clean sky 2 joint undertaking · 2018-03-23 · 1/137 clean sky 2 joint undertaking clean sky...

1/137

Clean Sky 2 Joint Undertaking

Clean Sky Programme - DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Document Id N°: Version: 2014 V5 Date: November 24 2014

Filename: CS-GB-2014-12-19 Doc9 CS Development Plan

REVISIONS

Revision History Table

Version n° Issue Date Reason for change

DRAFT V Submitted to the GB

APPLICABLE V1 15/05/2011 Agreement of the GB

DRAFT V2 30/01/2012 To be submitted to the GB for Adoption March 2012

V2 (Adopted) 30/03/2012 Adopted by GB (Signed Letter Chairman in JU)

DRAFT 2013 V3.0 01/11/2012 Integrated First Draft returned to ITD co-ordinators

DRAFT 2013 V3.1 05/11/2012 Submitted to GB Sherpa Group Pre GB-Adoption 13 DEC 2012

FINAL DRAFT 2013 V3.2 31/01/2013 Released to ITD Co-ordinators and POs

FOR_APPROVAL_FINAL 16/04/2013 For GB Approval by Written Procedure April 2013

DRAFT 2013 V3.3 08/11/2013 Released to ITD Co-ordinators and POs

DRAFT 2013 V3.4 11/11/2013 Further revision

FOR_APPROVAL_FINAL V4

15/11/2013 For GB Approval December 2013

Final Version V4 21/11/2013 GB approved on December 2013

DRAFT 2014 V5 24/11/2014 For GB Approval December 2014

2/137

Major changes in the current CSDP

item Para / page

Changes in the Introduction part

Table describing the Year 2000 Technology updated Paragraph 2.5– page 15

Table of Demonstrators updated paragraph 2.6 – page 16

Delay in next TE Assessment Paragraph 3.9 – page 25

Environmental performance assessment modified Paragraph 3.10 – page 27

Changes in the SFWA ITD

Engine assembly and flight test readiness for SAGE 2 shifted to 2020 Paragraph 5.1 – page 36

High Speed Smart Wing Flight Demonstrator shifted in LPA CS2 Paragraph 5.2 - page 38

Beginning of flight test for BLADE demonstrator aircraft shifted to Q4/2016 Paragraph 5.2 – page 38

First flight test for CROR shifted to the end 2020 Paragraph 5.2 – page 39

Completion of CROR test aircraft preliminary design review process shifted Q3/2017 i.e in the Clean Sky 2 LPA programme

Paragraph 5.2 – page 39

Long Term Technology Flight Demonstrator – preparation for the starting of the flight in autumn 2015

Paragraph 5.2 – page 39/40

Updated TRL table Paragraph 5.3 – page 41

Updated Road Map for SFWA ITD (Schedule) Paragraph 5.4 – page 42

Nomenclature in the table ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE TARGETS updated

Paragraph 5.6 - page 43

The TRL for SAGE 1 (CROR) will be limited to 4 Paragraph 5.6 – page 45

SAGE 2 - Critical open rotor technologies will arrive to TRL5 Paragraph 5.6 – page 46

A second funding request for 2.0M€ to cover ONERA for Bizjet innovative afterbody large scale wind tunnel test still pending


Changes in the GRA ITD

Full Scale Ground Demo Test Readiness Review shifted in Q1/2015 instead of Q4/2014


Starting of the NLF wing aerodynamic & aero-elastic Wind tunnel test campaign on Large-Scaled A/C 130 Pax shifted to Q2/2015 with closure in Q4/2015


Starting of the Aerodynamic & Aero-acoustic Wind Tunnel Testing on Large-Scaled A/C 90 Pax shifted to Q3/2015 with closure to Q4/2015


Milestone : Green FMS availability(3rd Release) shifted to Q3/2014 Paragraph 6.2 – page 51

Only GRASMs of Green 90 Pax & Green 130 Pax GTF will be delivered to TE Paragraph 6.2– page 52

New Updated TRL Table (only format) Paragraph 6.3 – page 53

Updated Road Map for GRA ITD and Temporal planning of the domains Paragraph 6.4 – page 55-56

Changes in the GRC ITD

AGF is extended to a flight test activity Paragraph 7.2 – page 63

Optimized passive rotor activity proposed for extension to flight test pending the availability of additional funding


GRC3 - Test plan for the integrated system demonstrator modified Paragraph 7.2 – page 64

GRC4 - Diesel engine tested also in flight Paragraph 7.2 – page 64

GRC5 - Final demonstrations for TS1, TS2 and TS3 will be on EC135 instead of EC145


New Updated TRL Table Paragraph 7.3 – page 66

Updated Road Map for GRC ITD (Schedule) Paragraph 7.4 – page 67

Conceptual r/c environmental forecast and Systems level environmental forecast: both tables updated

Paragraph 7.4 – page 68-69

Changes in the SAGE ITD

Major deliverable on SAGE 6.4 “First Engine Pass To Test” has been shifted to Sept 2015 instead of April 2015. Deliverable “Engine ready to test” shifted to Oct 2015 instead of May 2015


Open Rotor - Activities in SAGE 1 under Clean Sky will deliver low TRL technologies


Previous plan and programme of SAGE 1 cancelled Paragraph 8.2 – page 74

3/137

Completion of Critical Design Review of SAGE 2 shifted to February 2015 Paragraph 8.2 – page 74

SAGE2 demonstrator to the ground test facility before the end of 2015 and ground test foreseen at beginning of 2016 with a TRL 5 target for the engine


Flight test on the Lean Burn demonstrator engine within Clean Sky I timeframes in addition to ground testing


New Updated TRL Table Paragraph 8.3 – page 78

Updated Road Map for SAGE ITD (Schedule) Paragraph 8.4 – page 79

Sub-system Environmental Forecast table updated Paragraph 8.5 – page 82

Changes in the SGO ITD

New Updated TRL Table Paragraph 9.3 – page 87-89

Updated Road Map for SGO ITD (Schedule) Paragraph 9.4 – page 90-92

Environmental forecasting methodology updated Paragraph 9.5 – page 93

Mission & Trajectory Management table updated Paragraph 9.4 – page 94

Changes in the ECO ITD

Cost to completion slightly updated reflecting release of 1m €

Changes in the TE ITD

WP organization modified Paragraph 11.2 – page 110

Reference vs. Clean Sky aircraft and fleet at global level picture updated Paragraph 11.4 – page 113

New part on TRL progress

Updated chapter 13 on MONITORING OF TRL PROGRESS Chapter 13 – page 122

Synthesis of the ITDs data in terms of TRL Paragraph 13.1 – page 124-126

TRL evolution in time Paragraph 13.2 – page 126

TRL level at the present state Paragraph 13.2 – page 127

Annex B reviewed pages 125 - 128

Annex C reviewed pages 12 - 138

4/137

Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 9

1.1 GENERAL OUTLINE ............................................................................................................. 9

1.2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN SCOPE, PURPOSE AND CONTENTS ...................................................... 10

1.3 INTERRELATIONSHIPS AND LINKS WITH OTHER CLEAN SKY DOCUMENTS ............................... 11

2. CLEAN SKY PROGRAMME SCOPE AND STRUCTURE .............................................. 12

2.1 CLEAN SKY PROGRAMME STRUCTURE ................................................................................. 12

2.2 AIRCRAFT ITDS: ................................................................................................................. 13

2.3 TRANSVERSAL ITDS: .......................................................................................................... 13

2.4 TECHNOLOGY EVALUATOR: ................................................................................................. 13

2.5 THE CLEAN SKY CONCEPT AIRCRAFT .................................................................................... 14

2.6 CLEAN SKY DEMONSTRATORS ............................................................................................ 16

2.7 CLEAN SKY TECHNOLOGIES ................................................................................................ 17

2.8 COHERENCE WITH NATIONAL & EUROPEAN PROGRAMMES ................................................... 17

2.9 CLEAN SKY – SESAR COORDINATION ........................................................................ 18

3. ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS OF CLEAN SKY ............................................................ 19

3.1 ACARE SRA GOALS AND CLEAN SKY TECHNOLOGY DOMAINS ............................................ 19

3.2 ORIGINAL CLEAN SKY OBJECTIVES BY ITD (PROGRAMME LAUNCH)...................................... 20

3.3 ORIGINAL CLEAN SKY OBJECTIVES BY AIRCRAFT TYPE (PROGRAMME

LAUNCH) ............................................................................................................................ 20

3.4 ENVIRONMENTAL FORECAST / ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY: GENERAL

APPROACH.......................................................................................................................... 21

3.5 METHODOLOGY OF INTEGRATION OF ITD TECHNOLOGIES ..................................................... 22

3.6 TE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY SUMMARY ......................................................................... 23

3.7 FIRST ASSESSMENTS RESULTS ............................................................................................ 24

3.8 SECOND ASSESSMENT ........................................................................................................ 25

3.9 NEXT ASSESSMENTS (2013-2016) ....................................................................................... 25

3.10 OBJECTIVES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENTS ...................................... 27

4. CLEAN SKY PROGRAMME TECHNICAL PLANNING AND CO-ORDINATION ................................................................................................................... 30

4.1 GENERAL ............................................................................................................................ 30

4.2 TRL GATES ........................................................................................................................ 30

4.3 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN LOGIC ............................................................................................. 31

4.4 BUDGET TO COMPLETION .................................................................................................... 32

5. SFWA ITD ACTIVITIES .................................................................................................... 36

5.1 DEVELOPMENT PHILOSOPHY, TECHNICAL APPROACH AND HIGH-LEVEL

CONTENT ............................................................................................................................ 36

5.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE WORK PACKAGES ............................................................................... 37

5/137

5.3 TECHNOLOGY ROAD MAP.................................................................................................... 41

5.4 SCHEDULE .......................................................................................................................... 42

5.5 FORECAST METHODOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE TARGETS ........................... 43

5.6 ENGINE / AIRFRAME MANUFACTURERS MAIN INTERFACE....................................................... 45

5.7 COST COMMITTED / EXPENDED AND FORECAST COST TO COMPLETION.................................... 46


CONTENT ............................................................................................................................ 48

6.2 DESCRIPTION OF WORK PACKAGES ..................................................................................... 48


6.4 SCHEDULES ........................................................................................................................ 54

6.5 ENVIRONMENTAL FORECAST METHODOLOGY AND PERFORMANCE TARGETS........................... 56

6.6 ENGINE / AIRFRAME MANUFACTURERS MAIN INTERFACE: ..................................................... 58


7 GRC ITD ACTIVITIES ...................................................................................................... 61

7.1 DEVELOPMENT PHILOSOPHY, TECHNICAL APPROACH AND

HIGH-LEVEL CONTENT .................................................................................................. 61

7.2 DETAILED WORK PACKAGES DESCRIPTION .......................................................................... 61


7.4 SCHEDULE .......................................................................................................................... 66


7.6 COST COMMITTED / EXPENDED AND FORECAST COST TO COMPLETION .................................. 69

8. SAGE ITD ACTIVITIES .................................................................................................... 70


CONTENT ............................................................................................................................ 70

8.2 WORK PACKAGES DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................... 73


8.4 SCHEDULE .......................................................................................................................... 78

8.5 ENVIRONMENTAL FORECAST METHODOLOGY AND

PERFORMANCE TARGETS ............................................................................................ 79


9. SGO ITD ACTIVITIES ...................................................................................................... 85


CONTENT ............................................................................................................................ 85



9.4 SCHEDULE .......................................................................................................................... 89



10. ECO ITD ACTIVITIES ...................................................................................................... 96

10.1 DEVELOPMENT PHILOSOPHY, TECHCNICAL APPROACH AND HIGH-LEVEL

CONTENT ............................................................................................................................ 96

6/137



10.4 SCHEDULE .......................................................................................................................... 101



11. TE ACTIVITIES ................................................................................................................. 107

11.1 SCOPE OF TECHNOLOGY EVALUATOR AND TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION .................................... 107


11.3 TECHNICAL APPROACH ........................................................................................................ 109

11.4 TE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................... 110

11.5 PLANNING........................................................................................................................... 112


12. MANAGEMENT OF ITD INTERDEPENDENCIES .......................................................... 114

12.1 MANAGEMENT OF INTERDEPENDENCIES WITHIN THE PROGRAMME......................................... 114

12.2 GLOBAL INTERFACES BETWEEN ITDS .................................................................................. 114

12.3 MANAGEMENT OF KEY INTERFACES: INTERFACE CONTROL DOCUMENTS ................................. 116

13. MONITORING OF TRL PROGRESS ............................................................................... 117

13.1 SYNTHESIS OF THE ITDS TRL LEVELS .................................................................................... 117

13.2 TRL EVOLUTION ................................................................................................................... 119

PART 3: APPENDICES .............................................................................................................. 122

A. ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................................ 123

B. CLEAN SKY CONCEPT AIRCRAFT ............................................................................... 124

B.1 LOW-SPEED BIZJET, TF POWERED: ...................................................................................... 124

B.2 HIGH-SPEED BIZJET, TF POWERED: ..................................................................................... 124

B.3 GRA 90PAX, TP POWERED: ............................................................................................... 124

B.4 GRA 130PAX, GTF POWERED: ........................................................................................... 124

B.5 GRA 130PAX, CROR POWERED: ................................................................................... 125

B.6 GRA 130PAX, A-TF POWERED: ..................................................................................... 125

B.7 SHORT/MEDIUM RANGE (SMR), TURBOFAN POWERED COMMERCIAL

AIRCRAFT ........................................................................................................................... 125

B.8 SHORT/MEDIUM RANGE (SMR), CROR POWERED COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT .......................... 125

B.9 LONG RANGE (LR), 3 SHAFT-TURBOFAN POWERED COMMERCIAL AIRCAFT .......................... 126

B.10 GENERIC SINGLE ENGINE LIGHT (SEL) TURBO-SHAFT POWERED

HELICOPTER ....................................................................................................................... 126

B.11 GENERIC SINGLE ENGINE LIGHT (SEL HELICOPTER, DIESEL POWERED ................................. 126

B.12 GENERIC TWIN ENGINE LIGHT (TEL) TURBO SHAFT POWERED HELICOPTER ......................... 126

B.13 GENERIC TWIN ENGINE MEDIUM (TEM) HELICOPTER ............................................................ 126

B.14 MULTI- ENGINE HEAVY HELICOPTER .................................................................................... 127

B.15 TILT ROTOR AIRCRAFT ........................................................................................................ 127

7/137

C. HIGH LEVEL PLAN FOR TECHNOLOGY UPTAKE IN TE ASSESSMENTS ............................................................................................................... 128

C.1 TECHNOLOGY PLANNING – SFWA SMR AND LR ASSESSMENT ............................................. 128

C.2 TECHNOLOGY PLANNING – SFWA BUSINESS JETS ASSESSMENT .................................... 129

C.3 TECHNOLOGY PLANNING – REGIONAL AIRCRAFT ASSESSMENT .............................................. 130

C.4 TECHNOLOGY PLANNING – ROTORCRAFT ASSESSMENTS ....................................................... 133

C.5 TECHNOLOGY PLANNING – LIFECYCLE IMPACT ASSESSMENTS (ALL A/C) ................................. 137

8/137

PART 1 – OVERALL PROGRAMME SCOPE, STRUCTURE AND OBJECTIVES

9/137

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 GENERAL OUTLINE

Clean Sky is a Joint Technology Initiative (JTI) that aims to develop and mature breakthrough ‘clean technologies’ for Air Transport. By accelerating their deployment, the JTI will contribute to Europe’s strategic environmental and social priorities, and simultaneously promote competitiveness and sustainable economic growth. Joint Technology Initiatives are purpose-built, large scale research projects created by the European Commission within the 7th Framework Programme (FP7) in order to allow the achievement of ambitious and complex research goals. Set up as a Public Private Partnership between the European Commission and the European aeronautical industry, Clean Sky will pull together the formidable research and technology resources of the European Union in a coherent, 7-year, €1.6 bn programme. The Clean Sky goal is to identify, develop and validate the key technologies necessary to achieve

major steps towards the ACARE1

Environmental Goals for 2020 when compared to 2000 levels:

Fuel consumption and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions reduced by 50%

Nitrous oxides (NOX) emissions reduced by 80%

Reduction in perceived external noise of 50%

Improved environmental impact of the manufacturing, maintenance and disposal of aircraft and related products.

1 Advisory Council for Aeronautics Research in Europe

Taking major steps towards the achievement of the ACARE (Environmental) Goals should be considered the pre-eminent objective of the Clean Sky Programme. Simultaneously, the programme aims to strengthen and anchor industrial competitiveness in the European Aeronautical industry by enabling an accelerated development and validation of differentiating technology, enduring networks of research collaboration and innovation, and a stable platform for integration and synthesis of technology into viable development platforms. Technologies, Concept Aircraft and Demonstration Programmes form the three complementary instruments used by Clean Sky in meeting these goals:

Technologies are selected, developed and monitored in terms of maturity or ‘Technology Readiness Level’ (TRL). A detailed list of more than one hundred key technologies has been set. The technologies developed by Clean Sky will cover all major segments of commercial aircraft. The technologies are developed in Clean Sky by each ITD, and subject to TRL roadmaps. Some technologies may not directly provide an environmental outcome, being 'enabling technologies' without which the global achievements would not be feasible. In the current CSDP, new tables showing the current TRL level achieved by every ITD and the forecast for the next years have been included with comments in the last column helping the understanding of the data.

Concept Aircraft are design studies dedicated to integrating technologies into a viable conceptual configuration. They cover a broad range of aircraft: business jets, regional and large commercial aircraft, as well as rotorcraft. They are categorized in order to represent the major future aircraft families. Clean Sky’s environmental results will be measured and

10/137

reported principally by comparing these Concept Aircraft to existing aircraft, and aircraft incorporating 'business as usual’ technology in the world fleet.

Demonstration Programmes include physical demonstrators that integrate several technologies at a larger ‘system’ or aircraft level, and validate their feasibility in operating conditions. This helps determine the true potential of the technologies and enables a realistic environmental assessment. Demonstrations enable technologies to reach a higher level of maturity (TRL). The ultimate goal of Clean Sky is to achieve TRLs corresponding to successful demonstration in a relevant operating environment. This is, according to the scale of levels of technology maturity developed by NASA in 1995 and called Technology Readiness Level (TRL), the highest TRL achievable in research and in Clean Sky is equal to 6.

1.2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN SCOPE, PURPOSE AND CONTENTS

This document defines the main technical and environmental performance targets as well as the way they are managed within the programme. In particular, it defines:

The Clean Sky Key Technologies and the Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) to be reached at the end of the Programme;

The Clean Sky Concept Aircraft through which the (environmental) benefits will be assessed, by comparing the performance of these aircraft configurations against relevant 2000 technology and 2020 ‘business as usual’ (bau) technology Aircraft models

The relevant Demonstrators and the associated development and cost schedules;

The environmental forecasts, resulting from the integration of demonstrated technologies into Concept Aircraft;

The technical interrelationships and interdependencies at the aircraft / primary system architecture level, which in turn determine key interfaces between the main programme entities or Integrated Technologies Demonstrators (ITDs).

The budget to completion for the entire programme as currently defined by the Governing Board of Clean Sky (October 2014)

The key performance areas of the programme to be monitored by the JU are the following:

The forecast environmental benefits stemming from the technological achievements, and their related performance parameters as demonstrated through Concept Aircraft;

The TRLs of the Key Technologies;

The completion and assessment of major Demonstration programmes to validate technology readiness

The multi-year project schedules and the budget to completion

The annual execution of work plans and budgets, including successful engagement with Partners through the Call-for-Proposal process.

11/137

1.3 INTERRELATIONSHIPS AND LINKS WITH OTHER CLEAN SKY DOCUMENTS

The CSDP is mainly linked to the following other documents:

Council Regulation (EC) No 71/2007 of 20 December 2007, setting up the Clean Sky JU

The 'CLEAN SKY' Aeronautics & Air Transport JTI Proposal – March 2007

The CSJU Decision #11, April 21st 2010, setting up the organisation of the Clean Sky Management Manual and Clean Sky Development Plan Projects

The CSJU Management Manual, where the strategy and development set out in this document is operationalized for the JU and Members.

The CSDP is an input to the following documents:

Annexes 1A & 1B to the Grant Agreements for Members (GAM),

Annexes 1 to the Grant Agreements for Partners (GAP),

Annual Implementation Plans, which must be consistent with the CSDP

Revision 1 (2013) – Budget to completion – decision of the Governing Board (22/3/13)

Revision 2 (2013) – Budget to completion – decision of the Governing Board (11/10/13)

Revision 3 (2014) – Budget to completion – endorsement of the Governing Board to the ED proposal for complementary funding (24/10/14)

Annual Budget Plans (ABP) (and their amendments)

12/137

2. CLEAN SKY PROGRAMME SCOPE AND STRUCTURE

2.1 CLEAN SKY PROGRAMME STRUCTURE

The innovative technologies developed by Clean Sky will cover nearly all segments of commercial aviation. Clean Sky activities are made within six Integrated Technology Demonstrators (ITDs) and the Technology Evaluator. The Clean Sky Programme organisation is shown schematically in the following figure.

Clean Sky Programme Logic and Set-up

13/137

2.2 AIRCRAFT ITDS:

Smart Fixed Wing Aircraft (SFWA) will deliver innovative wing technologies for breakthroughs together with new aircraft configurations, covering large aircraft and business jets.

Green Regional Aircraft (GRA) will achieve reductions in noise & pollutant emissions through the integration of technologies enabling low-weight aircraft configurations, external noise reduction and improved aerodynamic efficiency; the integration of new systems such 'all electric aircraft' architectures and mission & trajectory optimization and management

Green Rotorcraft (GRC) will deliver innovative rotor blade technologies for reduction in rotor noise and power consumption, lower airframe drag configurations, environment friendly flight paths, integration of Diesel engine technology and advanced electrical systems for elimination of noxious hydraulic fluids and fuel consumption reduction.

2.3 TRANSVERSAL ITDS:

Sustainable and Green Engines (SAGE) will design and build six engine demonstrators to integrate technologies for Low Fuel Consumption, while reducing noise levels and NOX. The Open Rotor is the target of 2 of these Demonstrators. The others address a Geared Turbofan, the Low Pressure parts of a Three Shaft Engine and a new Turbo shaft for helicopters. Finally, a Lean Burn Demonstrator will be developed.

Systems for Green Operations (SGO) will focus on all-electrical aircraft equipment and system architectures, thermal management, capabilities for 'green' trajectories and missions, and improved ground operations to give any aircraft the capability to fully exploit the benefits of Single European Sky.

Eco-Design for Airframe and Systems (ECO) ITD will develop new technologies that reduce input resource usage (energy and raw materials), and resulting nuisances (hazardous materials, effluents, and waste) during aircraft production, maintenance and disposal. For systems in small aircraft, ECO-developed architectures will help in the reduction of harmful substances such as hydraulic liquids.

SFWA, GRA and GRC are vehicle (Aircraft) ITDs. They deliver themselves, but also assimilate and integrate 'transverse' technologies that will be bundled in diverse aircraft configurations. This bundling and integration includes the determination of so-called installation effects and will involve the integration related trade-off assessments required to prevent mutually exclusive or non-compatible solutions being absorbed into Concept Aircraft or Demonstrator Programmes.

SAGE and SGO are transversal ITDs that deliver technologies, which may be integrated in aircraft configurations as defined by the vehicle ITDs. ECO will support the ITDs with environmental impact analysis of the manufacturing, maintenance and disposal life-cycle phases of their technologies and product architectures.

2.4 TECHNOLOGY EVALUATOR:

Completing these six ITDs, the Technology Evaluator is a dedicated evaluation platform cross-positioned within the Clean Sky Programme structure. The TE has the key role of assessing the environmental impact of the technologies developed by the ITDs and their level of success with respect to the ACARE goals. For this purpose, air traffic is considered as a process, with inputs, outputs and impacts, characterized through inventories and relevant metrics.

14/137

2.5 THE CLEAN SKY CONCEPT AIRCRAFT

For each market segment, 2000 technology Aircraft have been selected as representative existing aircraft (SFWA / GRA) or representative ‘blends’ of existing rotorcraft and technologies (GRC). From these, Y2000 technology Aircraft are derived, which form the ‘Year-2000 Technology’ comparative base. For GRC these 2000 technology rotorcraft models represent 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s r/c configurations. Y2000 represents the Baseline for comparison purpose. 2020 Concept Aircraft will represent aircraft where Clean Sky technologies are (virtually) integrated. Comparing Concept Aircraft to Y2000 technology Aircraft forms the basis for assessing Clean Sky’s progress towards the ACARE 2020 Goals. Clean Sky progress will ultimately also be compared as best as possible to the estimated evolution of aircraft technology towards 2020. Y2020 business as usual (‘bau’) technology Aircraft will represent evolutionary development in order to judge the ‘net’ Clean Sky benefits vis-à-vis a 'Nominal Technology Evolution' development scenario, and as such demonstrate the ‘additionality’ of the Programme. Y2020 bau was called previously as Reference Aircraft. Previously the bau was also termed in this document as NTE (Normal Technology Evolution). Potential improvements will result from the groupings of technologies which are expected to reach the maturity of a successful demonstration within the programme timeframe. Not all of these technologies will be developed directly through the Clean Sky programme, but it is neither feasible nor relevant at this stage to isolate the benefits derived purely from Clean Sky technologies, as Clean Sky will achieve a significant synergy effect in European Aeronautics Research by maturing closely linked technologies to a materially higher TRL through demonstration and integration. See for assessment methodology para 3.4 and for targeted benefits para 3.5 For a more detailed description of the year 2000 technology aircraft and Concept Aircraft see Appendix B. A table describing

1 Year 2000 technology (Baseline), year 2020 ‘business as usual’ (Reference)

and year 2020 Concept Aircraft follows.

1 The table has been changed to introduce the business as usual (bau) Aircraft. Only year2000 column has been

taken as Baseline

15/137

Aircraft Y2000 technology Y2020 business as

usual (bau) technology Clean Sky

Concept (2020)

Business

Low Speed Bizjet LSBJ 2000 F2000EX

‘Resized’

202

0 b

au

1

LSBJ 2020

High Speed Bizjet HSBJ 2000 F900/F7X

‘Resized’ HSBJ 2020

Regional

90 Pax Turboprop TP90 2000 ATR72-500

'Resized' TP 90 2020

130 Pax Jet (GTF) TF 130 2000

Embraer E-190 'Resized'

GTF 130 2020

Large Commercial

Short/ Medium Range / CROR

RPL1 2000 Based on A320 ('ACARE A320')

APL1/2 2020

Long Range 3-Shaft Turbofan

(SAGE 3/6)

RPL2 2000 Based on A330 ('ACARE A330')

APL3 2020

APL6 2020

Rotorcraft

Single Engine Light (SEL) Turboshaft

SEL 2000 SEL 2020 bau SEL 2020

SEL Diesel DEL 2000 DEL 2020 bau DEL 2020

Twin Engine Light (TEL) Turboshaft

TEL 2000 TEL 2020 bau TEL 2020

Twin Engine Medium (TEM)

Turboshaft TEM 2000 TEM 2020 bau TEM 2020

Twin Engine Heavy (TEH) Turboshaft

TEH 2000 TEH 2020 bau TEH 2020

Tilt Rotor (TLR) TLR 2020

16/137

2.6 Clean Sky Demonstrators

The Clean Sky Demonstrator Programmes identified to date are as follow:

SFWA DEMONSTRATORS

High Speed Smart Wing Flight Demonstrator

Low Speed Smart Wing Flight Demonstrator

Innovative Engine Demonstrator Flying Test Bed ('CROR engine - demo FTB') POSTPONED TO CS2

Long Term Technology Flight Demonstrator

Innovative Empennage Demonstrator

GRA DEMONSTRATORS

Static & Fatigue Full Scale Ground Demonstration Test

Large scale Wind Tunnel Test Demonstration

Ground Laboratory Test (COPPER BIRD and other)

Flight Simulator on ground

ATR-72 Based Integrated In-Flight DEMO

GRC DEMONSTRATORS

Innovative Rotor blades on Ground / in Flight

Drag reduction on Ground / in Flight

helicopter electrical system demonstrator including electromechanical actuation for flight controls (Electric Tail Rotor Prototype)

Diesel powered flight worthy helicopter Demonstrator

Flight paths operational Demonstrations

Rotorcraft Eco Design Demonstrators

SGO DEMONSTRATORS

VIRTUAL IRON BIRD

COPPER BIRD

PROVEN (Ground test rig at Airbus Toulouse)

AVANT (Thermal test rig at Airbus Hamburg) POSTPONED TO CS2

In house electrical technologies demonstrators

AIR LAB, MOSAR & GRACE simulations

SAGE DEMONSTRATORS

Geared Open Rotor Demonstrator 1 REPLACED BY SAGE 6 LEAN BURN

Geared Open Rotor Demonstrator 2

Advanced Low Pressure System (ALPS) Demonstrator

Geared Turbofan Demonstrator

Turboshaft Demonstrator

Lean Burn Demonstrator

ECO DEMONSTRATORS

COPPER BIRD

Thermal Test Bench

'Clustered technologies' parts Demonstrators, for LCA assessment

17/137

2.7 Clean Sky technologies

The Key Technologies per ITD and associated Road Maps (development schedules towards targeted maturity or TRL) are identified in PART 2, in the Chapters related to Development Activities of each ITD. Work packages within the ITD Work Breakdown Structure involve technologies, which of course will influence other activities within the ITD. But they may also have an influence on other ITDs. In order to identify such interdependencies and to be able to follow the progress of each topic, the interfaces between ITDs and the way they will be managed are defined later in this document.

2.8 Coherence with National & European Programmes

The coherence with National Programmes (e.g. CORAC) will be checked via the NSRG and, when appropriate, directly with the Agencies in charge of any programme which may provide inputs for the execution of the Clean Sky activities. When and if needed, the certification issues will be dealt with EASA. The interfaces with the European Programmes such as SESAR or others projects within FP7 are dealt directly by the Clean Sky Project Officers in charge of the ITD where synergy, overlaps or interdependencies may exist. The CSJU and the DG RTD will ensure that activities conducted within the ITDs and the CfPs will not present redundancies with current and upcoming L1 & L2 projects, in particular with the following projects:

ACFA 2020

ADFCS/ADFCS2

ADMIRE

ADYN

ALCAS

ALEF

ALFA BIRD

ATAAC

COMFORT

COSMA

DESIREH

DREAM

EXTICE

FANTOM

FLOCON

FRIENDCOPTER

FUBACOMP

IAPETUS

IFATS

I.P.

I.P. OPTIMAL

IMAC PRO

MAAXIMUS

MOET

NACRE

NEWAC

NICE TRIP

OPEN AIR

OPTIMAL

POA

RAIN

REACT4C

SADE

SILENCER

SMIST

TEENI

TILTAERO

VALIANT

VICTORIA

VITAL

LEMCOTEC

ACTUATION 2015

18/137

2.9 CLEAN SKY – SESAR COORDINATION

The aim of Clean Sky is to develop the 'game changing' technologies for future aircraft that will allow air transport to further improve its environmental footprint.

At the same time, SESAR aims to define the next generation ATM systems and processes for existing and foreseen aircraft, and enable the air transport system to make full use of the aircraft performance and capabilities.

The integration of future aircraft and different capability levels (in the broadest sense) will need to be taken into account to leverage the environmental benefits they will provide.

The two JUs are therefore committed to collaborating and exchanging the information relevant to each other's activities.

Joint meetings need to take place to harmonize the work performed in the two programmes. In technical terms this work is supported by SGO in the scope of work package 1.3, and its natural link in SESAR is WP 9, and by GRA and GRC for respective platforms.

An additional link that is of crucial importance to the two programmes concerns the environmental assessment and the harmonisation / synthesis of scenarios and predicted impacts. To this end, Clean Sky Technology Evaluator (TE) and SESAR WP16 ('Transversal Package') have established an agreed mechanism of quarterly meetings and a joint 'roadmap' for creating mutually complementary and harmonised environmental performance metrics.

The aim of the 'roadmap' will be to have shared and harmonised methodologies where applicable, in order to have congruent assessment scenarios to determine the two programmes' environmental impact forecasts.

19/137

3. ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS OF CLEAN SKY

3.1 ACARE SRA GOALS AND CLEAN SKY TECHNOLOGY DOMAINS

Clean Sky will aim to develop and to validate more efficient and greener technologies, which are necessary to achieve major steps towards the environmental goals set for 2020 by ACARE:

To reduce fuel consumption and CO2 emission by 50%

To reduce perceived external noise by 50%

To reduce NOX by 80%

To make substantial progress in reducing the environmental impact of the manufacture, maintenance and disposal of aircraft and related products.

Contributors to ACARE goals for 2020

20/137

3.2 ORIGINAL CLEAN SKY OBJECTIVES BY ITD (PROGRAMME LAUNCH)

The Programme Proposal from March 2007 set the initial Clean Sky environmental targets which were deemed achievable through the implementation of the selected technology areas (domains) (see below):

3.3 Original Clean Sky objectives by Aircraft Type (Programme Launch)

During the initiation phase of the Clean Sky programme, a number of possible future aircraft were targeted in accordance with achievable environmental objectives to illustrate the potential additional contribution that the Clean Sky programme is expected to deliver:

These general objectives and forecasts, established before the start of the Clean Sky programme, were followed by forecasts directly linked to the technologies actually targeted and under development in the Programme. These forecasts (environmental objectives) form part of the present document.

21/137

3.4 Environmental Forecast / Assessment METHODOLOGY: general approach

The overall Clean Sky environmental performance assessment will be performed according to the following guidelines:

For each relevant aircraft category (e.g. short/medium range commercial aircraft, regional aircraft, helicopters,…), (virtual or actual) Y2000 technology Aircraft representing the relevant ‘Year-2000 Technology’ and virtual Concept Aircraft including the Clean Sky technologies, are defined by the three 'Aircraft ITDs' (SFWA, GRA, GRC). These three Aircraft ITDs will down-select and integrate relevant technologies from the 'Transversal ITDs' (SAGE, SGO, ECO) as well as integrate their own technology sets into the Concept Aircraft.

For latest assessments Y2020 'business as usual' technology [bau] Aircraft should also be determined, based either on the ITD assessment of technology evolution (GRC) or on available predictions of new aircraft performance in 2020 (GRA/SFWA) using ‘normal’ evolutionary development excluding Clean Sky technologies. See also page 23.

Aircraft models (performance simulation and prediction toolset) are developed by these Aircraft ITDs and made available to the Technology Evaluator.

The Technology Evaluator uses these models to perform the environmental forecast for CO2, NOX and noise at three levels:

Mission (aircraft flight), Airport (relevant hub airports to evaluate community impact), ATS (global air transport system, evaluating the global fleet, and worldwide operations)

For these three levels, the TE is developing and using specific tools, to which the aircraft models provide inputs. The performance evaluation at Airport and ATS level will eventually aim to make use of and be harmonised with Air Transport System infrastructural developments, such as SESAR, where applicable and appropriate. To that end, regular liaison with SESAR, EUROCONTROL and EASA will be ensured, principally by and through the TE but with ITDs involved where technology interdependencies are found.

22/137

3.5 Methodology of integration of ITD technologies

The principal assessment of the environmental improvements due to the technologies developed will be performed by the TE at Concept Aircraft Level. The TE will use the Concept Aircraft and their relative performance compared to ‘Year-2000 Technology’ Aircraft for the Mission, Airport and ATS level simulations. TE Assessments will consider all promising green technologies selected by the ITDs, not on a unitary basis, but incorporated in the Concept Aircraft and modelled accordingly by the Aircraft ITD.

It is the shared responsibility of the Aircraft ITD and the Transversal ITDs (where it concerns 'transversal' technologies) to determine suitable modelling methods; the TE will monitor the inclusion of congruent technologies and their representation in Aircraft Models provided by the Aircraft ITDs.

Going forward, the TE has developed a joint plan with the ITDs with respect to the step-by-step revision and updating of the technology ‘suite’ represented in the Concept Aircraft. Appendix C gives an overview of the current plan for the updates of the Concept Aircraft, and the technology ‘uptake’ into these models for evaluation within the TE Assessments.

The Assessment will be based on the relevant metrics concerning emissions (CO2, NOX and noise on ground as stated by the ACARE Goals). These will be harmonised by the TE to eliminate consistency and comparability issues between aircraft types, and to make comparison against the ACARE SRA metrics and methodology as straightforward and consistent as possible.

For the Transversal ITDs (SAGE, SGO and ECO), the key parameters through which could be consolidated in the Aircraft ITD models, are set out below:

Specific fuel consumption (SFC); the weight; the noise and the NOX emission levels at engine or propulsion system level for SAGE;

Weight and the power/weight ratio for SGO / MAE;

CO2 and the noise emission impacts (reductions) resulting from innovative trajectories for SGO / MTM;

The process CO2 emission & energy consumption, the hazardous material & the level of recycled materials for ECO.

These parameters are defined, wherever possible, for each engine module and each energy subsystem considered in Clean Sky. The transfer coefficients from these parameters to the 'Aircraft Level' metrics (e.g. SFC to CO2) are a shared responsibility of the relevant Aircraft ITD and Transversal ITD, and the transfer is a key interface 'deliverable' that the JU will monitor.

Some technologies, equipment and even subsystems may be enabling elements, which will not bring, per se, a significant, direct environmental improvement. But they may enable such an improvement in other fields – this can only be evaluated and checked at the Aircraft Level; in this case, this 'enabling' character is mentioned in the description.

It should be noted that CO2 savings at Aircraft Level may be different from the implied emissions gain stemming from SFC reduction percentages at engine level, due to the installation effects which are dependent on the airframe architecture choices. The same applies to the aircraft energy-management subsystems.

23/137

3.6 TE assessment methodology summary

As mentioned, the TE Assessment involves three levels: Mission, Airport and ATS. Year 2000 will be used as datum point. By simulating a 2020 Air Transport System environment, where Concept Aircraft are compared against ‘Year-2000’ technology Aircraft in the system, the principal evaluation of Clean Sky environmental benefits is achieved and progress towards the ACARE Goals is estimated. The evaluation will eventually be expanded to include a ‘business as usual’ technology evolution with evolutionary development of aircraft towards 2020.

The following guidelines will be followed:

The Year 2020 evaluation will be performed, on the one side for Year-2000 Technology and 2020 ‘bau’ technology Aircraft and on the other side Year-2020-Concept Aircraft incorporating Clean Sky technologies.

'Clean Sky technologies' are defined as technologies brought to a sufficiently high TRL within the Clean Sky Programme and consistent with the ACARE 2020 timeframe. It is often difficult or artificial at aircraft level to isolate benefits from a sub-set of technologies which are designed to fit together in a consistent system level architecture. In this case, the full picture is taken into account in the forecast, Clean Sky being considered the 'catalyst’ effect. Clean Sky will achieve important synergy effects in European Research in the area of aeronautics by accelerating maturation (TRL) of technologies developed in earlier research.

The Year 2020 (and onwards) fleet considers the growth of the aircraft operating fleet (in relevant seat-class categories) through an air traffic scenario from the Year 2000 on. The 2020 (and onwards) fleet addresses the global fleet, including non-European aircraft.

The obtained delta between the Year-2000 Technology aircraft and Year-2020 Concept aircraft determines the overall progress toward the ACARE Goals.

The obtained delta (when applicable) between 2020 ‘bau’ technology Aircraft and 2020 Concept Aircraft should provide an estimate of the net Clean Sky contribution to the ACARE Goals.

A selected percentage of the Year 2020 (and onwards) fleet will be replaced by Clean Sky Concept Aircraft (including rotorcraft) in the 'Clean Sky Scenario' (as compared to 'Non Clean Sky Scenario)

1. This

involves the implicit assumption that Clean Sky technologies can / will be widely adopted on all aircraft, either through the selection of European manufacturers and technologies by foreign airframers, or through the development of similar technologies outside Europe. In first instance, the TE Assessment (2011) has been done assuming a 100% adoption of Clean Sky technologies in the global fleet in 2020. This is not intended to reflect a realistic fleet replacement scenario. Rather, it is intended to demonstrate as simply and clearly as possible the potential of technology insertion 'pur sang', and to report Clean Sky benefits in a format consistent with the definition of the ACARE Goals

2. At a later stage of the Clean Sky Programme,

other fleet replacement / technology insertion scenarios and additional time horizons for evaluation may be added to more accurately reflect actual fleet development and to enable projections towards e.g. 2030 and 2050 (possibly for ACARE II SRIA purposes).

The Technology Evaluator will not measure the competitive edge brought by the Clean Sky Programme to the European industry, as the detailed analysis of the market penetration and of the competition is beyond the reach of the TE.

1 This selected percentage may be different for each type of aircraft.

2 The Year '2020' comparisons in the TE Assessments do not imply that these Clean Sky technologies will be in commercial use in

2020. The (commercial / operational) availability will be governed by the duration of any development cycle beyond a full-scale demonstrator, the aircraft type's replacement cycle and the new product's true introduction rate in the fleet. The 2020 horizon is a nominal 'gate', chosen to evaluate progress towards the ACARE Goals (as defined for 2020). As such it therefore merely reflects the order of magnitude of the potential of the technologies that will become available.

24/137

3.7 First assessments results

The first assessment was performed in 2011 according to this general methodology, and produced its results mid February 2012. It was based on a limited set of basic concept aircraft, with limited capacities in their ‘modelisation’. . Also, as mentioned neither the ‘bau’ aircraft nor the SESAR concept were taken into account. Yet, even with these limited input data and scenarios, this first assessment was able to confirm the Clean Sky game-changing potential advances in environmental performances; in particular:

1. 130–180 seat, short/medium range aircraft equipped with open rotor engines and laminar-flow wing technology could deliver up to 30% better fuel efficiency and related CO2 emissions reductions when compared to equivalent 2000 aircraft.

2. Next-generation regional aircraft for 90–130 passengers using advanced turboprop and turbofan engines (including a new Clean Sky ‘geared turbofan’ solution), and incorporating advanced aerodynamics, structures and energy-efficient systems show similar potential - against today’s best in-service aircraft.

3. Important reductions in noise nuisance are foreseen in business aviation and rotorcraft operations. For instance, new business jet designs could deliver a 2/3 reduction in noise affected areas during take-off.

4. Clean Sky has successfully implemented a unique Technology Evaluation process involving robust and independent analysis of performance gains and extensive simulation of aircraft in airport and air transport system level scenarios. Going forward, each year Clean Sky’s progress will be evaluated and reported.

