Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T10:26:41.741Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Applying a distributed collaborative MDAO environment to study the power matching of the propulsion system and the on-board electrified systems for advanced regional and short- to medium-range jetliners

Part of: 31st Congress of The International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences (ICAS)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 October 2019

M. Fioriti ,
A. Mirzoyan Open the ORCID record for A. Mirzoyan [Opens in a new window]  and
A. Isianov
M. Fioriti*
Affiliation:
Politecnico di Torino, Turin, Italy
A. Mirzoyan
Affiliation:
Central Institute of Aviation Motors, Moscow, Russia
A. Isianov
Affiliation:
Central Institute of Aviation Motors, Moscow, Russia
*
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper deals with the study of the power matching of the propulsion system and on-board systems changing the on-board systems’ electrification level. In particular, four system architectures have been studied, each one with a different level of electrification starting from the More Electric Aircraft (MEA) to the All Electric Aircraft (AEA) systems. The mass and the power requirement of each system architectures have been analysed together with the change in engine specific fuel consumption. Then, these results have been used to quantify the influences of engine and systems power matching to the entire aircraft. In particular, the beneficial effect of system electrification has been evaluated as an increment of aircraft range. Moreover, two reference aircraft – a regional jet and a short/medium range liner – have been selected to understand the variance of the power matching changing aircraft dimensions and mission range. The study is carried out using a distributed and collaborative Multi-Disciplinary Design Analysis and Optimization (MDAO) environment. The results show a beneficial effect of systems electrification on systems mass and engine specific fuel consumption. At aircraft level, the results point out an increment of aircraft range up to 7.7% with a different trend for the two studied cases.

Keywords

Power matchingMore electric aircraftOn-board system architectureEngine performanceMulti-Disciplinary Design Analysis and Optimization.
Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 123 , Issue 1268 , October 2019 , pp. 1618 - 1638
Copyright
© Royal Aeronautical Society 2019 

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.)

Footnotes

A version of this paper was presented at the 31st ICAS Congress of the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences in Belo Horizonte, Brazil in September 2018.

