stenke, A., and Søvde, O.A., Radiative forcing from particle emissions by future supersonic aircraft, Atmos Chem Phys, 2008, 8, pp 4069–4084.Google Scholar