25/137

3.8 Second assessment

The second assessment was performed in 2012, and produced its results end March 2012. It was based on an updated set of concept aircraft, with improved capacities in their "modelisation". The main results are presented in the table hereinafter which shows the deltas of the 2020 Clean Sky Concept aircraft compared to 2000 technology aircraft:

3.9 Next assessments (2013-2016)

In the 2015-2016 period yearly partial assessments will be performed by the TE, on the basis of the available updates of the ITDs a/c models, about 6 months before the issue of the assessment results. As these updates are related to the internal planning of technology study inside every ITD, they are not necessarily all phased with the yearly drum beat of the TE assessments. Then, the TE will issue in addition a global assessment report- by appending the partial assessments results- when most of the ITDs a/c models would have been updated. Besides the partial TE yearly TE assessments, at least two next issues of global assessment results are planned: end 2014, and 2016 for the final one.

Every year, the vehicle ITDs will update, in agreement with transversal ITDs, their concept aircraft technology integration plan, according to the work progress in their ITDs (improved knowledge of technologies and integration effect at aircraft level).

The TE and the Aircraft ITDs will agree suitable representative sets of realistic Mission models and Airport and ATS scenarios, including the aim to consider SESAR results as input for the last assessments, in order to get in each assessment until the final assessment in 2016 a more accurate prediction of the Clean Sky environmental impact.

Eventually, the TE should also provide comparisons between Clean Sky Concept Aircraft against (yet to be defined) ‘2020 bau Aircraft’ representing the best estimate of the performance of new aircraft in 2020 without

Clean Sky Concept Aircraft Noise area (take off) CO2 NOX

Low Sweep Biz-Jet (Innovative Empennage) -68% Up to -32% Up to -28%

High Sweep Biz-Jet -36% -22% -26%

TP90 (Regional Turbo-prop) -48% Up to -23% Up to -43%

GTF130 (Regional Jet – Geared Turbo-fan) -75% Up to -23% Up to -46%

Short-Medium Range / CROR Engine Up to -37% Up to -30% N/A

Long Range / 3-shaft Advanced Turbo-fan Up to -28% Up to -20% Up to -21%1

Single Engine Light -47% -30% -76%

Twin Engine Light Up to -53% -26% -74%

1 This estimate excludes any SAGE6 ‘Lean Burn’ benefits

which should lead to up to 55% NOx reduction in total

26/137

Clean Sky technologies but incorporating evolutionary performance improvements as foreseen in the marketplace. The latter comparison should demonstrate the best estimate of the ‘net’ benefits and ‘additionality’ of the Clean Sky Programme. In providing this future estimate of ‘net’ benefits great care will need to be taken to ensure evolutionary improvements that are mutually compatible with Clean Sky technologies and architectures do not unduly bias the comparison. An example of this could be aircraft weight reduction based on structural or interior/cabin equipment developments outside the scope of Clean Sky but fully compatible with a Clean Sky Concept Aircraft.

27/137

3.10 Objectives for environmental performance improvements

The following figures are based on the initial estimates and have been refined during 2011. For a clarification of the Concept Aircraft see Appendix B. The ranges of potential improvements result from the groupings of technologies which are expected to reach the maturity of a successful demonstration within the Programme timeframe.

Aircraft Y2000 technology

aircraft

2020 Concept Aircraft

CO2 [%] NOX [%] Noise [EPNdB] Average single operation

1

Source noise reduction

Operational measures

Business

Low Speed Bizjet

LSBJ 2000 F2000EX 'Resized'

LSBJ -30 to -40 -30 to -40 -7.5 to -10

(tbc wrt operations element)

High Speed Bizjet

HSBJ 2000 F900/F7X 'Resized'

HSBJ -25 to -35 -25 to -35 -2.5 to - 5

(tbc wrt operations element)

Regional

TP90 TP90 2000

ATR72-500 ‘Resized' TP 90 2020 -25 to -30 -25 to -30 -1 to -3.3 -1 to -2

GRA130 / GTF TF 130 2000

Embraer E-190 'Resized'

GTF 130 2020 -27 to -35 -27 to -35 -4 to -7 -1 to -2

Large Comm.

Short/ Medium Range / CROR

RPL1 2000 Based on A320

APL1/2 2020 -25 to -35 -25 to -35 -2 to -3

-2 to -3

Long Range 3-Shaft

Turbofan

RPL2 Based A330

APL3 2020 -7 to -12 -7 to -12

-3 to -4 w/out OPENAIR

2

-2 to -3

-5.5 to -6.5 with OPENAIR

2

-2 to -3

Rotorcraft


SEL 2000 SEL 2020 -10 to -25 -50 to -65

-1 to -3.3

To

be d

ete

rmin

ed

fro

m 5

0%

fo

ot

pri

nt

red

ucti

on

SEL Diesel DEL 2000 DEL 2020 - 25 to -

40 -30 to -50


TEL 2000 TEL 2020 -15 to -30 -55 to -70

Twin Engine Medium (TEM)

Turboshaft TEM 2000 TEM 2020 -15 to -35 -55 to -70


THE 2000 THE 2020 -15 to -35 -55 to -70

Tilt Rotor (TLR)

no reference TLR 2020 no ref no ref tbd

1 In accordance with ACARE Goal of -10 EPNdB ‘per operation’, figures have been calculated from cumulative margins and

averaged as noise benefits per single operation 2 OPENAIR Technologies like Folded Cavity intake Liners, Lined OGVs, Lined bypass duct Fins, Low Noise Flap setting, Porous

Flap Side Edge, Low noise landing gear

28/137

Not all of these technologies will be developed directly through the Clean Sky Programme, but it is neither

feasible nor relevant at this stage to isolate the benefits derived purely from Clean Sky technologies, as

Clean Sky will achieve a significant synergy effect in European Aeronautics Research by maturing closely

linked technologies to a materially higher TRL through demonstration and integration.

29/137

PART 2: CLEAN SKY PROGRAMME TECHNICAL PLANNING AND ACTIVITIES

Part 2 – Clean Sky Programme Technical Planning and Activities

30/137

4. CLEAN SKY PROGRAMME TECHNICAL PLANNING AND CO-ORDINATION

4.1 GENERAL

The technical management of the overall Clean Sky Programme is based on a development plan covering the full duration of the programme. This plan aims to ensure that the best technologies with the highest possible level of maturity (up to TRL 6-7) are developed and demonstrated, in order to optimize the environmental results of the programme. The development plan also aims to ensure that these environmental targets and achievements are measured all along the programme life.

The environmental targets will be set and followed at the appropriate level (Aircraft concept, system, subsystem, whenever technically appropriate) by the ITD and the TE in a way that ensure global environmental targets of the programme will be followed for each aircraft concept, and that takes into account:

the Environmental Targets of the programme,

the candidate technologies identified by the ITDs

the models used or developed within the TE,

Where environmental targets are set and followed, a roadmap of TRL maturity will be issued and followed for all Technologies contributing towards the objectives. Formal TRL-‘Gate Reviews’ should be conducted, and the results of these should be reported to the JU.

The Environmental targets and the Technologies TRL Road map are set and followed in this Development Plan (CSDP).

4.2 TRL GATES

Once candidate technologies have been identified as contributing to an environmental footprint improvement at aircraft, system or sub system level, the main objective of ITDs will be to increase the technology maturity, generally from TRL 2/3 to TRL 6 (TRL 6 being the target for all technologies).

Consequently, as the programme progress will be largely followed via the TRL Gate Review progress, there is a need to clarify at Clean Sky level, based on the NASA reference material, what the demonstration requirements are at each TRL Gate.

Environmental Targets

Candidates Technologies + TRL Maturity level

CS Development Plan TOP DOWN

TOP DOWN & BOTTOM UP

Development Plan definition Logic

31/137

As most of the beneficiaries participating to Clean Sky have already set TRL Gate criteria in their internal rules, these can be used to conduct the TRL Gates, but the criteria used at ITD or Subproject Level should be communicated to the JU and published in the present Management Manual, Annex E, to make clear to all stakeholders what a TRL Level achieved in an ITD or Sub Project mean.

A common approach regarding elements to be demonstrated at each TRL gate (from TRL 2 to TRL6) are described in Annex E as default.

Without specific criteria communicated to the JU and integrated in this document, these should be used to conduct the TRL Gates.

4.3 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN LOGIC

Annual Work Plan

CS Development Pan + CS General Planning

Updated Program & Annual Work Plan to be described respectively

in Annex 1A & 1B + Annual CfP Program

TOP DOWN TOP DOWN & BOTTOM UP

32/137

4.4 BUDGET TO COMPLETION

In 2008, when the Commission signed the first set of Grant Agreements for Members, a preliminary allocation of funds was set out and agreed by the members. After a slower than expected start in 2008/2009, and having the actual cost claims of 2010 and 2011 validated by the Joint Undertaking, the preparation for a re-allocation of funds was started in early 2012. As the JU monitors the implementation of the annual and multi-annual budget to completion allocations of the ITDs (for both the GAM and GAP), it was in a position to propose a re-allocation of resources in early 2013 based on the requests and information it received from the ITDs. The JU has dealt with these requests using the following criteria:

- Request ITD to make a case for added value from technical perspective of the activities unfunded;

- Request ITD to make an internal review of budgetary planning and re-balancing amount between

members, associates, and CFP;

- Ensure ITD is not requesting extra budget for the same activities but rather to fund increased scope

of activities bringing added value to the JU objectives overall;

Once these criteria have been sufficiently addressed, the JU then took their position and looked at the available possibilities at JU level to meet the requests for extra funding. Technical background to the changes proposed: The two main activities concern the revised scope of work for the Cockpit demonstrator, with an increase of the rig content and of the budget required. EADS CASA estimated an extra budget compared with the original one of about 2 M€ in funding, to be split further in actual members tasks and potential involvement of partners through CFPs with dedicated topics. The other main area of extra funding request concerns activities by Alenia in demonstrations both in flight and ground, plus a special aero-acoustic testing in wind tunnel; there was also an increased support requested to Liebherr to perform flight test and some new activities by CIRA for a dedicated collaboration with Tsagi. In total, GRA requests 2 M€ of extra funding for members, and 1.75 M€ for CFPs; the latter being managed in the current situation of CFPs expenditure across all ITDs without any transfer between ITDs needed. Members’ budget changes: After careful consideration with the Leaders and their execution of their budget to date, Rolls Royce considered its new situation at the end of 2012. The changes to the programme due to the delay and subsequent cancellation of the open rotor engine demonstrator and its replacement with the lean burn system demonstrator has led to a back end loaded programme. Despite this volatility, the Rolls-Royce programme is fully on track and the milestones delivered are in line with the spend to date. One of the results of the review of its spending to programme completion is the identification of approximately €2m that was made available within Clean Sky. On the recommendation of the JU, discussions have been held with Alenia, EADS CASA and Liebherr and an agreement in principle reached for the redistribution of these funds in 2013/2014.This will allow GRA to fully meet its commitments without impacting the ability of Rolls-Royce to deliver its commitments in SAGE 1,3 and 6. During 2013 all ITDs continue to monitor their budgeted activities and their progress to demonstration. In SAGE ITD, Rolls Royce has submitted a request for extra funding of 8.7m € for increased scope for having a flight demonstration for testing re-start, quick relighting and surge plus 2 additional ground tests for noise measurement and for flame stability under icing conditions (scheduled in 2015). This request was submitted officially to the JU on 4

th October. This request will be analysed by the JU but to date no funds are available

within the JU. In GRC ITD, some projects will go to a higher TRL than originally foreseen within existing budget but with re-directions, namely the active Gurney flap and electric tail rotor. For the diesel engine proposed for flight test and the optimised blade design – some extra budget is to be requested from the JU – in the region of 2m € funding. For SFWA, as there is a shortage of funding for BLADE, the JU is reviewing with the ITD what

33/137

possible consequences could be but to date no agreement on the admissibility of this request is reached as further information is needed to analyse the overall situation of funding versus work plan. The JU expects this to evolve further over the coming months and keeps this issue on the list of possible funding requests to be treated in future. Calls for proposal (CFP) budget:

SGO ITD informed the JU in November 2012 that it would not use 2.5m € funding from its CFP allocation. The JU informed the GB about this in the December meeting. The JU has now re-allocated these funds to other ITDs as shown in the attached table and based on the topics presented to the JU for publication. Specifically, Eco Design and GRC have received the main part of this extra budget. This therefore solves the issue of GRC who had informed the JU of a 1.3M € topic already launched for which they did not have available funding. In October 2013, the JU proposed to the GB to adopt a new allocation of funding which would bring more flexibility to the decision process regarding the calls for proposals topics to be launched for call 16 and the signatures on GAPs from call 15 compared to the March 2013 GB decision on budget envelopes per ITD. Summary of changes: CFP budget: The JU proposed to align all CFP budgets into one common JU envelope in order to ensure the 200m € target for non-member partners is reached and no ITD is inhibited from proposing topics in order to assist in reaching this minimum target. Members’ budget: The summary table reflecting this proposal and the other updates already agreed as outlined above results in the following table (adopted by the GB on 11

th October 2013):

Revision 3 (2014) Budget to completion

SAGE SFWA SGO GRA GRC ED TE

25.784%

24.182%

18.836%

11.678%

9.709% 7.152% 2.660% 100%

149.78 140.48 109.42 67.84 56.40 41.55 15.45 580.9

Leaders 99.19 93.32 76.72 45.45 38.68 27.59 5.32 386.3

Associates 50.59 47.16 32.70 22.39 17.72 13.96 10.13 194.7

Partners Rev 2 No distribution by ITD as such - overall minimum funding of 200m € for JU for non-member partners

200.0

TOTAL 780.9

Note: While the current total budget arrives at 780.3m €, the JU proposes to allow some overrun as it has flexibility with regard to the running costs budget and its experience with less than 100% spending of planned budgets per ITD to date.

Budget revision 3 The JU launched the process to receive requests for complementary funding at the end of 2013. The JU received 15 requests for funding for a total sum of 21.48m €. The requests fall into two categories:

a) Complementary funding for additional scope compared to the Development plan agreed by the GB on 13 December 2013.

34/137

b) Complementary funding for the same initial objectives for some members whose allocated funding is insufficient to cover the remaining technical activities. It can be noted that in particular at least 3 leaders did not request further funding despite some substantial overspending compared to their allocated budget, namely Airbus, Dassault and Safran.

Requests which are proposed for support now: Category (a) requests:

1. GRC 4 (Airbus Helicopters): Diesel Engine flight test - Additional funding is requested to support flight testing of the light helicopter integrating the HighCompression Engine HIPE AE 440. The work plan, according to the last GAM GRC amendment (n°10) for GRC4 includes the integration of a High Compression Engine on a flightworthy EC120 light helicopter and the performance of all tests on ground needed to obtain a Permit to Fly. This is deemed to allow passing successfully the TRL5 gate. After completion of this work plan, all conditions to start flight testing will be fulfilled. Despite some technical difficulties encountered during the engine testing, the current work plan is being implemented with limited delays and cost overrun on Airbus Helicopters side and will be completed in 2014, some 18 month before the GRC final closure. However, the currently allocated budget does not allow including the flight testing phase within the GRC4 work scope. This proposal concerns the possible extension of the HCE demonstration by one year (2015), with a complementary budget, allowing the flight testing phase to be performed and the technology maturity to reach TRL6, as repeatedly recommended by GRC reviewers.

2. SAGE 6 (Rolls Royce) : Lean Burn flight test - Increase the scope of the technical content to accommodate the inclusion of flight test demonstration as well as two additional ground test experiments of the Lean Burn System. This will enable SAGE 6 to achieve TRL6. The test vehicles will encompass the entire lean burn system including the combustor, fuel supply and control system, sensing technologies along with the associated externals and installation hardware. This represents a significant set of modifications to the architecture of the Trent 1000 donor engine.

Category (b) requests: 1. SFWA [Saab, INCAS cluster (Romaero), Aernnova] - BLADE – Additional R&T and development

activities to define, design, manufacture assemble and integrate two laminar wing articles for flight testing on-board the Airbus A340-300 test aircraft. The following additional challenges to develop concepts for large passenger aircraft laminar wing wings and methods to manufacture the key components are led to the need of a significant number additional activities and development approaches:

The required quality of large areas is very strict.

Quality assurance, new approaches and new means had to be developed, designed and qualified.

A significant number of additional concepts and tests for structural integrity and loads were made to accomplish appropriate solutions.

Developing two fully independent NLF-wing structural concepts for the BLADE, could not be pursued with a high level of symmetric parts. The particular features of the concepts appeared the source of more individual solutions than initially planned.

With the backside of additional cost and additional time used for the BLADE project, and compared to the initial work plan, a significant number of additional results and experiences for the design and manufacturing should further be achieved:

A consistent metrology to control the geometrical quality at the manufacturing and assembly of laminar wings

Additional flight test instrumentation have been developed, build and qualified, others have been improved

Additional structural design concepts and manufacturing and assembly methods have been defined and developed and tested, yielding a wider knowledge about the parametic behaviour of materials and components.

The knowledge of the application and use of DFM for R&T in a complex, industrial environment for large commercial aircraft is now available for a large number of partners in SFWA.

35/137

The table corresponding to this change (and not yet reflecting the GRC increase) is:

The % here are indicative and are taken based on 790m € funding. The JU running costs are still being implemented and will be until end of 2017. At the same time, the GAP funding finally used will evolve as projects finish and the final funding validated by the JU will become clearer. This could imply that the figure of 198.8 m € of GAPs could decrease further over time. These figures will be once again updated at the moment of the next release of the DP. In addition, once the GRC increase is taken into account within the ITD and funds are either released, within the ITD or from elsewhere in the JU, the Development plan will be amended for this purpose and to reflect any further complementary funding which the JU can facilitate and as an implementation of the GB endorsement of 24

th October 2014. The further requests set out in the complementary funding proposal

which were accepted for further funding will also be added into the Development plan at that moment.

SAGE SFWA SGO GRA GRC ED TE

26.098% 24.863% 18.509% 11.476% 9.541% 6.900% 2.614% 100% of 790m €

154.28 146.98 109.42 67.84 56.40 40.79 15.45 591.2 75%

198.8Partners (estimated)

10 m provided by JU running costs transfer in

JU figure

Oct 14

Leaders & Associates

36/137

5. SFWA ITD ACTIVITIES

5.1 DEVELOPMENT PHILOSOPHY, TECHNICAL APPROACH AND HIGH-LEVEL CONTENT

In SFWA two major large transport aircraft technologies will be matured and validated, the low drag, laminar flow 'smart wing', and the integration of advanced (ultra-) high bypass propulsion concepts such as Open Rotor. In line with the Clean Sky programme goals, the objective is to achieve maturity levels in both technologies to a status close to a potential application through major, dedicated large scale ground and flight demonstrations. The particular focus in SFWA is upon developing these 'smart' wing architectures, and integrating innovative engine concepts for small and medium range transport aircraft and business jets.

The first key technology is the all new 'smart wing', which features a substantially reduced aerodynamic drag through a step changing laminar wing design. This design will be based on including passive and active flow control means and a completely rethought multidisciplinary new structure and system concept, using advanced materials and manufacturing methods, sensors and actuators. The effect achieved by this type of design of a wing is to maintain the laminar flow of air throughout a greater percentage of the chord of the wing and to control the transition point. Drag is therefore considerably reduced since the laminar wing takes less energy to slide through the air. An improvement in CO2 and NOX is then achieved. The maturing of this smart wing is including a number of ground demonstrators plus a large scale flight demonstration to validate the smart wing concept in flight condition representative for cruise flight. Target is to proof that the smart wing can be produced at 'industrial scales' and used with guaranteed performance, at low maintenance and operational costs during the whole lifetime. The second key technology is the integration of advanced propulsion system with special focus on the Contra Rotating Open Rotor (CROR), which has the potential for a uniquely large reduction in the specific fuel burn. The SFWA-ITD project is including a full scale demonstration of a full size engine in flight. The demonstrator engine will be provided as ground test article by the CleanSky SAGE-ITD, the related parts of the technology roadmaps in both ITDs are coordinated accordingly. It is important to note that the funding of the modification of the ground test engine to a flight test article, including the airworthiness work, is not foreseen in the current Clean Sky budget. Based on a careful review of the progress achieved in CleanSky on the best options to integrate a CROR propulsion system to a future short and medium large transport aircraft, the design of CROR blades and the engine concept, the demonstrator planning associated to large scale testing have been jointly updated in SFWA and SAGE in December 2012. The bottom line is that there is an unchanged strong commitment to continue the development in the CROR technology at highest possible effort, but that starting the full scale CROR demo engine flight test before the end of 2016, i.e. within the CleanSky lifetime, is impossible. In discussion and agreement with the CleanSky Joint Undertaking a detailed joint Airbus- Snecma proposal for an updated, robust demonstrator plan has been laid out with a start of a first run of a full scale SAGE 2 ground test engine beginning of 2016, and the flight test with a flight worthy engine to start following the delivery of the flight test demonstrator engine, the engine assembly and the flight test readiness review all scheduled in 2020 as part of the LPA work package WP1.1 plan. Further details are described in the following subchapter 5.3. Additional technologies, supplementing in particular the development and validation of the smart wing, are being prepared, ground and flight tested in dedicated work packages. With the strong motivation to mature the key technologies in SFWA-ITD for large transport aircraft, the project is tailored to take advantage of the similar technical requirements of large transport aircraft and large size business jets in both principle areas of the SFWA-ITD, the smart wing, and the integration of innovative engine.