References

REFERENCES

Prakasha, P.S., Boggero, L., Fioriti, M., Aigner, B., Ciampa, P.D., Anisimov, K., Savelyev, A., Mirzoyan, A. and Isianov, A. Collaborative system of systems multidisciplinary design optimization for civil aircraft: AGILE EU project, 18th AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization Conference, Denver, Colorado, US, 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prakasha, P.S., Della Vecchia, P., Ciampa, P.D., Ciliberti, D., Charbonnier, D., Jungo, A., Fioriti, M., Boggero, L., Mirzoyan, A., Anisimov, K., Zhang, M. and Voskuij, M. Model based collaborative design & optimization of blended wing body aircraft configuration: AGILE EU project, AIAA, ed.: 18th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference, Atlanta, Georgia, US, 2018, 1–27.Google Scholar
Berlowitz, I. All/More electric aircraft engine & airframe systems implementation, The 9th Israeli Symposium on Jet Engines and Gas Turbines, 2010.Google Scholar
Jones, R.I. The more electric aircraft—assessing the benefits, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 2002, 216, (5), pp 259–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiesa, S., Farfaglia, S., Fioriti, M. and Viola, N. Design of all electric secondary power system for future advanced medium altitude long endurance unmanned aerial vehicles, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 2012, 226, (10), pp 1255–1270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cronin, M.J. All-electric vs conventional aircraft: The production/operational aspects, Journal of Aircraft , 1983, 20, (6), pp 481–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scholz, D. Aircraft Systems Overview - Greening of Secondary Power Systems, SWAFEA-Sustainable Way for Alternative Fuels and Energy for Aviation, April 2009, Brussels.Google Scholar
Chiesa, S. and Fioriti, M. UAV logistic support definition. In: Handbook of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, Springer, 2015, Netherlands, pp 2565–2600.Google Scholar
Chakraborty, I. and Mavris, D.N. Integrated assessment of aircraft and novel subsystem architectures in early design, AIAA SciTech , 2016, 1, pp 215–240.Google Scholar
Fioriti, M., Boggero, L., Corpino, S., Isyanov, A., Mirzoyan, A., Lombardi, R. and D’Ippolito, R. Automated selection of the optimal on-board systems architecture, 18th AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization Conference, Denver, Colorado, US, 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinnet, M. 787 no-bleed systems: Saving fuel and enhancing operational efficiencies. Aero Quarterly QTR_04 | 07, 2007, 06–11.Google Scholar
Lupelli, L. and Geis, T. A study on the integration of the IP Power Offtake system within the Trent 1000 turbofan engine.Master Thesis, 2012.Google Scholar
Agile H2020 Project, Research. Available at: https://www.agile-project.eu/ Google Scholar
Braunschweig, T.U. Preliminary Aircraft Design and Program, Optimization, Simulations- werkzeuge. Available at: https://www.tu-braunschweig.de/ifl/simulationswerkzeuge/prado Google Scholar
Alzubbi, A., Ndiaye, A., Mahdavi, B., Guibault, F., Ozell, B. and Trepanier, J.Y. On the use of JAVA and RMI in the development of a computer framework for MDO, 8th AIAA Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization, Long Beach, California,US, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
openMDAO. Available at: http://openmdao.org/ Google Scholar
The, DAKOTA Project. Available at: http://dakota.sandia.gov Google Scholar
Ciampa, P.D. and Nagel, B. Towards the 3rd generation MDO collaborative environment, ICAS, 2016.Google Scholar
Prakasha, P.S., Ciampa, P.D., Boggero, L. and Fioriti, M. Assessment of airframe-subsystems synergy on overall aircraft performance in a collaborative design, 17th AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization Conference, Washington, DC, US, 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Common Language for Aircraft Design. (Accessed 2019). Available at: http://cpacs.de Google Scholar
VAMPzero - Conceptual Design for the Needs of MDO. Available at: https://software.dlr.de/p/vampzero/home/ Google Scholar
Boggero, L., Fioriti, M., Corpino, S. and Ciampa, P.D. On-board systems preliminary sizing in an overall aircraft design environment, 17th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference, AIAA AVIATION Forum, Denver, Colorado, US, 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lefebvre, T., Bartoli, N., Dubreuil, S., Panzeri, M., Lombardi, R., D’Ippolito, R., Della Vecchia, P., Nicolosi, F., Ciampa, P.D., Anisomov, K. and Savelyev, A. Methodological enhancements in MDO process investigated in the AGILE European project, 18th AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization Conference, Denver, Colorado, US, 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lammering, T., Franz, K., Risse, K., Hoernschemeyer, R. and Stumpf, E. Aircraft cost model for preliminary design synthesis, 50th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, Nashville, Tennessee, US, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurzke, J. Gas turbine cycle design methodology: A comparison of parameter variation with numerical optimization, Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, 1999, 121, (1), pp 6–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiesa, S., Di Meo, G.A., Fioriti, M., Medici, G. and Viola, N. ASTRID – Aircraft on board systems sizing and trade-off analysis in initial design. Research and Education in Aircraft Design–READ, 2012.Google Scholar
Fioriti, M., Boggero, L., Corpino, S., Prakasha, P.S., Ciampa, P.D. and Nagel, B. The effect of sub-systems design parameters on preliminary aircraft design in a multidisciplinary design environment, Transportation Research Procedia , 2018, 29, pp 135–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van den Bossche, D. The A380 flight control electrohydrostatic actuators, achievements and lessons learnt, ICAS, Hamburg, Germany, 2006.Google Scholar
Abdel-Hafez, A. Power Generation and Distribution System for a More Electric Aircraft - A review. Dr. Ramesh Agarwal, ISBN: 978-953-51-0150-5, Intech, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Avery, C.R., Burrow, S.G. and Mellor, P.H. Electrical Generation and Distribution for the More Electric Aircraft, In 42nd International Universities Power Engineering Conference, IEEE, Glasgow, UK, 2007, pp 1007–1012.10.1109/UPEC.2007.4469088CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomasella, F., Fioriti, M., Boggero, L. and Corpino, S. Method for estimation of electrical wiring interconnection systems in preliminary aircraft design, AIAA Journal of Aircraft , 2019, 56, (3), pp 1259–1263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar