EFFICIENCY MEETS SKY .g (ü Technische -Ol Universität Berlin TU Berlin [n Setr. F2 Marchstraße | | 12-14 | 10587 Bertin Fakultät V Verkehrs- und Maschinensysteme lnstitut für Luft- und Raumfahrt German Aerospace Center (DLR) FG Luftfahrzeugbau lnstitute of System Architectures in Aeronautics und Leichtbau Aircraft Design & System lntegration clo ZAL TechCenter Fachgebietsleiter Hein-Saß-Weg 22 Prof. Dr.-lng. D-21129 Hamburg Andreas Bardenhagen z.H. Dr.-lng. Johannes Hartmann Sekretariat F2 Raum F 126 Marchstraße 1 2-1 4 '10587 Berlin Berlin,28.06.018 Tele{on +49 (0)30 314-28538 Telefax +49 (0)30 314-22955 [email protected] Joint NASA / DLR Aeronautics Design Ghallenge // Selbstständ ig keitserkläru ng Team Assistenz im Sekr. F2 M.A. Anke Heymann Sehr geehrter Herr Hartmann, Telefon +49 (0)30 31 4-22954 Telefax +49 (0)30 314-22955 [email protected] hiermit bestätige ich, dass die angefertigte Arbeit mit dem Thema: Unser Zeichen ,,Efficiency meets Sky" F2 Bh/He selbstständig sowie ohne unerlaubte fremde Hilfe und ausschließlich unter Verwendung der aufgeführten Quellen von den Studierenden o Beck, Ramon r Bieler, Juri o Borsutzki, Simon o Cabac, Yannic o Dehmel, Jiri o Khosravi, Raman o Klünder, Arthur o Kracke, Lennart o Lopez Milan, Jorge o Roscher, Stephanie o Rüthnik, Pascal angefertigt wurde Mit freu Grüßeq,.. - BERLIN '.r. ,,, UN IVERSITAT für Luft- und Raunrfahrt und Lelohtbqu ,;:,X l1.,'ourr r.n,n > Seite 1/1 t_qo4- & ,,.9r Berliner Volksbank I IBAN DE69 1009 0000 8841 0150 03 | BIC BEVODEBB 'rr 1,. www.tu-berlin.de w Table of Contents List of Figures ........................................... III List of Tables ............................................ IV Nomenclature ........................................... V Challengers ............................................. VIII 1 The Need for Change .................................... 1 2 The Aircraft of Tomorrow ................................. 2 2.1 Potential of Future Markets . .2 2.2 Reference Aircraft . .2 3 Ultra-efficient Design .................................... 4 3.1 Blended-Wing Configuration . .4 3.2 Propulsion System . .8 3.3 Fuel System . .9 3.4 Aircraft Cabin Design for Global Market . 12 4 Aircraft Characteristics ................................... 15 4.1 Mission Profile . 15 4.2 Mass determination . 15 4.3 Performance . 17 5 Feasibility ........................................... 20 5.1 Assimilation to Existing Systems . 20 5.2 Airport Infrastructure . 21 5.3 Consideration of Emergency Cases . 21 6 Sustainability ......................................... 22 6.1 Energy Consumption . 22 6.2 Environmental Impacts . 23 6.3 Direct Operating Costs . 24 7 Conclusion ........................................... 25 Appendix .............................................. XXV References .............................................. XLVIII II | Efficiency meets Sky List of Figures 3.1 Sideview rendered . .4 3.2 Airfoil optimization flowchart . .5 3.3 Polar of the center-body-airfoil . .5 3.4 Optimized airfoil . .6 3.5 BWB polars calculated in XFLR5 . .6 3.6 Pressure distribution and streamlines at cruise conditions . .7 3.7 Test engine NOx against power output [28] . .8 3.8 Cabin layout . 13 3.9 Initial simulation configuration . 14 3.10 Configuration during evacuation . 14 4.11 Design mission profile . 15 4.12 Thrust matching between take off and cruise . 19 5.13 Ground handling . 21 6.14 Combustion products of kerosene and hydrogen [16] . 23 List of Figures| III List of Tables 2.1 Specific transport energy of relevant aircraft . .3 2.2 B747-400ER design data [17] . .3 3.3 Aircraft geometric parameters . .7 3.4 Properties of Jet-A Fuel, LH2 and LCH4 .........................9 3.5 Geometric parameters . 12 3.6 Evacuation simulation data . 14 4.7 Final thrust matching data . 18 4.8 Final thrust matching data . 20 5.9 Service positions . 20 IV | Efficiency meets Sky Nomenclature Indizes Symbol Designation aft After Center Body CL Climb CR Cruise D Drag equi Total Resistant f Fibre fuse Fuselage g Gravity Force gas Gaseous H2 Hydrogen ICA Initial Cruise Altitude in Internal K Kerosene L Lift LD Landing MTOM Maximum Take Off Mass neo New Engine Option R Range to Take Off w Wetted Nomenclature| V Abbreviations Abbreviation Designation ACAP Aircraft Characteristics for Airport and Maintenance Planning ADHF Adaptive Dropped Hinge Flap ATM Air Traffic Management BLI Boundary Layer Ingestion BPR Bypass Ratio BWB Blended Wing Body BYOD Bring Your Own Device CAD Computer Aided Design CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics CS Certification Specifications DOC Direct Operating Costs EFB Engine Feature Benefit EIS Entry Into Service ER Extended Range FOD Foreign Object Damage FFF Fuel Fraction Factors FRB Fuel Reduction Benefits FST Full-Size-Trolley GDP Gross Domestic Product GE General Electric GTF Geared Turbofan GVPTF Geared Variable Pitch Turbofan GWP Global Warming Potential HST Half-Size-Trolley ICA Initial Cruise Altitude ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization IFFF Improved Fuel Fraction Factors IRA Intercooled Recuperated Aero Engine ISA ICAO Standard Atmosphere LR Long Range LTO Landing and Take Off Cycle MLI Multi Layer Insulation NO Nitrogen Oxides PAX Passengers pkm passenger kilometer PW Pratt & Whitney RFFF Roskam Fuel Fraction Factors VI | Efficiency meets Sky RFI Radiative Forcing Index RPK Revenue Passenger Kilometer SET Specific Excess Thrust SFC Specific Fuel Consumption SMK Seat Mile Kilometers SRIA Strategic Research and Innovation Agenda STE Specific Transport Energy SU Standard Unit TFFF Taxi Fuel Fraction Factor TOFL Take Off Field Length TRL Technological Readiness Level UHC Unburned Hydrocarbons VLA Very Large Aircraft VPF Variable Pitch Fan Nomenclature| VII Challengers VIII | Efficiency meets Sky 1 The Need for Change "Beim Erdöl liegt die Zukunft hinter uns." (Josef Auer, Analyst) [1] Before the existence of modern civilization, the atmospheric concentration of CO2 remained gener- ally constant. Since then the average concentration of carbon dioxide suddenly increased up to 2013 when it surpassed a level of 400 ppm for the first time in recorded history [2]. This manifests itself in an emission of more than 1,100 tonnes of carbon dioxide per second, equal to 35.76 gigatonnes per year (status as of 2016) [3], while only one half is recycled back into the carbon cycle [4]. Although the share of global anthropogenic CO2 emitted by the aviation industry is only 2% [5], it plays an important role in fighting the climate change due to its high radiative forcing index (RFI). This factor takes into account that aside from CO2 air traffic also emits numerous other climate-relevant emissions, like NOx, soot, and contrails into the atmosphere whose warming effects are significantly larger due to output in particularly sensitive, high altitude atmospheric layers. This results in a two to four times greater climate impact of aircraft compared to CO2 emissions alone and under- lines the indispensability of using RFI as a benchmark. Therefore, the aviation sector, as the only artificial emission source at high altitude, has a climate and environmental responsibility to develop sustainable air transportation with almost negligible CO2 input. Although airlines have reduced their fuel consumption in recent years and transport capacity is increasingly decoupled from fuel consumption [6], absolute CO2 emissions have increased as a result of the simultaneously rising traffic volume. With an average annual growth of 5% and a doubling of air traffic every 15 years [7], this is insufficient to achieve aviation’s high-level emission reduction goals defined by NASA and the European Commission in Flightpath 2050 [8] which have been developed to reconcile the future needs of aviation with environmental objectives such as the Paris Agreement [9]. It is the responsibility of mankind to proactively adapt to changing conditions in order to ensure not only environmentally sustainable technology, but also improved operations, efficient infrastructure and adapted economic measures [10]. The component wise improvement of a classic “tube and wing” aircraft configuration may not be able to deliver the required enhancements at aircraft level. Conse- quently, key to meeting ambitious future demands are disruptive configurations and synergistically integrated systems paving the inevitable process of transition. The purpose of this design study is to present a valid preliminary next level aircraft concept with entry into service (EIS) in 2045 using a wide range of promising technologies and leading in a new fuel era. Innovative aircraft operations, the passenger acceptance and possible modifications in the airport infrastructure have to be taken into consideration. To develop a sustainable and successful concept it is mandatory to discover the future markets needs. Therefore the following layout is based on both a market analysis and a technology outlook, taking the availability of technologies, expressed through the Technological Readiness Level (TRL) into account. Due to the analysis the top level requirements of the present aircraft design were de- fined aiming further detailing in the progressive design process to develop suitable solutions. Based on these considerations the reference aircraft is selected. With the help of relevant literature and established calculation methods, several configurations have been elaborated, however, only the fi- nal results refined in several iterations are presented. To validate the integration into the overall air traffic system, the concept is subjected to a feasibility