37/137

5.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE WORK PACKAGES

The concept of the 'smart' low drag wing and the integration of the CROR power plant were studied in a substantial number of major research and technology programmes since decades. However, the transition into industrial application was never achieved because Some required contributing technologies were not available or premature

Critical technical show stoppers were identified in the R&T projects

The risk for application without large scale validation and demonstration under realistic operational condition was unacceptable.

The programmatic 'environment' for an appropriate, huge demonstrator project was not available

The work break down structure of the Clean Sky SFWA-ITD is tailored to overcome these deficits. The logic of the work packages is aligned straight forward along the concept of developing, integrating, and validating the technologies along increasing the Technology Readiness Levels (TRL):

Work Package 1 'Technology Development'

This Work Package concentrate on all key elements of technologies required to develop, design and build an all new smart laminar 'low drag' wing, are picked up at typical 'laboratory levels' TRL 2 or TRL 3, to be advanced to a TRL 4. This relates to a development at subcomponent or system level with features and performance validated at realistic condition in a rig tests. This does not only apply to hardware, but include aerodynamic and structural design and calculation methods, fabrication or repair tools. In SFWA-ITD the headlines for these WP1 technologies are:

Passive and active technologies for flow control

Concepts for active and passive load control

Sensor and actuator network architectures

Concepts for laminar wing high lift design

Design tools and methods for laminar wing preliminary design

Please note that work package 1 does only contain technologies related to the smart wing. The activities to integrate the innovative power plants consider the availability of all basic technology elements at TRL4, which means the related R&T work starts in SFWA work package 2.

Work Package 2 'New Configuration'

The integration of the smart wing, respectively the innovative power plants as major components takes place in WP2, and includes the preparatory R&T to integrate the major parts into the overall aircraft concept. For the smart wing a number of dedicated 'feature' ground and rig demonstrators are planned to mature and validate the new wing with respect to bird and lightning strike, icing, but also with manufacturing and repair methods of related innovative structures and systems. For the engine integration there will be two path ways to consider the special requirements for business jets respectively large transport aircraft. In work package 2 all activities related to the integration of laminar wing technologies and integration of innovative power plants including the design of a modified, innovative empennage are addressed, typically advancing the SFWA technologies from TRL4 to TRL5.

38/137

To be able to accommodate further important complementary technologies in addition to the smart wing and innovative engine integration, a work package 'Integration of other Components for Green Operation' is added in SFWA WP 2. The detailed assessment of the value and potentials of the individual SFWA technologies at component and aircraft level are also part of work package 2. This work package is also acting as interface to the Clean Sky Technology Evaluator, providing the reference aircrafts, the conceptual aircraft, and the related models for the parametric assessment of the SFWA results.

Work Package 3 'Flight Demonstration'

This Work Package intend to accommodates the flight demonstration activities to validate and demonstrate the SFWA target technologies under real operational condition in an aircraft environment at large or even full size. These demonstrators are providing the key information to advance the SFWA-technologies from TRL5 to TRL6. The flight demonstrators in SFWA are: 1. High Speed Smart Wing Flight Demonstrator The critical validation step for the low drag laminar smart wing will be to prove performance at typical cruise flight conditions, at relevant Mach and Reynolds numbers, at representative cL [lift coefficient] and pressure distribution, and using a wing article with typical structural features in static and dynamic behaviour, shape, tolerances and quality. An Airbus A340-300 test aircraft will be used to demonstrate the laminar wing. The smart wing test articles, comprised of two major outboard wing sections at full-scale and featuring different structural concepts on either side of the wing, will replace the existing wings of the test aircraft from the outboard engine through to the wing-tip. Owing to the cost and time for this demonstration, the smart wing part of SFWA is focussing on the validation and demonstration of the natural laminar wing concept at large scale. The development and testing of an active 'hybrid' laminar flow smart wing, which is 'stage two' in the SFWA-ITD technology plan, will be pursued at limited level only. Based on the experiences made for the preparation of the BLADE flight test demonstrator, large scale integrated flight testing has now been moved to the CS2 LPA program. This will be based on numerical research and wind tunnel tests conducted in SFWA, and a flight test of a section of a HLFC FIN structural design concept planned to be performed in AfloNext. In the current SFWA technology roadmap the flight tests of the so called BLADE demonstrator aircraft (Breakthrough Laminar Demonstrator in Europe) are planned to begin in the last quarter of 2016, following four ground-based 'feature' demonstrators in the years 2010 to 2014. 2. Low Speed Smart Wing Flight Demonstrator For a successful all-new low drag (laminar) 'smart wing' the development and integration of low speed systems using innovative control surfaces and systems, providing appropriate performance and handling qualities for take-off and landing, needs to be included from the outset. Although there are a number of viable 'conventional' low speed technologies that could be combined with the laminar smart wing, there are other, advanced technologies available at TRL3 with the potential to provide additional performance gains for the smart wing. At this stage, two innovative technologies have been identified which could bring sufficient improvements to justify a large scale demonstration: a so called "smart flap" concept combining passive flow control at cruise conditions through variable camber, and extra lift at takeoff and landing through maximized extension, and an active vibration control system using the aircraft's control surfaces to suppress the effect of flow separation. On vibration control full scale ground demonstrations has been initiated in 2013, once all preliminary results have been obtained. If the ground test is successful a flight test on a Falcon F7X of the active vibration control is intended to be engaged in 2015 leading to a flight

39/137

test scheduled to start at the end of Q1 / 2016. The smart flap is a passive device and is not thought to require a flight test (still to be confirmed after the ground tests). 3. Innovative Engine Demonstrator Flying Test Bed ('CROR engine - demo FTD') It is clear that the validation of the CROR propulsion concept requires a large scale demonstration under operational conditions. In coordination with the engine manufacturers in SAGE, a coherent roadmap has been set up and updated as work has progressed. This road map can be seen in the Interfaces management section later on in this document. Based on a joint agreement and alignment of the planned activities of Snecma, Rolls-Royce and Airbus, the Snecma CROR SAGE2 engine will be developed with the target to be ground within Clean Sky in SAGE. The first ground demonstrator engine run in SAGE2 is now planned for a delivery of a full scale SAGE2 demonstrator to the ground test facility before the end of 2015 and a ground test of this demonstrator beginning of 2016. Based on a careful review of the preliminary design work done through most of 2012, it is clear that a full scale flight test engine cannot be directly derived from the upgraded ground test engine, but will require a substantial reworking, including all lessons learned in the ground testing phase. The complexity and the risks to the demonstration planning are significant and must be carefully managed. It became evident during year 2012 that a full parallel design and preparatory work on both, the ground test and the flight test engine cannot be covered with the available resources, and – as declared from beginning of CleanSky on, is not covered in the budget frame of CleanSky. The preliminary and detailed design work for the flight worthy CROR engine is now foreseen to start in 2014 in the LPA-IADP in the CleanSky 2 programme, build on the work done so far to prepare the CROR demo engine flying test bed in CleanSky SFWA to be seamlessly handed over into a follow on program with the further preparation of the flight test. According to current planning the first flight test takes place at the end of 2020. Unchanged from all earlier planning, a major review was held in summer 2013 exploiting all numerical, analytical and experimental research activities done on the CROR technology so far. The successful completion of this significant decision gate (TRL3) on 10

th July confirms the robust nature of the initial

research plan for CROR. Airbus, has confirmed the technical feasibility of the CROR powered aircraft concept as of September 2013 and the intention to continue research with its partners to address the remaining technical risks associated with open rotor technologies. Mainly for reasons of availability, the decision was taken to change the choice of the test aircraft away from the Airbus A340-600 test aircraft (“MSN360”) to the Airbus A340-300 test aircraft (“MSN001”). As before, due to the size of the A340-300, the resulting aircraft 'with CROR engine' will still be able to fly with the current test aircraft certification. The principle specification of the flight test demo engine was made in early 2013, the requirements are considered in the detailed design activities currently progressing in SAGE 2. The preliminary design of the modifications for the test aircraft will start upon reaching the CROR ground test engine PDR to be able to ensure a coherent development of the engine, the test aircraft, and all required auxiliary systems. Based on the experiences of the BLADE flight test, the later start of the CROR demo engine flight testing will not be turned into a later start of the preparation of the flight test vehicle, but used as active element to de-risk the preparation route book to for the heavy modifications of the Airbus A340-300 test bed. The completion of the test aircraft preliminary design review process is currently planned at the end Q3/2017, planned to take place in CleanSky2 LPA.

4. Long Term Technology Flight Demonstrator A key objective of the maturing of the smart wing in the SFWA-ITD is the proof of the viability of the concept and robust performance under real operational condition, providing the benefits predicted in numerical predictions and obtained in earlier laboratory or ground experiments. To validate the long term robustness of specific systems, like sensors, actuators, but also surface coatings and others, a critical, yet large number of testing in operational, i.e. flight condition are required. In the course of the development and down selection of the best candidate technologies to contribute to the smart wing, dedicated flight test activities will be prepared and conducted. In cases when only very

40/137

light modifications on the aircraft are necessary, the plan is to involve in service aircraft, if possible in partnership with airlines through call for proposals. A further long term test is currently in preparation to start flight in autumn 2015 directing to observe the contamination of the leading edge of a long range aircraft in commercial operation. Like for a former long endurance flight test campaign related to the stability of functional coatings and riblet-structured paint, important work shares will be contributed through call for proposal partners.

5. Innovative Empennage Demonstrator The integration of advanced, innovative propulsion concepts into an aircraft design requires a number of optimisations and modifications to achieve the best performance of these engines in combination with many other components of the aircraft. Integrating an advanced turbofan or a CROR engine at the rear fuselage requires major a rethinking of the rear fuselage, in particular in view of aerodynamic aspects, handling quality, but also the handling of static and dynamic loads, issues of noise shielding and certification. In the initial planning phase of SFWA-ITD a dedicated demonstration work package for this objective was anchored in the WBS, with provision to keep it as ground test, and to tailor this test in order to give priority to the other SFWA flight demonstrations, in particular the 'CROR- engine demo FTB'. The ground tests envisaged at this stage comprise a full scale after body mock up, to be tested on-ground, integrating an existing turbofan, with the objective of analyzing the capacity of noise shielding and of sustaining the harsh environment (thermal, vibrations) induced on the tail planes by the proximity of the jet exhaust. They also comprise a subscale aero-elastic test in a wind tunnel in order to analyze the flutter stability of these innovative empennages. The large scale tests are scheduled to be conducted throughout most of year 2015.

41/137

5.3 TECHNOLOGY ROAD MAP

Technology description

TRL at

2008

TRL at

2012

TRL at

2013

TRL at

2014

TRL at

2015

TRL at

2016

Comments

High aspect ratio laminar wing

3 4 4 4 5 6 Technology is part of SFWA Technology Stream NLF wing

High speed laminar wing

3 4 4 4 5 6 Technology is part of SFWA Technology Stream NLF wing

CROR engine integration

2 2 3 3 4 4 Activity is planned to be continued in CS2, to accomplish TRL6 after 2016

Noise masking empennage

3 4 4 4 5 6 Full scale demonstrator, ground test only

Innovative afterbody 3 3 3 4 5 6 Full scale demonstrator, ground test only

Improved shielding for engine burst containment


Natural Laminar Flow Smart Wing

2 3 4 4 5 6 TRL6 based on NLF wing concept defined in SFWA

Advanced load control for Smart Wing

2 2 3 4 5 5 // 6 TRL5 for advanced active load control for large transport aircraft. TRL6 for vibration control for bizjet

Low speed vibration load control for bizjets

2 2 3 4 5 5//6 TRL5 with ground test, flight test to be decided based on G/T results

Passive loads control/aeroelastic tailoring

2 2 2 3 3 3 Including gust loads control. No major demonstration planned

Advanced load monitoring/structural health monitoring

2 2 3 3 4 4

Smart Wing High Lift Trailing Edge Device

2 3 3 4 5 6 Full scale demonstrator, ground test only

Fluidic Flow Control for leading edge

2 3 3 3 3 3 Wind tunnel tests only

Fluidic Flow Control for Trailing Edge

2 3 3 3 3 3 Wind tunnel tests only

Riblet technology Turbulent flow drag reduction

2 3 4 4 5 6 Note: This technology is developed in coordination with other R&T projects, TRL6 may be achieved outside CleanSky

CROR engine integration


(*) Full scale demonstration – ground test only

42/137

5.4 SCHEDULE

To complement the activities to develop, integrate and demonstrate the technologies in SFWA, paper 'aircraft concept' studies were added to the plan, in order to be able to assess the value and consequences of the SFWA-ITD technologies at overall aircraft level in a timely coherent manner.

Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 High Speed Demonstrator Passive (HSDP)

TRL progresses

CROR Demo FTD

TRL progresses Low Speed Demonstrator (LSD)

TRL progresses Short Range Aircraft Concept (SRA)

TRL progresses Low Sweep Bizjet Concept (LSBJ)

TRL progresses High Sweep Bizjet Concept (HSBJ)

TRL progresses

2008 2009 2010 2011 2016 2012 2013 2014 2015

TRL scale 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

3 4 5 6 2

Preliminary design Detailed design

PDR

Manufacturing A/C

Chantier G F CDR

Preliminary design Detailed design

PDR CDR

Evaluation

CER

6

Preliminary Detailed design

PDR CDR

Evaluation

CER

6

Concep

Preliminary Detailed design

PDR CDR

Evaluation

CER

6

Concept

6 3

3

3

3

Design

Manufacturing

Ground Test

In Flight Test

CLIntegration CL* Detailed Design

Vibration control Preliminary Design

2 3 5 4

CL I ntegration CL

Update Flight Test

LDR PDR CDR LDR - FT PDR - FT CDR - FT

* CL = Control Law Go ahead is confirmed at LDR (Launch Design Review)

Ground Test

A/C Integr. Study

CROR Config. Studies

A/C Prelimary Design Feasability Study

G/T propulsion system PDR

Demo engine spec

G/T prop. syst. CDR

- FTD CFR

SAGE 2 G/T engine

development & test

Test A/C preparation

3

G/T engine first run

6

4

Analysis delta spec G/T vs. F/T engine

CS2

FT engine preparation

F/T engine Prelimary Design

2

5

engine

43/137

5.5 FORECAST METHODOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE TARGETS

Summary of targeted results for concept aircraft

Y2000

Technology Concept (2020)

Forecast 1

Aircraft Concepts AIRCRAFT AIRCRAFT CO2 [%] NOx [%] Noise

[EPNdB]

Business AIRCRAFT

Low-speed bizjet, TF powered

F2000EX 'Resized'

LSBJ -30 to -40 -30 to -40 -7.5 to -10 2

High-speed bizjet, TF powered

F900/ F7X 'Resized'

HSBJ -25 to -35 -25 to -35

-2.5 to -5

2

Short/medium range AIRCRAFT

SMR AIRCRAFT RPL1

Based on A320

SFWA-APL4 -8 to -12

-8 to -12 4

-5 to -7 3

RPL1 Based

on A320 SFWA-APL1/2 -25 to -35

-25 to -35

4 -4 to -6

3

Long range AIRCRAFT

LR AIRCRAFT, TF powered

SFWA-RFP2

Based on A330

SFWA-APL3 -7 to -12 5 -7 to -12

4,5 -5 to -7

3

(1) The figures indicate an indicative range which results from the sum of technologies which are expected to reach TRL6

within the Clean Sky programme timeframe. While not all of these technologies will be directly demonstrated in flight through the Clean Sky programme, it is difficult, at this stage, to isolate the particular benefits derived only from Clean Sky funding. The technologies derived from Clean Sky will achieve the target of a synergy effect in European Research in the area of aeronautics.

(2) Per operation, averaged, compared to 2000-level performance. Effect of operational measures (trajectories) included

(3) Per operation, averaged, compared to 2000-levels. Effect of operational measures (trajectories) included. OPENAIR benefits not included

(4) Lean Burn (SAGE 6) not included at this stage

(5) Benefits from SAGE 3 not included at this stage

44/137

Environmental forecast methodology for bizjet, SMR and LR aircraft Overall vehicle level environmental forecasts are determined according to the following process, which also describes current emissions reduction forecasts:

To be computed

45/137

5.6 ENGINE / AIRFRAME MANUFACTURERS MAIN INTERFACE

The planning above, associated with the following description of activities, define the main interfaces between SAGE and SFWA regarding the integration of the CROR on a SFWA Platform: As explained in the related sections for SFWA and SAGE in more detail, the planning displayed in the above chart is based on the latest joint planning between both ITDs issued in December 2012. Owing to the complexity of the development work, the amount of resources and cost associated with this exercise, and the required harmonization with the R&T strategy of the involved ITD-members, the decision was taken to separate the development routes of the ground and flight test demo engine. Further, including the intermediate results, and finally taking the decision to account for the risks that have been accumulated in the schedule in the previous years, an updated CROR engine development plan was jointly put in place leading to an update of the flight test plan with first flight to take place from 2020 on accommodated in Clean Sky 2, with a wider set of technical objectives.

Open Rotor Feasibility Studies within SAGE 1 and SAGE 2:

Alongside with rig tests includes continuation of noise and aero design methods and tools development, and evaluation of test data and associated improvement and validation

Working together with Airbus on mounting and installation, flight test instrumentation, flight clearance requirements, noise test requirements and feasibility provisions to ensure representativeness, Safety and Reliability analysis alongside with flight clearance strategy affecting ground and flight testing, whole engine and aircraft modelling, controls integration concepts

Minimum underlying ORD design support

Whole engine modelling and DMU

Slave system requirements

Working with partners on other elements like turbines and PGB

CROR blade mechanical design and material definition evolution

Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

SAGE 1 Geared Open Rotor

TRL progresses


TRL progresses

CROR Demo FTB

TRL progresses

2014 2015 20162008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

TRL scale 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

3 4 5 62

2

555

3

Design

Manufacturing

Ground Test

In Flight Test

OR Concept Studies

OR Feasibility Studies2 4 Manufact.

Build/

OR Config Studies Concept

Prelimina

Detail

PDRCoDR

3

SFWAdecision

2

555

3

Concept studies option 1

Scorecard Manufacturing

Build/Instrum

(6)

Critical Components Preliminary

Preliminary

Detail Design

GTD CDR

GTD PDR

SFWAConfiguration

Gate Review

Geared ORSelection


CoR

3 5

GSFWAGo No Go

4

Design manufacturing and build for Flight test * H2020

Analysi

s

(6)

2

G/T propulsion system PDR

G/T prop.system CDR

A/C Integr. Study

*: No funding identified in Clean Sky

(6)

A/C Integr. Study

(6)

43

FTD CFR

A/C Detailed Design

5

A/C Integr. Study

CROR Config. Studies

Feasability StudyManufac-turing

Pylon mounts/ relocated

engine systems

A/C PDR

Analysis delta spec G/T vs. F/T engine

A/C Prel. Design

G/T enginefirst run

Pylon mounts MAT C

H2020

Demo engine

spec

46/137

Continues evaluation of representation of ORD with regards to potential final product definitions

Open Rotor feasibility studies in SFWA in 2012 and 2013 and key decision gate review to continue already completed

Review of existing certification rules and proposal new OR certification rules with industry and authorities

Development of high fidelity tools for aerodynamic assessment of aircraft configuration with OR integration including the calculation of drag effects.

Conduct of high fidelity rig tests including the prior development of required means and equipment, continues improvement and validation

Development of calculation methods to forecast low and high frequency induced vibration effects of installed OR including the evaluation of vibration treatment.

o Working together with engine manufacturers on mounting and installation, ventilation & fire Zones, flight test instrumentation, flight clearance requirements, noise test requirements and feasibility provisions to ensure representativity.

o GO decision at the end of 2012 and passing of formal decision milestone mid 2013. Technical feasibility is secured, technology must be further developed to be economically viable.

Large subscale low speed Z08 aircraft model tests, first isolated and subsequently with CROR / pylon to achieve high fidelity aerodynamic and acoustic characterization in industry-type wind tunnel facilities.

Full aircraft model testing at the end of 2012 and in 2013.

Following the feasibility gate review in July 2013 Rolls Royce took the decision to minimise Open Rotor activities further under Clean Sky and will deliver low TRL technologies and associated designs under SAGE 1. Based on this work Rolls-Royce has decided that there is still much to do to prove the system level benefits of the concept and that full scale demonstration within the Clean Sky timeframe is no longer appropriate. Rolls-Royce remains committed to the CROR concept, but in the near term, within SAGE 1, will limit activities to focus on developing the TRL4 of the fundamental enabling technologies.

The SAGE 2 project will demonstrate a Geared Pusher Open Rotor architecture applicable to the Single Aisle short / medium range aircraft with “Side Fuselage Nacelle” installation (30 klbs class thrust). The SAGE 2 project builds on technology developments in existing national, European and privately-funded programmes and aims at raising critical open rotor technologies to TRL5.

5.7 COST COMMITTED / EXPENDED AND FORECAST COST TO COMPLETION

At the time of the operational launch of Clean Sky in June 2008, the SFWA technical programme was tailored towards a total volume of activities equivalent to 393M€. With the development of the demonstrator strategy and the selection of the main flight test demonstrator vehicles being implicit to the work programme, yet not known in any detail, the assumption was that ~185M€ will have to be directed to the main elements of the flight test programme with an equal sharing between main Work-packages WP1 “Smart Wing Technology Development “ and WP2 “New Configuration”. In the course of the progressing SFWA technical programme, the Airbus A340-300 was selected in early 2010 as the viable solution for a representative test emerging from a fully technical motivated competitive selection with a very large UAV and the Alpha Jet, and the Airbus A340-600 was chosen in summer 2010 as the only appropriate test bed for the CROR demo-engine flight tests. The decision for the low speed the innovative rear empennage large scale ground demonstrator as well as the low speed vibration control flight test – all based on a Dassault Falcon 7X vehicle, were all taken in winter 2011 / 2012 by the Management Committee respectively Steering Committee. All these decision have been taken with a clear eye on the potential cost, but with a strong “as required to validate” the technology mind-set. With all major demonstrator decisions having been taken and following the re-alignment of the SFWA programme along “Technology Streams” being accomplished in autumn 2011, a top down “to completion

47/137

analysis” was conducted showing that the cost to completion for all programme main lines would lead to a per rata moderate, but in absolute terms still substantial overrun of the initially committed budget target. A detailed bottom up cost to completion analysis which was launched in autumn 2011 and finished after summer 2012 led to very similar figures. A recalculation of the funding shares in Clean Sky per ITD in the GAM and GAP based on “as is” Call for proposal funding rates and with Running Cost being taken out from the funding volume available for the GAMs, revealed in October 2012 that the nominal SFWA gross target completion is not 393M€ but significantly lower. With decision of the CleanSky Governing Board at the 22

nd March 2013, the maximum

available funding for SFWA-ITD is 140,48M€ for ITD-members (“GAM”) and 50,13M€ for CfP-partners (“GAP”). Applying a funding rate of 50% for GAM beneficiaries and “as is” average rate 65% for GAP beneficiaries, the available funding translates into 358,1M€ gros budget available for operational activities. Essentially driven by the technical evolution of the BLADE program and the review and alignment of all spend figures between the SFWA beneficiaries and the CSJU, the Cost to Completion plan was again reviewed and updated in October 2013 (CtC version v20). The calculated total gross is 419,4M€. It is important to note that this value is including a provision to continue the Technology Stream 7 (TS7) CROR engine integration related activities for the entire year 2014, to account for the uncertainty to have the opportunity to shift these work packages into another funded R&T program early in 2014.

Following a further review of the BLADE planning at the end of 2013 to take the progress of work in year 2013 into account, a full Cost to completion review was done in the first half of year 2014. The yield of this “CtC21” review loop was that total gross amount of activities to completion is 441M€, which meant 83M€ beyond the available budget at the time. The BLADE project has secured a further 6.5m € funding allocated through the GB endorsement of the JU complementary funding proposal of October 2014. While further funding requests remain on the table at the JU, the development plan will be amended if/when this funding is made available and according to the ranking list agreed at GB level. The funding requested for the ONERA Bizjet innovative afterbody large scale wind tunnel test is in this list. As in all ITDs, a possible re-allocation within the ITD will be first examined at the moment the 2014 final execution figures are known in March 2015 and based on the ITD planning for the remainder of the programme in all areas.

48/137

6. GRA ITD ACTIVITIES


Future green regional aircraft will have to meet demanding weight reduction, energy and aerodynamics efficiency, a high level of operative performance, in order to be compliant regards to pollutant emissions and noise generation levels. In order to achieve these so challenging results, the aircraft will be entirely revisited in all of its aspects.

The GRA technological areas structure is as follows:

GRA1 - Low Weight Configuration (LWC)

GRA2 - Low Noise Configuration (LNC)

GRA3 - All Electric Aircraft (AEA)

GRA4 - Mission & Trajectory Management (MTM)

GRA5 - New Configuration (NC)

This reflects its transversal nature by being organized in 5 domains, that in turn interface with the other JTI platforms, such as Eco-Design (EDA for Airframe with LWC, EDS for System with AEA), System for Green Operation with AEA and MTM, and Sustainable and Green Engine (SAGE) with NC. It is necessary to concentrate on some very promising 'mainstream' technologies, but also draw the benefits of other technologies in an integrated view of their cumulative and reciprocal effects. Objective of the Green Regional Aircraft ITD is to mature, validate and demonstrate the technologies best fitting the environmental goals set for the regional aircraft that will fly in 2020+. The environmental forecasts are under regular verification in line with what has been presented in the interim assessment and together with the Technology Evaluator platform. The GRA Demonstration Programme is a cost-effective mix of ground and flight tests covering the aspects of integration of airframe, systems and engines technical solutions at the aircraft level.

6.2 DESCRIPTION OF WORK PACKAGES

GRA1: Low Weight Configuration

The GRA1 Domain, which deals mostly with structures, will consider all the solutions that may enable considerable weight reduction, from the improvement of current composite materials with more innovative solutions such as multi-functional Layer and Multi-layer architectures that can ensure electric conductivity and lightning resistance without additional special items- i.e. with no additional weight - and a better acoustic insulation, to the introduction of new lower-density aluminum alloys (Al-Li). Advanced manufacturing and assembly techniques will also be tested for these alloys. The Domain will also review the possibility to use various sensor technologies embedded in the composite to monitor structure health status & report degradation of its mechanical properties. The down-selection process of the technologies matured in the first part of the programme will proceed through theoretical studies supported by advanced modeling tools and extensive small-medium size structural tests. Demonstration is envisaged on ground, on full scale representative assemblies of wing and fuselage sections, and in-flight, changing selected components of an existing regional aircraft with the advanced solutions which will have been developed during the Programme. Major performed milestones and demonstration activities are as follow:

Coupon Testing: First down selection Q2 2011

Testing of Large Stiffened Panels: Second down selection Q3 2012

49/137

One Piece Barrel (OPB): demonstrator pre-production manufacturing (PPM) Q4 2013

The planned Final Demonstration is:

Full Scale Ground Demo: Test Readiness Review (TRR) Q1 2015

GRA 2: Low Noise Configuration

The GRA2 Domain, which deals mostly with aerodynamics and aero-acoustics aspects, will evaluate the effects of drag reduction and of low-noise solutions aimed at reducing the aircraft fuel consumption and external noise. Drag in particular will be reduced by using a Natural Laminar Flow (NLF) wing that will be integrated with specific anti-ice and high lift systems or with flow and load control systems. In order to reduce external noise relevant studies will deal mostly with approach and landing phases, improving high lift device (HLD) technologies. Landing gears will also require a better aerodynamic optimization than in the past in order to reduce turbulent flows, thus reducing airframe noise. The down-selection process of the addressed technologies is planned to be carried out through multi-disciplinary theoretical studies, preliminary wind-tunnel tests and experiments on small-scale mechanical prototypes. Technologies demonstrations will mainly relying on large-scale wind-tunnel tests on AIRCRAFT configurations models.

Major closed milestones are:

Low Noise & High Efficiency High Lift Devices Second down selection: Q3 2012

Natural Laminar Flow Wing HLD Second down selection: Q3 2012

The planned Demonstrations are:

NLF wing aerodynamic & aero-elastic design WTT: Green Concept 130 Pax GTF Q2 2015 start; Q4 2015 closure:

Acoustic & Aerodynamic WTT: Green Concept 90 Pax TP Q3 2015 start; Q4 2015 closure;

GRA 3: All Electric Aircraft

The GRA3 Domain will develop new A/C systems based on the Bleedless Engine architecture allowing the optimization of engine power extraction and, consequently, enabling reduced fuel consumption. In particular, the Wing Ice Protection System (WIPS), the Environmental Control System (ECS) and the Cabin Pressurization will not be powered by the engine thermodynamic extraction but by electric power. In this manner, utilizing an appropriate Energy Management System, it will be possible to reduce the fuel consumption by utilizing the superior flexibility of an electrical system. This will be the first step towards the so-called All-Electric Aircraft, where all on-board utilities will use only the electric power output by generators connected to the engine. Development of relevant data through dedicated studies, simulations and test as a meaningful ATR Integrated In-flight Demonstration and a Ground Laboratory Test are foreseen. To achieve such objectives the GRA AEA domain activities are performed in tight cooperation with “Transversal” ITDs (SGO, EDS) and are mainly focusing on:

Specification of the requirements for the design and integration of on-board systems; identification of AEA architectures and configurations for the next generation regional aircraft;

In-flight demonstration of some critical sub-systems (E-ECS, Power Center, etc.) in order to demonstrate that relevant solutions correctly perform in the real regional aircraft operative environment.

Major closed event of this domain is:

ATR Integrated In-Flight Test: Critical Design Review (CDR) Q2 2013

and the planned one is:

ATR Integrated In-Flight Test: Flight Readiness Review (FRR) Q1 2015

50/137

GRA 4: Mission & Trajectory Management

In the future important benefits, in terms of environmental impact, are envisaged from the evolution of Mission and Trajectory Management (MTM) for regional aircraft. The aim of this domain is to study new green FMS (Flight Management System) functions and to demonstrate environmental benefits coming from the adoption of such a technology

MTM activities will be performed in tight cooperation with Systems for Green Operations (SGO) ITD: the overall idea is that the GRA ITD defines regional aircraft high level requirements and MTM peculiar functionalities. These inputs are provided to SGO ITD in order to be taken into account during technology studies. When ready, the technologies will be provided to the GRA ITD for development and integration in the regional aircraft simulator. Finally, GRA flight simulator is used to run tests to assess the environmental benefits deriving from the new green technologies.

The major milestones reached are:

Green FMS availability (2nd

Release) Q2 2013

Green FMS availability(3rd

Release) Q3 2014

and the planned one is:

Green FMS Final Demonstration on GRA Flight Simulator Q2 2015

GRA 5: New Configuration

First of all, comprehensive high level requirements (including power-plant) of regional aircraft will be developed. Starting from that, a complete set of system engineering requirements and technical specifications will be derived. Trade-off studies will be performed for the assessment of the aircraft general architectures and performance that are the 'best fit' with respect to the GRA environmental forecast. These trade-offs will be based on the overall contribution of GRA technologies developed in the others technical domains.

In particular, Regional aircraft high level requirements, including power-plant, will be defined for two different seats class: 90 and 130, for which the sizing and the preliminary design of the following A/Cs will be developed, with reference to the GRA GA documentation:

Two Reference A/C:

o 90 pax with TurboProp engine

o 130 pax with TurboFan engine

Five Green Concept A/C:

o 90 pax, with TP engine

o 130 pax, with OR engine

o 130 pax, with Advanced TF engine

o 130 pax, with Geared TF engine, Under Wing mounted

o 130 pax, with Geared TF engine, Rear Fuselage mounted

Nevertheless according to the current strategy, presented and agreed during the last GRA AR 2011, two GRASMs (A/C Simulation Models of the GRA ITD), for the Green concept A/C, will be delivered to TE.

51/137

The above Green Concept A/C will be developed through three Design Loops. For the 130 pax GTF, a trade-off study to select the best configuration between “Under Wing mounted” and “Rear Fuselage mounted” powerplant has been performed at the end of the second Loop.

The integrated technologies developed will be tested by means a specific Aerodynamic and Aero-acoustic WT campaign, in particular including the investigation of an aeroacoustic integration of the Open Rotor Engine in the 130 Pax concept.

Major expected milestones and demonstration activities are as follow:

Aerodynamic WTT of 130 Pax Q2 2015

Aerodynamic & Aero-acoustic WTT Large-Scaled A/C 130 Pax Q3 2015

NC, for the assessment of the Technology Evaluator, has provided the GRASM for the Reference A/C and for the following Green Concept A/C in order to contribute to the Clean Sky assessment:

GRASM of Green 90 Pax TP

GRASM of Green 130 Pax GTF of the best A/C configuration resulting from the trade-off between “Under Wing" and “Rear Fuselage” engine mounted A/C configurations.

For the third and final loop, only the GRASMs of Green 90 Pax & Green 130 Pax GTF (Rear Fuselage engine mounted) will be delivered to the TE.

52/137


The TRL development of each Advanced Technology of GRA is showed in the table hereafter:

* GRA activities are planned to be closed within 2015 year. No technical activities are foreseen for year 2016; however in case of need for extension of GAPs this will be taken into account..

53/137

The matching between the system (technological domain), the aircraft subsystem and related

advanced technologies are showed in this figure:

54/137

6.4 SCHEDULES

The planning of the 'Technologies Studies' and 'Demonstration' are hereafter represented:

55/137

Concerning the Technologies Studies, the planning of the “Advanced Technologies” developed in each

GRA Domain is showed in the following:

Figure 7 – GRA “Advanced Technologies (LWC & LNC)” Plan

Figure 8 – GRA “Advanced Technologies (AEA, MTM & NC)” Plan

56/137

6.5 ENVIRONMENTAL FORECAST METHODOLOGY AND PERFORMANCE TARGETS

Summary of targeted results for concept aircraft (integrating GRA, SAGE, SGO)

The relevant Environmental Forecast for each couple of Reference/Future Conceptual AIRCRAFT are represented in the following table:

Y2000

Technology

Concept (2020)

Forecast

Aircraft Concepts AIRCRAFT AIRCRAFT CO2 [%] NOx [%] Noise [EPNdB]

Average single operation

Regional AIRCRAFT

Source noise reduction

Operational measures

90 Pax, TP Engine powered AIRCRAFT

ATR72-500

'Resized' TP90 2020 -25 to -30 -25 to -30 -1 to -3.3 -1 to -2

130 Pax, GTF Engine powered AIRCRAFT

Embraer E-190

'Resized' GTF130 2020 -27 to -35 -27 to -35 -4 to -7 -1 to -2

Tab. 1: GRA environmental Clean Sky targets [1]

1 The figures indicate an indicative range which results from the sum of technologies which are developed within the Clean Sky programme timeframe. While not all of these technologies will be directly demonstrated in flight through the Clean Sky programme, it is difficult, at this stage, to isolate the particular benefits derived only from Clean Sky funding. The technologies derived from Clean Sky will achieve the target of a synergy effect in European Research in the Aeronautics area.

The environmental forecast will be achieved according to the Maturity developed (TRL) of the GRA Advanced Technologies.

System/Subsystem environmental forecast

According to GRA, the 'System' is identified as a Technological Domain, since it is not deemed feasible to control the environmental target of a further breakdown. The relevant Environmental Targets are showed hereafter:

System/

Technological Domain

Conceptual AIRCRAFT

Environmental forecast (wrt reference)

CO2 [%] NOX [%] Noise

[EPNdB]

Low Weight Configuration TP90 2020 -2 to -4 -2 to -4 N/A

GTF130 2020 -4 to -6 -4 to -6 N/A

Low Noise Configuration TP90 2020 -3 to -5 -3 to -5 -1 to -6

GTF130 2020 -4 to -7 -4 to -7 -1 to -6

All Electric Aircraft TP90 2020 -1 to -3 -1 to -3 N/A

GTF130 2020 -1 to -3 -1 to -3 N/A

Mission & Trajectory Management

TP90 2020 -2 to -4 -2 to -4 -1 to -2

GTF130 2020 -1 to -3 -1 to -3 -1 to -2

The environmental forecast for both Concept Aircraft (90 Pax – TP & 130 Pax GTF) with the relative environmental target of each 'Technological Domain' under study, is showed in the figures hereafter:

57/137

Forecast 90 Pax TP, AIRCRAFT

Systems/Subsystem updated environmental forecast for GRA 90 Pax

Forecast 130 Pax GTF AIRCRAFT

Systems/Subsystem updated environmental forecast for GRA 130 Pax

All Electric

Aircraft

Green Regional Aircraft Technology and Environmental Targets

Low Noise

Configuration

Low Weight

Configuration

-2 /-4%

Fuel Burn

- 3 /-5%

Fuel Burn

-8 /-16 %

Fuel Burn-8 /-16 % CO2 -8 /-16 % NOx

Mission &

Trajectory

Management

Structural Weight

Reduction -6/-8 %4/6 % L/D

Improvement

Turbulence &

Vortex

Reduction

Trajectories

Optimization

-1 / -3 %

Fuel Burn

-2 /-4%

Fuel Burn

-1 /-6

EPNdB * *

- 1/-2 EPNdB * *

New

Configuration

Integration

Power

Optimization

* * Depending on single point value, at A/C level, from ground demo extrapolated to flight

* With respect to the Cumulative Noise Levels (sum of three Certification Points) of the Resized Ref. A/C

without Engine

Contribution

-25 / -30 % CO2 -25 / -30 % NOx-3 /-10 EPNdB *-25 /-30 %

Fuel Burn

to Technology Evaluator

All Electric

Aircraft

Green Regional Aircraft Technology and Environmental Targets

Low Noise

Configuration

Low Weight

Configuration

-4 /-6%

Fuel Burn

-4 /-7%

Fuel Burn

-10 /-19 %

Fuel Burn-10 /-19 % CO2 -10 /-19 % NOx

Mission &

Trajectory

Management

Structural Weight

Reduction -8/-10 %5/8 % L/D

Improvement

Turbulence &

Vortex

Reduction

Trajectories

Optimization

-1 / -3 %

Fuel Burn

-1 /-3%

Fuel Burn

-1 /-6

EPNdB * *

- 1/-2 EPNdB * *

New

Configuration

Integration

Power

Optimization

* * Depending on single point value, at A/C level, from ground demo extrapolated to flight

* With respect to the Cumulative Noise Levels (sum of three Certification Points) of the Resized Ref. A/C

without Engine

Contribution

-27 /-35 % CO2 -27 /-35 % NOx-12 / -21 EPNdB *-27 /-35 %

Fuel Burn

to Technology Evaluator

58/137

6.6 ENGINE / AIRFRAME MANUFACTURERS MAIN INTERFACE:

The Main Interface between the Engine manufacturer, present in GRA and SAGE ITDs, and the Airframers in GRA, is hereafter represented:

59/137


Brief history of the GRA budget evolution from the operational launch of Clean Sky in 2008, is the following: A global GRA budget (174,21 M€) was agreed during the SC #1 in 2008, based on the assumption of 50% funding for the CfP. There were a few changes in the GRA roadmap since the project operational start in the September of year 2008, but the overall strategic project objectives of the ITD are basically unchanged. The shift of the Call-for-Proposal launch caused un-doubtfully some initial trouble for the activities. All the activities not completed in 2009, 2010 and 2011 were developed respectively in 2010, 2011 and 2012 and the deliverables have been rescheduled accordingly. The motivation of the above delays were the engine performance data release for the new configuration domain and related sizing loops-i activities, and difficulties in the availability and acquisition process through the standard commercial channels of the very advanced experimental material in low weight configuration domain. Moreover in accordance with recent indications by regional market analysis and taking into account some preliminary results of engine technologies maturation for the future products, GRA started a major effort to investigate advanced turboprop (TP) A/C, that would likely the first to enter into service. Having considered that some modifications were introduced (as already declared in the GB#10), especially in Low Noise domain, and in particular for the Landing Gear. The work program was addressed towards MLG & NLG architectures for a high-wing A/C configuration. In Mission & Trajectory Management and All Electric Aircraft domains no particular delays were expected.

Moreover, upon the CSJU request to develop a GTF (SAGE4) powered 130 pax Regional Jet an additional budget for GRA was estimated to be necessary for main activities regard to A/C sizing and configuration development and A/C Simulation Model (ASM) for TE. Consequently, some additional activities in GRA of Alenia moved to Cira.

So, New Configuration domain will deliver to TE, according to the current strategy presented and agreed during the GRA AR 2011, two GRASMs (A/C Simulation Models of the GRA ITD) of Reference A/C:

90 pax with Turbo-Prop engine 130 pax with Turbo-Fan engine and two GRASMs (A/C Simulation Models of the GRA ITD) of the Green concept A/C:

GRASM of Green 90 Pax TP GRASM of Green 130 Pax GTF In particular, from the TE Assessment of 2013, the Green 130 Pax GTF will be the best A/C configuration resulting from the trade-off (at the end of the second Loop) between “Under Wing" and “Rear Fuselage” engine mounted A/C configurations.

Green Concept A/C 130 pax, with Advanced TurboFan and Open Rotor engines will be developed only for an internal GRA ITD performance evaluation: no Aircraft Simulation Model will be delivered to TE.

GRASM of Green 90 Pax & Green 130 Pax GTF (“Rear Fuselage” engine mounted) related to the Third Loop delivered in October 2014 to the TE.

In October 2012, the GRA ITD, having had an internal review of its budget execution and future planning, initiated steps to request a funding increase to the JU. Subsequently, during the Interim Progress Review meeting at end of January 2013 the experts requested further technical reviews in order to better evaluated the content of activities and related budget. Finally, in total GRA request was of 2,0 M€ of extra funding for members. CLEAN SKY JU GOVERNING BOARD (MEETING 22 March 2013 – Brussels) adopted the 2.0 M€ funding for the GAM of the GRA ITD as the ITD exhausted its internal possibilities and demonstrated in a sufficient way the added scope of activities. The following table presents the foreseen budget approved during the GRA #2 Steering Committee held on April 2013 in Pomigliano. This budget data includes sub-contracted activities, but excludes CfPs

60/137

GRA Overall Members Budget and Funding:

BUDGET (M€)

FUNDING (M€)

ITD Leaders + Associates

135.68 67.84

Since some beneficiaries had already almost consumed their budget, a re-visiting of the members budget was necessary. A re-allocation of resources within the GRA ITD to allow funding those activities which, while being needed for a successful completion of GRA Project, could be not covered by the remaining budget of relevant involved Members, was unanimously approved by GRA Steering Committee #1 held in February 2014.

The Overall Funding break-up view GRA in percentage for ITDs Members,Associates and CfP is reported below:

The Funding expected by JU for GRA Call for Proposal is about 23,5 M€. The estimate for CfP #1 to #16 is based on negotiation outcome for the funding ratio.

As with all ITDs, the JU is monitoring the actual spend of the GRA ITD and will investigate further if the entire envelope will finally be consumed. Actual implementation of the 2013 budget showed a lower than 100% consumption and 2014 is soon expected to be lower than 100% also. The JU will then check with the ITD how it plans to demonstrate that the entire envelope is indeed still required and if there is any room for release of funding to other ITDs.

61/137

7 GRC ITD ACTIVITIES


The Rotorcraft ITD in the Clean Sky responds to the challenge of minimising the impact of sharply increasing rotorcraft traffic including the introduction of tilt-rotors through a much more efficient usage of energy and through a drastic reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and noise footprints throughout the whole mission spectrum.

The objective to be achieved within the next 10 years as resulting from Clean Sky (outputs from Green Rotorcraft ITD and contributions from other ITDs - mainly the Sustainable and Green Engine and Eco-Design ITD), along with outputs of other already launched technology programmes, is to halve the specific impact of any rotorcraft operation on the environment. The proposed GRC ITD encompasses a wide range of activities dedicated to light, medium and heavy helicopter applications. The programme is composed of six Work packages focused on technical matters and one Work package ensuring the interface with the Technology Evaluator, as follows:

GRC1 – Innovative rotor blades

GRC2 – Drag reduction of airframe and non-lifting rotating systems

GRC3 – Integration of innovative electrical systems

GRC4 – Installation of a High Compression Engine (HCE) on a light helicopter

GRC5 – Environment-friendly flight paths

GRC6 – Eco-Design Demonstrators (Rotorcraft)

GRC7 – Technology Evaluator for Rotorcraft (interface and preparation)

GRC depends on Systems for Green Operations (SGO) to complete their activity and also on Eco-design (ECO) and Sustainable and Green Engines (SAGE) in order to fulfill the environmental Clean Sky objectives. The cross-relation between GRC Work pages (WP) and other ITDs is given in the table below. Each of the technologies developed in the GRC WPs provides contribution to the 3 Clean Sky environmental objectives in terms of emission, noise and life-cycle.

7.2 DETAILED WORK PACKAGES DESCRIPTION

Detailed activities planned within each Work Packages are described in this part.

GRC 1: Innovative rotor blades

The activities in GRC1 – 'Innovative Rotor Blades' are aiming at the development of active and passive technologies to provide the greatest possible reduction in rotor noise and fuel consumption. Activities are organized around 3 main streams:

Stream 1 – Active Twist Blades

o The aim is to reduce mainly noise and vibrations but as well at a lesser scale power required through the use of active twist providing more optimal blade twist distributions in both hover and cruise (building upon results gained in the FP6 FRIENDCOPTER Integrated Project).

62/137

Stream 2 - New Active Technology o The principal aim is to reduce fuel consumption and exhaust emissions by means of an

active blade device, which improves rotor aerodynamic performance and dynamic attributes while maintaining stall envelopes and containing vibration. AGF is now extended to a flight test activity.

Stream 3 – New optimized passive design approach

o The aim is to reduce rotor noise and fuel consumption by means of optimization of plan-form, twist and anhedral (lower drag, less noise). This optimization is to be conducted using state-of-the-art tools not previously available addressing aerodynamic and aero-elastic simulation and optimization techniques. The optimized passive rotor activity is proposed to be extended to a flight test activity, pending the availability of additional funding.

Technology Demonstration

o The technologies developed in GRC1, towards active or passive rotor blades, will be demonstrated on various levels of system integration: component testing (sub-systems & wind tunnel), model rotor testing (wind tunnel), full scale ground testing (whirl tower) and flight testing (AGF).

GRC 2: Drag reduction of airframe and non-lifting rotating systems

The main objective of GRC2 is the reduction of various rotorcraft (helicopter and tilt rotor) components drag, aimed at increasing airframe and non-lifting rotating systems aerodynamic efficiency. Innovative techniques, both passive and active, will be developed for drag abatement of helicopter rotor hub, helicopter and tilt rotor fuselage and empennage and tilt rotor wings. Moreover the engine installation architectures will be improved as far as pressure losses and pressure distortions are concerned. Various passive and active drag reduction methodologies, focused on the above mentioned rotorcraft components will be assessed: shape optimization, vortex generators, synthetic/pulsed jets, controllable surfaces). They will be assessed against various helicopter configurations:

Two light helicopters of the AHg and AW family respectively,

One medium AHg helicopter

One heavy AW helicopter and two common platforms, namely GOAHEAD helicopter and ERICA tilt rotor.

These techniques will be numerically investigated, design of components will be optimized and the most promising configurations will be manufactured and tested in the wind tunnel. Effects of the proposed solutions on rotorcraft cost, weight and performance will be assessed as well, together with feasibility aspects, and a selection of components will be prototyped in full scale for ground and flight tests of the previously identified light helicopters. The isolated enhanced components developed for both helicopter and tilt rotor will be finally combined on the common platform configurations in order to obtain overall optimized designs, which will be tested in extensive final wind tunnel campaigns.

GRC 3: Integration of innovative electrical systems

The activities in GRC 3 aim to develop electrical solutions for the next generation of rotorcraft. The new electrical architecture and technologies to be developed should enable future on-board energy systems to comply with the following objectives toward more environmentally friendly helicopter operations:

Replacement of hydraulic systems on rotorcraft by electrically-powered systems

Improved overall electrical power system energy efficiency

Reduction of power systems mass

63/137

To reach those objectives, GRC 3 activities are organized around 3 main activities:

Power management on rotorcraft: from new architecture scheming for on board management system to test and integration of new electrical technologies coming from new partners to be down selected through Call for proposals or existing Members already part of Clean Sky

Electromechanical Actuators: replacement of hydraulic actuators with electromechanical actuation (EMA) for flight controls of the reference helicopter application (joint activities with the ITD SGO), and of a light helicopter application, and for utility consumer systems

Electric Tail Rotor: from the needs requirements to define key features to the modeling/ simulation and testing of a prototype on a dedicated rig in order to evaluate the potential benefits of an electrical tail rotor drive system.

Tests and analysis for each topic will converge toward an integrated system demonstrator:

A complete helicopter electrical system demonstration to be performed on the EDS Common Test Bench and on an Electrical Tail Rotor bench.

In addition, it is expected that there will a number of partial demonstrations at sub-system/ equipment level which will de-risk the integrated demonstration.

GRC 4: Installation of a High Compression Engine (HCE) on a light helicopter

Extreme low specific fuel consumption can be obtained by transferring existing turbocharged reciprocating engine technology developed in the automotive industry (Diesel type) to helicopter applications. This work package aims at:

Developing a demonstration high compression engine (after down selection of a partner through a call), based on the adaptation to helicopter specifications of modern Diesel engine technologies

Determining the integration of diesel engine on a modified light helicopter, i.e. the integration of a flight worthy helicopter demonstrator.

Performing ground and flight tests to be conducted with that light helicopter demonstrator to make the assessment of gas emission level reduction and maturity of the concept developed.

The demonstrator planned for this activity is a flight worthy helicopter demonstrator based on EC120 and modified to integrate a Diesel engine, to be tested on ground and in flight. This includes the main modified/new components: primary structure, engine installation, power transmission, control system. The development of a flightworthy Diesel power pack designed for helicopter use (standard Jet A kerosene fuel, power rating, weight reduction, FADEC, gearbox, clutch system, cooling system) is an essential part of this demonstration activity.

GRC 5: Environment-friendly flight paths -

The goal of subproject GRC5, for both helicopters and tiltrotors, is to (1) reduce polluting emissions through environment-friendly missions and flight paths, leading to a reduction of CO2 and fuel consumption for helicopter and tiltrotor aircraft, and (2) to develop new low-noise procedures to minimise the noise perceived on ground during the departure, low level flight and approach. Four Technology Streams (TS), each one made up of one or more Technology Products (TP), which correspond to single work-packages of the project:

TS1 eco-Flight Procedures, encompassing TP1 (Eco-flight VFR Procedure for H/C and T/R), TP2 (Eco-flight IFR Procedure for H/C and T/R) and TP3 (Eco-Flight IFR Procedures for H/C with FMS), with the aim of developing and testing flyable, real-world low-noise flight procedures for helicopters and Tiltrotors relying on accurate GNSS navigation (EGNOS, Galileo);

TS2 eco-Flight Planner, corresponding to TP4 (Eco-Flight Planner), focused on the development of software tools to plan low-pollutant emissions by optimizing before flight helicopter/tiltrotor altitude, speed and rate of climb profiles;

64/137

TS3 eco-Flight Guidance, composed by TP5 (Eco-Flight VFR Real-Time Mission Guidance), TP6 (Eco-Flight VFR Approach Guidance) and TP7 (Eco-Flight IFR Approach Guidance), with the goal of developing and testing in flight guidance systems able to provide pilot cues regarding the low-noise path to follow or the acoustic emission in run-time, improving situational awareness and reducing workload;

TS4: eco-Technologies, which gathers supporting technologies and tools for passively identify and track helicopters (TP8, Acoustic Passive Radar), analyse and synthesize acoustic signals (TP9, Sound diagnosis and synthesis tools), assess the impact of operative and flight conditions on the pollutants produced by a helicopter by in-flight measurements (TP10, Pollutant Emissions Assessment) and produce suitable synthetic results of all the TPs to feed GRC7 for the interface to the Technology Evaluator.

Final demonstrations for TS1, TS2 and TS3 will be on helicopter prototypes of the AW139, EC135 and EC155, in agreement with air navigation authorities when necessary to validate innovative IFR helicopter routes and procedures. Final in-flight measurement in TP10 will be performed on a properly equipped SW4 helicopter. Tiltrotor related activities will be demonstrated up to the level of pilot-in-the-loop simulation, in remote connection with an Air Traffic System simulator, considering AW609 and ERICA simulation models.

GRC 6: Eco-Design Demonstrators (Rotorcraft)

This work package aims at complementing generic technology developments and demonstrations performed in the Eco-Design ITD (EDA project) with demonstrations that address typical helicopter components under specific requirements and constraints. In addition, the Life Cycle Assessment methods and tools developed in EDA will be applied for these specific components based on actual measure data in order to assess the eco-friendly life cycle processes for helicopter applications. Schedule of complementary activities in both ITDs are aligned to try and match this objective The selected components will be adapted to the new production methods and materials, subsequently manufactured, laboratory tested and evaluated including consideration of the dismantling impact and end-of-life solutions.

Four typical rotorcraft components will be at the heart of the activity and concern:

Thermoplastic composite aerodynamic fairings

Thermoplastic composite structural parts

Transmission

Gear box

GRC 7: Technology Evaluator for Rotorcraft

Sub-project GRC 7 is the interface between the GRC-ITD and the Technology Evaluator (TE). GRC 7 prepares rotorcraft fleet data; mathematical models that predict the noise and emissions of rotorcraft flying typical mission profiles; and generic rotorcraft design definitions that represent all of the commercial rotorcraft operating in the Year 2000, plus concept designs for the Year 2020+ with, and without, Clean Sky technology. The objective is to provide the Technology Evaluator with all of the information, advice and data that they need to calculate the environmental impact of rotorcraft and evaluate the environmental benefits of the technologies developed in the GRC-ITD.

65/137


Technology description

TRL at

2008

TRL at

2012

TRL at

2013

TRL at

2014

TRL at

2015

TRL at

2016 Comments

Active twist blade

2 3 3 3 4 4

Active Gurney flap rotor

2 2 3 5 5 6

Optimised 3D blade profile

2 2 3 3 5 6 AH-D requesting flight testing of this technology which, if approved, will raise the TRL to 6 in 2016

New hub fairings

2 2 3 4 6 6

Active devices for drag

reduction 2 2 2 3 4 4

Optimised geometry of a light weight class H/C

(EC135 - AH-D, DLR)

2 2 4 4 6 6

Engine installations

2 2 3 3 6 6

Power generation, conversion and storage

- 3 3 4 5 5

HEMAS for Main Rotor Actuators

3 4 4 5 5 5

Electric Tail Rotor

- - 3 4 5 5

Demo HCE for light H/C

2 3 3 5 6 6

Eco-flight VFR Procedure for RC

1 2 2 4 6 6

Eco-flight IFR Procedure RC

1 2 2 4 6 6

Eco- technologies (thermoplastic, composite and metal coating)

2 3 3 5

66/137

7.4 SCHEDULE

67/137


Conceptual r/c environmental forecast (integrating GRC, SAGE, SGO)

Y2000

technology Concept (2020)

Forecast

Aircraft Concepts AIRCRAFT AIRCRAFT CO2 [%] NOx [%]

Noise Contour

area reduction SELdB(A)

(%)

Helicopters


SEL 2000 SEL 2020 -10 to -25 -50 to -65 -30 to -50

SEL HCE DEL 2000 DEL 2020 - 25 to -40 -30 to -50 N/A


DEL 2000 TEL 2020 -15 to -30 -55 to -70 -30 to -50

Twin Engine Medium (TEM) Turboshaft

TEM 2000 TEM 2020 -15 to -35 -55 to -70 -30 to -50


TEH 2000 TEH 2020 -15 to -35 -55 to -70 N/A

Tilt Rotor

Tilt Rotor (TLR) ERICA concept

no ref TLR 2020 [no ref] [no ref] No Data

68/137

Systems level environmental forecast

Sub-Systems level environmental forecast

System level environmental forecasts are determined according to the following process, which also describes current target levels (outputs):

System environmental target for GRC

Subsystem Environmental forecast (wrt reference)

CO2 [%] NOx [%]

Noise Contour area reduction

SELdB(A) (%), cf table above

Rotor Blades -3 to -7 -2 to -4 Via Footprint

Airframe Aerodynamics -5 to -12 -3 to -7

Turboshaft engine installation -2 to -6 -1 to -4 N/A

Electrical systems -1 to -2 -0.5 to -1.5 via Footprint

HCE -25 to -40 -30 to -50 via Footprint

Flight Path Management -4 to -5 -2.5 to -3 via Footprint

Note: No direct correlation between CO2 reduction and NOx reduction. The NOx reduction data are an estimate only.

69/137


GRC ITD is on track to execute its budget in full with the reservation that the 2013 and 2014 execution of budget is below 100% as in other ITDs. The ITD is committed to spending the full envelope and has made a request to the GB for further funding of GRC 1 and GRC 4 activities (see chapter 4.4). Pending the internal re-allocation of funding between members, the JU has committed to finding the funding shortfall if necessary from within the wider JU total allocation.

The ITD will re-visit this issue in January 2015 when the final estimated spending of 2014 will be available. This could imply that an internal re-allocation will then take place. The Development plan will be updated according to this evolution and the respective activities will be funded with through the ITD own funds or through additional funds from the JU. These additional funds will be more visible once the JU receives the cost claims relating to the period 2014 in March 2015 according to the GAM reporting deadlines.

70/137

8. SAGE ITD ACTIVITIES


The SAGE ITD contains 6 technology development programmes and accompanying test and demonstration vehicles, distinguished by application (helicopter, regional, narrow-body and wide-body) and by engine architecture (2-shaft, 3-shaft, Geared Turbofan, Open Rotor.) These demonstration vehicles will use the competencies and facilities of all the European aero-engine manufacturers complemented with those of related Research Establishments, Academia and SMEs. The six engine demonstrator projects are designated:

SAGE 1, Geared Open Rotor;

SAGE 2, Geared Open Rotor;

SAGE 3, Large 3-shaft Turbofan;

SAGE 4, Geared Turbofan;

SAGE 5, Turboshaft;

SAGE 6, Lean Burn.

Geared Open Rotor (SAGE 1 and SAGE 2)

The purpose of the activities of projects SAGE 1 and SAGE 2 is to validate the Open Rotor concept, which comprises the following innovative propulsor sub-systems:

Counter-rotating propellers;

Blade pitch control system;

Power drive and transmission system. The aim is to demonstrate this novel engine architecture applicable to engines in the 21-30 Klbs thrust class. The propulsive efficiency gains are expected to contribute a significant proportion of the improvements required by the ACARE 2020 targets. The Open Rotor is a Cornerstone project within Clean Sky, both in SAGE and SFWA, and if its feasibility and technical behaviour are confirmed by the demonstration, it will be the most rewarding in terms of the environmental impact. From the outset of the programme two parallel Open Rotor projects were planned up to ground demonstration, one led by Rolls-Royce (SAGE 1), the other by Safran (Snecma) (SAGE 2), each able to elaborate different technological architectures and design philosophies. The propeller system, the blade pitch control and actuation system, the gear box technology and its integration in the engine, are just three examples of Open Rotor sub-systems which carry a large impact on the overall system performance and reliability. These will be engine-manufacturer specific, in accordance with their own technical experience and in-house design philosophies. Having two concurrent Open Rotor Projects does not imply that both projects will reach the same TRL levels for their respective architectures during the course of the current Programme. The funding for the provision of a flightworthy engine does not currently exist in Clean Sky, as already mentioned in the Programme Strategy Update in 2010: This will be funded under Clean Sky 2 programme within Horizon 2020. Clean Sky Open Rotor activities in SAGE and SFWA are coordinated through a common roadmap, described in the interfaces management with the SFWA Open Rotor FTB feasibility decision of July 10

th,

2013.. This Airbus decision states that : - The CROR Research & Technology milestone (TRL3) was passed successfully on 10th July 2013 - The CROR powered aircraft concept was confirmed as technically feasible, and the basis for air-craft

certification was established. - No “showstoppers” were identified. - Airbus will maintain the current programme planning, which is agreed with engine partner Safran and is

paced by the development of a CROR Ground Test Demonstrator in 2016. Airbus will continue with

71/137

current commitments in Clean Sky 1 (SFWA & SAGE), and with the industry proposal for continued research to further mature CROR technology in Clean Sky 2.

Large 3-shaft Turbofan

The SAGE 3 project will demonstrate technologies applicable to large 3-shaft turbofan engines in the 60,000 - 95,000 lbs. thrust class, with a focus on low pressure system, externals and compressor structures technologies. The project aim is to deliver TRL6 for these sub-systems through appropriate testing delivering engine conditions representative of potential future engine applications, which may be through engine or rig testing. The technologies to be demonstrated will deliver improved low pressure system efficiencies and reduced engine weight, which will translate into higher engine and aircraft efficiencies.

The SAGE 3 project strategy is to validate technologies previously developed to TRL4, and to raise the technologies to TRL6. The project will provide systems integration and develop additional technology to support the integration where necessary.

Geared Turbofan

The SAGE 4 project is aimed at preparing and demonstrating technologies applicable to geared turbofan engines in the 16,000lb – 40,000lb thrust class domain for regional and single aisle markets. The purpose of the advanced Geared Turbofan Engine Demonstrator is to further improve necessary technologies dedicated to both, the low-spool low pressure system and the high-spool high pressure system and to achieve the next important step change for eco-efficient propulsion in terms of fuel burn reduction combined with additional improvements in noise emission to exceed existing and comply with future noise regulations. Advanced technologies derived from EU programmes like CLEAN, VITAL, NEWAC or DREAM and from national programmes will be integrated and validated up to TRL6. Moreover, the Geared Turbofan Engine Demonstrator is envisioned to assess further advancements of the current geared fan engine technology to provide significant contributions towards the ambitious forecast of ACARE in 2020.

Turbo-shaft

The project aim is to deliver TRL6 for the sub-systems studied and design in SAGE 5 through appropriate testing delivering engine conditions representative of potential future engine applications. The representative environment for many technologies will be provided by components and engine test. The technologies to be demonstrated will deliver improved specific fuel consumptions, noise and emissions in-line with the goals of the Clean Sky programme. The SAGE 5 project strategy is to build on technology developments through National, European and self-funded programmes and to raise the technologies to TRL6. The SAGE 5 project will provide systems integration and develop additional technology to support the integration where this is necessary. The top level SAGE 5 project objectives are:

To demonstrate technologies that will decrease the fuel consumption of turboshaft engines through

components efficiency increase, dimension and weight reduction

To provide engines and rigs for technology validation and integrate the technologies to be

demonstrated, developing and producing components as necessary.

To develop enabling manufacturing technologies and materials/coating where these are necessary

to deliver the engine technologies for demonstration.

To deliver and test turboshaft engine and, on the basis of prediction and test data obtained from the

engine, to assess the improvements in gaseous and noise emissions that may result from

incorporating the technologies in a production engine.

Lean Burn (SAGE 6)

72/137

The aim of the SAGE 6 lean burn project is to demonstrate the lean burn whole engine system to a TRL6

maturity level, suitable for incorporation into civil aerospace applications in the 30,000lb to 100,000+ thrust

classes. In doing so it is expected that the resulting technology will achieve compliance (with margin) to all

planned future legislation.

The major SAGE 6 activities will follow two primary work streams. The first will, through a series of trade

studies, focus on defining sub-system designs and associated verification strategies for concepts identified

as most appropriate for introduction into future gas turbine products. This work will be referred to as the

Generic System design. Major areas under investigations will include:

Combustion system aero-thermal and aero-acoustic design;

Novel fuel control systems;

Advanced control laws;

Turbine thermo-mechanical and aerodynamic integration;

The second work stream will focus on design and make activity to create a set of experimental components

that can be integrated into a system demonstration platform. It is anticipated that these hardware will be

subjected to both rig and engine testing during the programme.

Staging the fuel system introduces new challenges in achieving a continuous flow of fuel to the combustor,

which can result in whole engine effects such as flameout and combustor instability if not adequately

controlled. The generic work stream will deploy a number of system modelling, rig test strategies to

investigate these issues and define control solutions that achieve stable engine operation (with margin)

throughout its usable operating envelope. A key deliverable of the demonstrator programme will be to ensure

that systems used can adequately replicate these and other architecture-defining attributes so that they may

be investigated over a wide range of operating conditions.

Significant work will also be carried out to investigate lean burn system effects on the functional attributes of

interfacing systems, in addition to validating understanding of the functional attributes of the lean burn

system itself. The relationship between the fuel control system and resulting combustor characteristics and

their impact on the engines’ internal air system and primary gas path turbomachinery will be of particular

interest.

The Programme and its major deliverables are defined in the table below:

Programme

Milestones No Major Milestones Month due Deliverables

SAGE 6.1 Concept Review April 2013 Concept review report May 2013

SAGE 6.2 Preliminary Design Review Oct 2013 PDR report Nov 2013

SAGE 6.3 Critical Design Review Apr 2014 CDR report May 2014

SAGE 6.4 First Engine Pass To Test Sept 2015 Engine ready to test Oct 2015

73/137

8.2 WORK PACKAGES DESCRIPTION

SAGE 1 – Geared Open Rotor 1

SAGE 1 will continue to develop Geared Open Rotor Technology for novel engine architectures applicable to

engines in the 21-30,000lb thrust class. A lot of work has previously been performed under Clean Sky during

the period 2007 to 2013. However, after a key decision to minimise Open Rotor activities further under Clean

Sky Rolls-Royce will deliver low TRL technologies and associated designs under SAGE 1. Based on this

work Rolls-Royce has decided that there is still much to do to prove the system level benefits of the concept

and that full scale demonstration within the Clean Sky timeframe is no longer appropriate. Rolls-Royce

remains committed to the CROR concept, but in the near term, within SAGE 1, will limit activities to focus on

developing the TRL of the fundamental enabling technologies.

The technologies to be developed are the open rotor aero, noise, component integrity and aero-elasticity

methods / models. In support of the four work strands there will be sub element rig testing and in order to

validate these methods / models Rolls-Royce will make use of the data obtained through Z08 and Rig 145,

which was previously funded through Clean Sky.

As a consequence, the new work breakdown structure impact within the Clean Sky Programme is as follows:

The demonstration of technologies on the SAGE 1 Open Rotor will be limited to TRL4 in Clean Sky

To dedicate the funding made available in SAGE 1 to a « Lean Burner » demonstration, allowing for a 60% cut in NOx. (currently considered to have not been sufficiently addressed within Clean Sky)

SAGE 1 will develop Geared Open Rotor Technology focusing on the R&T necessary to develop the TRL of the fundamental enabling technologies and a demonstrator engine for ground and flight testing at a later stage outside the Clean Sky programme. This will be based on the work performed under SAGE 1 and SFWA. Furthermore, the functional integrity of new technology is intended to be demonstrated.

SAGE 2 – Geared Open Rotor 2

The SAGE 2 project will demonstrate a Geared Pusher Open Rotor architecture applicable to the Single Aisle short / medium range aircraft with “Side Fuselage Nacelle” installation (30 klbs class thrust). The SAGE 2 project builds on technology developments in existing national, European and privately-funded programmes and aims at raising critical open rotor technologies to TRL5. The top level SAGE2 project objectives are:

To demonstrate technologies that contribute to assess the open rotor architecture feasibility and environmental benefits,

To provide a gas generator and a rig for technology validation and integration demonstration,

To develop manufacturing technologies and materials as enablers to the demonstrator engine.

To test on ground a geared open rotor demonstrator

The SAGE 2 ground demonstrator key milestones reflect the SFWA CROR key programme milestones:

The open rotor pusher configuration was selected in 2010 for the feasibility phase. Note that at this conceptual stage, parts of the studies are relevant for both configurations,

The concept feasibility studies are made in 2012, with a Concept Review held in June 2012;

the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) completed in Q4 2013

The detailed design phase of the ground demonstrator follows the PDR and the SFWA GO / NO-GO final decision.

The Critical Design Review is planned to end in February 2015 after which the manufacturing of most parts will start. Long lead-time items procurement has already been anticipated.

74/137

The SAGE 2 project focuses on demonstrating the following technologies:

Composite open rotor propeller blades Research activities currently performed on composite blades in French national programmes are stepping stones for the propeller blade technology development in SAGE 2. Aero-acoustic design activities were performed in the context of FP7 DREAM - and the French [CORAC] national programme.

Lightweight front and rear rotating frames. The technologies focus on addressing certification issues of rotating casing, controlling leakage at interfaces and reducing the weight. Power Gear Box. This work stream develops and demonstrates the technologies to achieve the reliability and power/envelope ratios required to the contra-rotating reduction gearbox for the installation on Open Rotor architectures. Power Turbine. New technologies are developed in order to reduce Module weight and increase performance characteristics.

Pitch Control System

Nacelle components and particularly rotating parts Lubrication & Cooling System

Control, Protection & Monitoring System & Equipment.

Propeller blades Electric De-icing System & Equipment. The gas generator used in the SAGE 2 open rotor demonstrator is derived from a Snecma M88 engine. As described in the SFWA chapter, SAGE and SFWA ITDs agreed with the Joint Undertaking in December 2012 to revise the CROR full roadmap. It is recognised that delays arising from technical contingencies as well a postponement of a “go – no go” decision gate in SFWA, do not allow for a flight test within Clean Sky timescale. However the SAGE 2 commitment remains for a delivery of the SAGE2 demonstrator to the ground test facility before the end of 2015 and for a ground test beginning of 2016, with a TRL 5 target for the engine. In parallel a global logic was established to prepare a “flyable” engine for a flight demonstration now scheduled end 2020. Hence, the following activities will be funded under another programme within Horizon 2020: Design, manufacture and rebuilt a demonstrator able to support the Clean Sky 2 LPA-IADP flight tests campaign; and delivery of a ground tested demonstrator to the Clean Sky 2 LPA Flight Test Demonstrator aircraft “chantier” in Q2 2020.

SAGE 3 – Large 3-shaft Turbofan

The top level SAGE 3 project objectives are:

To demonstrate technologies that will improve efficiency through weight reduction, and contribute to noise reduction through innovative engine externals, composite fan system, compressor structures and low-pressure turbine design.

To provide engines and rigs for technology validation and integrate the technologies to be demonstrated, developing and producing components as necessary.

To develop enabling manufacturing technologies and materials.

To deliver and test a demonstrator engine and, on the basis of prediction and test data obtained from the engine, to assess the improvements in gaseous and noise emissions that may result from incorporating the technologies in a production engine.

The engine test vehicle will be a Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 engine, for which replacement modules will be prepared for demonstration. The engine will undertake the following testing:

Ground testing to study aero-performance, flutter, blade integrity and bird impact capability for the composite fan system and low pressure turbine.

Flying test bed tests to study in-flight operability of the composite fan blades.

Outdoor ground testing, to determine composite fan system flutter behaviour under cross-wind conditions and noise performance.

Icing tests to determine ice shedding behaviour of blades and impact damage tolerances of new liners.

75/137

SAGE 4 – Geared Turbofan Engine

Components and modules with new technologies are under development. These will be implemented and validated through component and rig testing as required before integration into the full scale engine environment that is dedicated as the SAGE 4 engine demonstrator based on a GTF donor engine. The successful validation of advanced technologies for geared aircraft-engine concepts will facilitate introduction of innovative new products into the demanding aerospace market, and significantly reduce environmental impact of air transport. The Geared Turbofan Demonstrator is envisioned to assess further advancements of the current geared fan technology to provide significant contributions towards the ambitious targets of ACARE in 2020.

The SAGE4 project aims and is structured to

• further develop and validate technologies that will reduce weight, improve efficiency and contribute to noise reduction through innovative LP System components including the fan gear box

• develop enabling manufacturing technologies and materials

• provide rigs for technology validation

• develop and produce parts, components and instrumentation as necessary

• deliver and test a demonstrator engine and

• To assess the improvements that may result from incorporating the technologies into products.

SAGE 4 demonstration focus is on technology validation concerning the following engine modules:

• High efficient HP compressor

• High speed low weight LP turbine

• New light weight Exhaust Frame

• Advanced fan gearbox

SAGE 5 – Turboshaft engine

The SAGE 5 project will focus on demonstrating the following technologies:

Technologies for high efficiency compressor stage

Technologies for high efficiency cooled HP turbine

Technologies for reliable and compact combustion chamber, combined with optimisation of the

combustion process and fuel injection system.

Technologies for high efficiency LP Turbine to contribute in fuel consumption decrease.

Materials and coating development and manufacturing techniques to for high temperature capability.

Technologies for low noise device through development of a quiet exhaust. This work is built through Call for Proposal

Technology for inter shaft architecture, reducing weight and structure in the gas path and enabling

compatibility with high operating temperature.

Technologies for Low Nox Combustion chamber and studies of the associated injectors and fuel

system. This work is built through national funding project, results will be provided via engine models

provided to GRC7 and TE.

Technologies for control system through development of equipment aiming to reduce cost,

weight/size or to enable to operate at higher temperature level. This work is built through Call for

Proposal.

76/137

SAGE 6 – Lean Burn

The SAGE 6 project has been created to house the Lean Burn programme and will deliver Lean Burn Combustion System demonstrator engine(s), with the aim of achieving TRL6. Rolls-Royce plans to develop an engine for ground testing within the Clean Sky timescales and affordability. Lean burn combustion is a vital technology acquisition for the European aerospace industry if it is to comply with future CAEP & ACARE emissions targets, and for its products to remain competitive in the world marketplace. Work to develop the technology for civil aerospace applications has, to date, used demonstrator programmes such as Advanced Near Term Low Emissions (ANTLE), The Power Optimised Aircraft (POA), The LUFO-funded E3E and the Environmentally Friendly Engine (EFE). All of these experiments have identified significant challenges beyond combustor that require development of complementary systems to achieve an operable and certifiable product. The integrated system, which consists of technologies across the engine architecture (e.g. control systems, sensing and noise technologies) must be able to address many often conflicting requirements to provide a high accuracy fuel supply to separate pilot and mains feeds within the combustor. Significant technologies that will be developed during this programme consist of, but are not limited to, Combustion, hydro-mechanical fuel control, control laws and associated sensing devices including increased computer processing speed, whole engine thermal management, acoustic attenuation, turbo-machinery thermo-mechanical integration and system health monitoring and maintenance functions. Each work package will define a programme that achieves technology maturity to a level suitable for inclusion in future engine designs at the preliminary design phase, and the manufacturing routes and processes necessary to support on-going support of high volume production programmes. It is essential that capability is developed in the related systems and that these are fully integrated into the whole engine architecture in order to achieve an optimised product. Recent experience from other manufacturer’s efforts to develop this same technology has further emphasised the complexity of integrating the technology at platform level, with them having identified a number of significant issues late in their programmes that resulted in major delays and significantly increased development cost.. Current TRL levels of the various subsystems vary, but are typically at TRL3-4. It has been concluded that while existing demonstrator platforms (rigs and engines) will be sufficient to develop the system to TRL5, additional capability in the form of a flight capable demonstrator will be required to retire a number of significant whole engine risks such as system operability and stability. To that end a proposal has been made to develop a new demonstrator vehicle based around a Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 engine suitable for installation on a flying test bed

1. This vehicle will encompass the entire lean burn system including the

combustor, fuel supply and control system, sensing technologies and the associated externals and installation hardware, and represents a significant set of modifications to the architecture of the donor engine. Given the wide-ranging impact that lean burn has at whole engine level it is likely that system validation and verification activity will not be limited to one demonstration route. It is expected that a myriad of information sources will be used up to, and during any whole engine system demonstration. These assets include, but are not limited to, combustion rig testing (single & multi-sector and full annular (FANN)), cold flow combustor models, control system test facilities, advanced computational methods, future builds of engines such as the EFE and E3E, and potentially experimental industrial platforms that use similar staging methodologies. 1 With recently granted extra funding Rolls-Royce plans to also perform a flight test on the Lean Burn demonstrator

engine within Clean Sky I timeframes in addition to ground testing.

77/137


Technology description TRL at

2008 TRL at 2012

TRL at 2013

TRL at 2014

TRL at 2015

TRL at 2016

Comments

SAGE 1 – Geared Open

Rotor

Propeller blade 2 31 3

1 3

1 3

1 3

1

Aero-Methods 2 2 2 2 3 4

Noise 2 2 2 2 4

Component Integrity 2 2 2 2 3 4

SAGE 2 – Geared Open Rotor

Propeller pitch system 2 3 3 4 4 5

Propeller pitch change 2 3 3 4 4 5

Gearbox 2 4 4 4 4 5

Rotating structures 2 3 3 3 4 5


Composite fan system 2 3 3 5 6 6

Advanced integrated externals 2 4 6 6 6 6

Intercase structures 2 4 6 6 6 6

Low weight low pressure turbine

2 3 4 5 6 6

SAGE 4 – Geared Turbofan

Advanced fan gearbox 4 4 4 4 5 5

High efficiency HP compressor 4 5 5 5 6 6

High speed low weight LP turbine

3 4 5 5 6 6

New light weight Exhaust Frame

4 4 5 5 6 6

SAGE 5 – Turboshaft

High efficiency compressor 2 3 5 5 6 6

Low emission combustor 3 4 4 4 5 6

Intake and exhaust acoustic treatments

4 5 5 5 6 6

High efficiency high pressure turbine

2 3 5 5 6 6

High efficiency low pressure turbine

4 5 5 5 6 6

Inner shaft architecture 4 5 5 6 6 6


Low Emissions Combustor 4 5 5 6 6 6

Fuel Control System 3 3 4 4 5 6

Staging Control Laws 2 3 4 4 5 6

Noise acoustic treatment2 2 3 3 3 4 5

Optimised combustor/turbine interface

2 3 3 3 4 5

1 Rolls-Royce has achieved TRL 3 with the blade design and will not be progressed any further work under Clean Sky.

2 This is cross funded by German Aeronautics Research Programme LuFo IV call 4.

78/137

8.4 SCHEDULE

Note final TRL achieved in SAGE1 lowered, key schedule changes to SAGE4 and introduction of SAGE6

* With additional funding granted Sage 6 Lean Burn will now include later-stage demonstrator build

for flight testing. This flight demonstration will use a flying test bed aircraft based in the USA. For SAGE 2, the schedule was agreed with Airbus and the Joint Undertaking.



TRL progresses


TRL progresses

SAGE 3 Large 3-shaft

Turbofan

TRL progresses

SAGE 4 Geared Turbofan

TRL progresses

SAGE 5 Turboshaft

TRL progresses

SAGE 6 Lean Burn

TRL progresses

2008 2009 2010 2011 20162012 2013 2014 2015

TRL scale 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

3 4 5 62

Design

Manufacturing

Ground Test

In Flight Test

3 5

Early Concept Studies Detailed Design

Lab-based concept rigs tests Demo Detail

2

Test/AnalysisManufacture

Build

6

EFE STF

ConceptSelection

SAGE 6 Start

CR PDR

4

CDR

2

555

3


Scorecard Manufacturing

Build/Instru

Critical Components Preliminary Study

Preliminary

Detail Design

GTD CDRGTD PDR

SFWAConfiguration

Geared ORSelection


Design manufacturing and build for Flight test *

CoR3 5

G

SFWAGo No Go

CS2

Analysi

s

1.2 Component Integrity2 4

1.1 Fast CFD Solver

1.3 Forced Response

1.4 Noise

3 3

4

4

(6)GTD CDRGTD PDR

3

Concept design

Preliminary design

CoDR PDR

Detail assessments AD1

Manufacturing

CDR

CFS1

FTB LPT1

CFS2

6

Eng 1

BuildEng 2

Detailed design

PDR

Manufacturing

CDR

3

Preliminary

Component Build 1

EngineTest

5 6

Build 1 Manufacturing

Build 2 EngineTest

Build 2 Manufacturing

Concept Defin.

Concept Optimization

CoDR

Procurement & Mfg

CDR

3

Concept studies Build/Test

PCoDR

5

Detai Design

PDR

6

Post Test Analysis

79/137


Propulsion Sub-System (Module) Level environmental target

Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions forecast

The environmental impact of aero-engines can be addressed by several, complementary, actions directed towards improving the efficiency of the engine in converting chemical energy into thrust and minimising the parasitic loading of the engine on the aircraft performance. The improvement categories are:

Improved thermodynamic efficiency. Actions that increase the efficiency with which fuel is converted to shaft rotation.

Improved propulsive efficiency. Actions that increase the efficiency with which shaft rotation is converted to thrust.

Reduction of parasitic weight. Actions that reduce the energy absorbed in moving the engine itself for an equivalent thermodynamic or propulsive efficiency.

In practice, actions must be taken to address all three improvement categories, and many of the technologies demonstrated in SAGE address more than one.

The measurable and verifiable benefits to be achieved in engine ground testing are the underlying efficiency and weight benefits and these must be converted to CO2, NOx and noise reductions by a common and agreed methodology to ensure equivalence in benefits and allow results at the end of the programme to be meaningfully compared with targets.

For turbofan engines, these conversions are well-established and the following conversion factors may be applied in converting module efficiency to SFC. Note that the conversion factors are different for short-range and long-range engines, accounting in a simplified way for the relative importance of take-off and cruise in the engine operations.

Module

Efficiency

Short range Long range

Variation SFC Impact Variation SFC Impact

Fan 1% -0.60% 1% -0.60%

Booster 1% -0.25% 1% -0.25%

Intermediate

pressure

compressor

1% -0.33% 1% -0.33%

Low pressure

turbine

1% -0.90% 1% -0.90%

Fan pressure

ratio

10% -4.00% 10% -3.75%

80/137

In assessing weight reductions, the benefit incorporates not just the reduced weight of the engine but also the associated reductions in fuel weight requirement and airframe supporting structure. The weight conversions are:


Engine weight Aircraft weight Engine weight Aircraft weight

Variation 100 lb 200 lb 100 lb 220 lb

Having converted module efficiencies to specific fuel consumption and engine weight to aircraft weight, the final step is to convert SFC and weight to fuel burn (equivalent to CO2.):


Variation Fuel burn Variation Fuel burn

SFC 1% 1.11% 1% 2.03%

Weight 2204 lb 1.65% 2204 lb 1.81%

While a simplified approach to CO2 emissions modelling has been achieved for turbofan engines, which are well understood and whose application and behaviour has been studied for many years, and a similar approach cannot be taken to open rotor technologies.

For engine types, such as open rotors, where there is no database of previous experience that can be used as the basis for defining trade factors, targets are set by reference to analytical predictions of the performance of the sub-system. Analytical studies of open rotors have been continuing for several years in preparation for the practical demonstration of the technology, and this has been supplemented more recently by scale rig testing. Analyses of open rotors were initially based on propeller design rules, but computational methods have allowed more sophisticated analyses and accurate predictions to be made as the programmes have progressed. Wind tunnel testing of scaled open rotors have provided confidence in the ability to predict the performance of the propulsors and confirmed the recent predictions. Given these results, environmental forecast for the open rotor propulsors have been defined using the analytical predictions from models validated by rig tests.

Nitrous Oxide(NOX) Emissions Forecast

Reductions in NOX emissions are not so amenable to simplified modelling as CO2 emissions but are also more closely associated with individual technologies and have less requirement for combining contributions from various sources. These forecasts have therefore been assessed and declared by the individual SAGE projects.

Depending upon the engine cycle selected, NOx emissions may be reduced in line with CO2 emissions simply as a result of less fuel being burned in the engine. The extent to which this is achieved is determined by the design of the engine that incorporates the technologies and so is not direct result of the technology although it is enabled by the technology. NOx emission reductions resulting from reduced fuel burn is therefore treated as a conceptual engine benefit rather than as a sub-system benefit.

However, there are specific technologies that target NOx emissions, particularly in combustion systems development, and will deliver greater benefits than will be achieved through tracking CO2 emissions. Reductions in NOX emissions due to these technologies will be reflected in the sub-system forecast and will, clearly, also be reflected in the forecast.

81/137

Noise Emissions Forecast

As is the case for NOx emissions, noise reductions are generally achieved through specific technologies and are not amenable to a simplified modelling approach.

Noise emissions can be addressed through technologies that reduce the creation of noise at source or through attenuating noise before it leaves the engine. Technologies that fall into the former category include developments that specifically address noise, for example in open rotor propulsor technology, but also technologies that are primarily driven by CO2 or NOX emission reductions but that also deliver a noise benefit. Noise attenuation is typically achieved by treatment of the engine intake and exhaust, where

features are incorporated into the structural surfaces to suppress specific noise sources. These

technologies have a significant impact on engine noise emissions.

Both forms of noise reduction are directly attributable to sub-system technologies and so are reflected in the sub-system forecast and in the conceptual engine forecast.

Sub-system Environmental Forecast

Subsystem forecast (wrt reference) CO2 [%] NOx [%] Noise [EPNdB] 5

-

SAGE 2 – Geared Open Rotor

Open rotor propulsor -15 to -17% N/A -6 to -9 5


Composite fan system -1 to -3% N/A -1 to -3 5

Advanced integrated externals -0.5 to -1.5% N/A 0

Intercase structures 2 N/A 0

Low weight low pressure turbine -1 to -2% N/A 0

SAGE 4 – Geared Turbofan

Advanced fan gearbox 0,15 N/A N/A

High efficiency high pressure compressor -0.4 to -1.2% N/A N/A

High speed low pressure turbine -0.6 to -1.6% N/A N/A

Aggressive aero-structures 0 N/A N/A

SAGE 5 – Turboshaft

High efficiency compressor -5% N/A N/A

Effect on engine thermodynamic cycle -4 % N/A N/A

Low emission combustor N/A - 60% 3 N/A

Intake and exhaust acoustic treatments N/A N/A -10 EPNdB 4

High efficiency high pressure turbine -2% N/A N/A

High efficiency low pressure turbine N/A N/A N/A

Inner shaft arch with high efficiency LP Turbine -4% N/A N/A

82/137


Low Emissions Combustor

Neutral NOx LTO

<40%

CAEP6

Cruise

EINOx

<12g/kg

Neutral

Fuel Control System N/A N/A N/A

Staging Control Laws N/A N/A N/A

1 Although not the primary focus of these technologies, reductions in NOx emissions will be associated with their introduction owing to reduced fuel burn. However, the extent of these improvements is uncertain owing to potential differences in gas generator operation, particularly between turbofan & open rotor applications. These to be assessed but are not specific targets.

2 The SAGE3 engine structures technologies are enablers for higher engine temperatures & more compact engine cores that can deliver higher efficiencies & bypass ratios. Sub-system structures may be heavier than current technologies but enabled engine cycle changes will more than compensate for the increased emissions due to weight effects. No specific forecast for the sub-system, but use of these structures is assumed in conceptual engine studies & overall system.

3 Thermodynamic cycle effect, performed on a dedicated engine in parallel to SAGE5 demonstrator

4 Shown as cumulative margin over three certification point related operations – these figures are converted to single operation averages for the comparison against ACARE at aircraft level elsewhere in the CSDP

Propulsion System environmental target

Six conceptual engines will be studied in the SAGE programme, covering a range of engine types and aircraft applications. The conceptual engine types to be studied are:

2 Open Rotor engines in the 21-30,000lb thrust class

A Geared Turbofan in the 16-40,000lb thrust class

A large 3-shaft turbofan in the 60-95,000lb thrust class,

A lean Burn engine within the 30-100,000lb thrust range

A turboshaft for rotorcraft in the 750-1000kW power class

Although the underlying principles of gas turbine engine operation are common to all engine types being demonstrated in the SAGE programme, the high degree of optimisation in current engine design precludes the automatic application of technologies developed for one engine type to other engine types. The conceptual engines to be studied in SAGE are therefore closely aligned with the engine demonstrators and there is little cross-over of technology application between concepts. However, the conceptual engines will include relevant technologies demonstrated, or planned to be demonstrated, to TRL6 in other programmes.

In defining the forecast for the conceptual engines, a number of assumptions have been made:

1. It has been assumed that the engines will be installed on aircraft applications designed with the engine and so able to fully exploit the benefits of the new engine.

Installation on a new airframe is the only option for open rotor engines, whose radical architecture change precludes application to existing airframes and demands that the engine and aircraft are developed as a closely integrated system. It would be possible for technologies demonstrated in the other SAGE projects to be applied to existing airframes, either through revisions of existing engine products or through development of new engines for current airframes. Technology insertion and re-engineering inevitably leads to compromise as the overall engine or aircraft systems were designed to exploit alternative technologies and the environmental benefit is reduced. However, the majority of new engine offerings are flown on new airframes and so the assumption has been made that the engines will be applied to a new airframe.

83/137

2. It has been assumed that the technologies will be incorporated into new engine designs that will be state-of-the-art at the time of introduction to the market. As such, the engines will benefit from improvements in performance due to factors other than the technologies demonstrated in SAGE. Nowadays the introduction to the market is foreseen around 2025 and the targeted figures are consistent with this date.

3. The first source of these improvements is applicable technologies demonstrated to TRL6 in other research programmes. Typically, these programmes will demonstrate technologies that complement those developed in SAGE and future engines will benefit from the combined application of several available technologies. Depending on the nature of the technologies, combinations may together deliver greater environmental benefits than are achievable through individual application as each enables the other to be more rigorously exploited.

A second, more general, source of improvement is that successive generations of engines show benefits from enhanced design and component optimisation. These improvements do not depend upon new engine technology insertion, but are driven by design and manufacturing methods improvements, by increased engineering experience and understanding of component and systems behaviour and by improved sub-system integration. This last is of particular importance as systems integration can significantly reduce parts count and component redundancy and allow the whole engine system to operate more efficiently than is possible if a series of interfaces exist between sub-systems.

The consequence of these assumptions is that the conceptual engines will deliver greater environmental benefit than consideration of individual sub-systems might suggest. Even if the sub-system benefits of all included technologies, from SAGE and other programmes are considered together, the integration and methods improvements deliver whole engine forecast and benefits that are greater than the sum for individual technologies.

The forecast mentioned in the table below were created from whole engine studies of future engines and projections of the environmental performance of those engines in a targeted airframe.

NOx [%] CO2 [%] Noise [EPNdB] Cumulative 5

Year 2000 Baseline 1 Baseline Baseline

2

Open Rotor -55 to -60 -25 to -30 -8 to -15 5

Geared Turbofan -55 to -60 -15 to -20 -15 to -20 5

Large 3-shaft Turbofan -55 to -60 -10 to -15 -15 to -20 5

Turboshaft -55 to -60 -10 to -15 -8 to -12 5

Large Turbofan with

Lean Burn -55 to -60 N/A

4 N/A

4

ACARE -60 3 -20 -20

5

1 NOx baseline is roughly consistent with CAEP6

2 Noise baseline is roughly ICAO Stage 3 -10 EPNdB [cumulative margin]

3 Engine contribution only

4 No impact from Lean Burn

5 Shown as cumulative margin over three certification point related operations – these figures are converted to

single operation averages for the comparison against ACARE at aircraft level elsewhere in the CSDP

84/137


Budget for Rolls-Royce projects SAGE 1, 3 & 6 which are globally serving Open Rotor, ALPS and Lean Burn development will be fully utilized. There has been a major transfer from SAGE 1 to SAGE 6 to partly support the foundation spend of the SAGE 6 flight test. Rolls-Royce has continued to spend on track for SAGE 6 and SAGE 3 programmes. Additionally, SAGE 3 has delivered the first flight engine test campaign in 2014. SAGE 2: the expenses are on track with regards to the Preliminary Concept Review December 2011. Concept Review June 2012 the Preliminary Design Review finalized in Q4 2013, the Critical Design Reviews planned up to February 2015 and the detail of the work associated. The major costs are incurred from 2013 with the completion of the PDR end-2013, all the activities related to the Critical Design Reviews in 2014 and when some materials for the long lead time items and other procurements are ordered. SAGE 4: The Clean Sky budget is aimed to support advancement of GTF technologies under SAGE 4 program and will be fully utilized. After moderate ramp up and previous schedule adjustment to reflect Q2-2015 test the project has stabilized while not compromising the overall objectives. Budget overrun is likely. With 17 active CfP projects SAGE 4 has already achieved its full contribution to the CS overall objective of placing 25% CfP funds to SMEs. For SAGE 5, , after overspending in the previous years, in 2014, it is now on track with regards to an end in 2015. Building on the successful ground and flight engine testing SAGE 3 is proposing to undertake a full engine bird ingestion test of the composite fan system for which an additional €1.6M budget. SAGE 2 ITD Leader and Associates budget is entirely spent to reach the TRL 5 ground demonstration of the open rotor. The current budget forecast shows an important overcost of around 34M€ compared to the available SAGE 2 budget. SAGE 4: Current budget forecast for the remaining program estimates a slight overrun. Additional material and manufacturing technology insertion under evaluation would consequently increase budget by 1-2 M€. For SAGE 5, the budget forecasted is higher by 4.93M€ than the one in the current contract. The extra budget is required to support the following activities which are necessary in order to reach the SAGE 5 TRL 6 target for all technology and especially HP turbine technology and intershaft architecture.

Test linked to the final version at high TET

Light maturation test

Behaviour in ultimate conditions to validate TRL 6 for the intershaft architecture.

Some tasks were not forecasted such as:

CfP activities that require more Turbomeca follow-up than expected

Activities such as engine modelling for the TE ITD due for GRC 7 which were not included in the contract.

As in all ITDs, the actual spend continues to be monitored together with the JU. In October 2014 the GB agreed to an additional 4.5m € towards the SAGE 6 activities to support the additional activities foreseen for the Lean Burn flight test. For full information, please see chapter 4.4. It can be noted that the original request of funding was higher at 6.25m €. The shortfall will be met by the leader Rolls Royce.

85/137

9. SGO ITD ACTIVITIES


The purpose of the SGO ITD is to assess, design, build and test up new aircraft systems technologies and architectures in the two areas of Management of Aircraft Energy (MAE), and Management of Aircraft Trajectory and Mission (MTM). CO2 benefits (see tables in par. 3.1 and 3.2) are expected both from mission and trajectory and optimization of on-board energy. Noise reductions are linked to the trajectory management, for approach/landing on the one hand and take off on the other hand. Additional benefits are also expected, e.g. suppression of the use of hydraulic fluids and reduction of persistent contrails formation.


Management of Aircraft Energy

MAE aims at two major objectives. The first one is to develop and demonstrate More-Electric Aircraft System Architectures (bleedless aircraft, power by wire architectures), involving energy users to facilitate the implementation of advanced energy management functions and architectures. This also entails the suppression of hydraulic fluids and related negative environmental impacts. The second objective is to adapt and demonstrate the control of heat exchanges (partly necessary due to the more-electric concept) and reduction in heat waste within the whole aircraft through improved system efficiency with respect to power electronics and advanced Thermal Management. In order to support those objectives, the following enabling technologies will be developed:

Electrical power generation, distribution, conversion and storage technologies

Electrical energy management architecture

Systems using electrical power (ice protection, environmental control systems, etc.)

‘Cooling power’ generation and distribution

Overall thermal management solutions of aircraft systems

Optimization of electrical drive system cooling, and interaction with the more-electric aircraft equipment systems technologies

Energy recovery/energy exchange systems, to reduce heat wastage.

These technologies will lead to a reduction of systems related weight, which will in turn reduce the fuel consumption. The extent of the weight reduction is still to be assessed, as previous studies have shown this to be a complex technical challenge. Another major benefit is the reduction of the systems related power extraction from the engine (non-propulsive thrust). Previous projects have shown that gains up to 40% are achievable, and will enable the engine to be further optimized as well. MAE will benefit from the results of these previous studies (MOET, POA) and further mature the technologies up to TRL 5/6, with target dates for the final demonstrations ranging from late 2012 to 2016 depending on the technologies. The developed technologies will be demonstrated on large scale demonstrators inside SGO itself for the large aircraft applications, but also in other ITDs (namely Green Regional Aircraft, Eco-Design, and Green Rotorcraft).

86/137

Management of Aircraft Trajectory and Mission

MTM is based on two main concepts. First, the ability to fly a green mission from start to finish, with management of new climb, cruise and descent profiles, based on aircraft performances database allowing multi-criteria optimization (noise, gaseous emissions, fuel, and time). This also encompasses the management of weather conditions, which could negatively impact the aircraft optimum route and result in additional fuel consumption. Then, on the airfield itself, Smart Operations on Ground uses new systems solutions, so as to allow airplanes to reduce use of main engines for taxi operation.

Based on the results from several previous studies (e.g. OPTIMAL, FLYSAFE, etc.) these concepts will be

enabled by the development at TRL 5 to 6 of the following technologies:

Flight management & guidance algorithms and functions for climb, cruise & descent phases.

Management of robust performance in presence of atmospheric perturbation, based on

characterization & surveillance of environment (improved Weather radar algorithms)

Database with aircraft and engine performance modeling with environmental data

Capabilities to build complete flight profiles optimized for multi criteria including environmental

impact, combining selected climb, cruise and descent trajectories

Electrically driven wheels, integrated with the landing gear and braking systems, for aircraft motion

on the ground.

The CO2 emission benefits will vary depending on the relative importance of taxi, low altitude and cruise phases in the overall fuel consumption for a given mission range.

The targeted technologies will also bring benefits in terms of NOX reduction. In particular, the reduction of engine use for taxi, thanks to the 'Smart Operations on Ground' system (embedded or external motion system) will decrease the amount of NOX produced in this phase. Nevertheless, a quantified target will require trade-off with the other pollutants.

This MTM activity is particularly coordinated with the SESAR programme.


The following tables show the plan of various SGO technology streams updated in 2010 for Mission and Trajectory Management (M&TM) and Management of Aircraft Energy (MAE)

Mission & Trajectory Management & MANAGEMENT OF AIRCRAFT ENERGY

Technology description TRL

at 2008

TRL at

2012

TRL at

2013

TRL at

2014

TRL at

2015

TRL at

2016 Comments

Multi-Criteria Departure Procedure 2 3 4 5 5 6

Optimized Multi-Step Cruise 2 3 3 4 5 6

Adaptive Increased Glideslope 2 3 4 4 5 6

Major risk on reaching TRL6 due to timing of associated activities in SESAR

SOG System 2 3 4 4 5

87/137

Multi Parameter Guidance (MPG) 2 3 4 5 5+

After TRL5, Flight test on Cessna Citation will provide some (but not all TRL6 criteria)

Advanced weather algorithms 2 3 4 4 5

Quasi-Artificial Intelligence algorithms for mission and trajectory optimization

2 3 3 4 5

Theoretical Trajectory optimization Tool (GATAC)

2 4 4 5 6

Dispatch Towing Vehicle 4 6 6 6 6

Model based energy system design process

2 2 3 4

Electrical Nacelle Actuation System 2 3 4 5

Optimised Variable Frequency Starter Generator

2 2 3 work continues on sub-groups of the equipment

Power Electronic Module for Electrical Power Centre

2 3 3 3 3 4/5

Permanent Magnet Starter Generator

2 2 3 3 4

Variable Frequency Starter Generator for other aircraft

2 3 3 4

E-ECS for Regional Aircraft 2 2 2 3 4/5

E-ECS for Business Aircraft 4 4 4 5

Power Electronics for Large Aircraft EECS

2 3 3 3 4/5 6

ECS mid-size pack for Large Aircraft 2 3 3 3 4/5 5+

2013: change to demonstrator with lower power lead to design change and decrease of TRL

Helicopter electro-mechanical actuation system HEMAS

2 3 3 3 4

Wing Ice Protection System for Large Aircraft

2 3 4 4 4

Flight test of Saab and Liebherr technologies have been cancelled due to budget constraints and low technical maturity. But TRL4 reviews are/will be

88/137

formally closed

Ice detection system 2 3 4 4 5 6 To be flight tests in A320 e-FTD

Electrical Power Centre 2 3 3 3 4

Target reduced to TRL4 becauseTRL5 criteria can’t be met on the ground based PROVEN test rig

Electrical Load Management architecture simulation

2 2 3

Skin heat exchanger 2 3 4 4 5/6

Flight test have been carried out in Sept-14 and assessment of FT results is ongoing.TRL5 and TRL6 will be a combined review.

Vapor Cycle System 2 2 2 3 4

Final TRL decreased to TRL4 due to non-availability of ground test rig AVANT in CLEAN SKY

Thermal Load Management Function

2 2 3 3 3+

Due to cancellation of testing on AVANT test rig in the period of Clean Sky 1 the TMF will not reach TRL4. A “pre-TRL4” (3+) might be carried out using rapid prototyping hardware

Design guide for Electrical Wiring Interconnection System (EWIS)

2 4 5 5 6

Advanced harness design 2 2 4 4 5

Advanced design tools for More Composite and More Electric Aircraft

2 3 4 4 5

89/137

9.4 SCHEDULE

The overall SGO demonstration schedule is the following: Red Cross X means activity cancelled. For MAE development planning is the following:

90/137

91/137

For MTM development planning is the following:


Flight Management functions

Green take-off and climb function

Green cruise function

Green approach

Green FMS

Weather avoidance and

mission optimization

Water Vapour Sensor (WVS)

and Airborne Data Transmission

System (ADTS)

Advanced weather radar

algorithms

On board optimisation

Smart Operation on ground

Gear integrated motion system

Disptach towing vehicle

2014 2015 2016

Trajectory Optimization tool

(GATAC)

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Development

Ground TestsDetailed design

Pre-feasibility phase Preliminary design Detailed design

Pre-feasibility phase Preliminary design

Ground test (Mosart / Airlab)

Ground TestPre-feasibility phase Preliminary design

Tests

Architecture / pre designGround Test

Def phase: Flight rules analysis, Req & Tools Ground & Flight Test32

Tools development for in-flight Procedure & Guidance Sys Developt5 6

Desig ManufacturingTest & EvaluationRecycling63 4

3 4

6

Ground test (Avionics demonstrator)

3

avionics demonstrator set-up

5 6

3 4 5

Tests

Integration

3 4

Ground Tests

3 45

Detailed design

Ground Tests

validation

integration

Inputs for cycle 2

3

GO/NO GO

56

4

4

Flight Test

5

92/137


Environmental forecasting methodology

The table hereafter explains the hypothesis used to compute the global environmental forecast.

Systems updated environmental forecast

Some of the SGO technologies, equipment and even systems mainly from MAE are enabling technologies which will not bring a direct environmental impact or contribution to fuel burn reduction. Actual consolidation and assessment of the environmental achievements for systems technologies will be only possible at a higher level, i.e. on a conceptual aircraft. Then, in a particular configuration, on a particular aircraft type, using a particular engine, and with a particular mission the calculation on aircraft level for each of the vehicle ITDs can generate reliable figures on the environmental forecast.

Subsystem environmental forecast

The tables hereafter show the environmental forecasts from the Mission & Trajectory Management and the Management of Aircraft Energy areas, respectively.

93/137

Mission & Trajectory Management

Type of Target

Flight Phase Reference Quantitative

target SGO concept /

technology Comment

Noise

Take-off Basic NADP on specific SID

2dB Improved NADP

Gain in targeted area SGO concepts could improve

gain by 1 dB for specific conditions

(TOW, Operations,…) simultaneous trade off with

other criteria

Initial and intermediate

approach

Standard FMS approach

profile

3dB CDA Optimization

Local gain Enlarged targeted noise

reduction area and ensure more

repeatable gain

Final approach 3° final glide

2 to 5 dB Steeper approach

Depends on Glide Slope (hence on conditions of the day : wind,

weight, etc)

CO2

Taxi Standard 2 engine taxi (in

and out)

30% Smart Operation on

Ground

Compared to 2 engine taxi

Take-off / climb /

approach

Basic NADP on specific SID - standard FMS

approach profile

15% Improved NADP / CDA Optimization

Simultaneous trade off with other criteria

Gains up to top of climb depends on the reference

procedure.

Cruise Standard Cruise

1% Multi-step cruise

Compared to single Flight level cruise. Applicable to long range

flights

Overall mission

Typical mission 6% Combination of all MTM functions

Example on short range mission 500Nm– no effect of Cruise

Multi-step.

NOx

Take-off / Climb

Basic NADP on specific SID

No quantitative

target

Improved NADP

Gain depending on trade-off with other criteria

Initial and intermediate

approach

Standard FMS approach

profile

No quantitative

target

CDA Optimization

Gain depending on trade-off with other criteria

Taxi Standard 2 engine taxi (in

and out)

No quantitative

target

Smart Operation on

Ground System

Benefits directly driven by reduced use of engine

94/137

Management of Aircraft Energy

Type of Target

Flight Phase

Reference SGO

technology domain

SGO technology

Targeted benefits / Reduction of

Comment

Weight Power

Off-take Drag

CO2

Overall mission

Typical standard aircraft mission

Electrical Technologies

Electrical Power

Generation and

Conversion Systems

Yes Yes

CO2 will be reduced

proportionally to fuel burn.

NOx emissions will

depend on engine

operations

Power Distribution

Systems Yes Yes

Ice Protection Systems

Yes Yes

Environmental Control

Systems Yes Yes Yes

Thermal Management

Systems Yes Yes

Engine Nacelle Systems

Yes

Load Management

Functions

Electrical Load

Management Function

Yes Yes

Thermal Load Management

Function Yes Yes

Method & Tools

Simulation

Yes Yes Yes

95/137


The initial budget assumption for SGO in 2008 was based on a total activity equivalent to €232.22m for ITD leaders and associates, and 38.07M€ of funding to launch CfP (with a worst case assumption of 75% funding). The modifications compared to this initial target were the following:

- Confirmation by JU that the available funding for ITD shall exclude the part reserved for JU running costs (3% of overall Clean Sky funding)

- Alignment of the SGO share of the available funding on 19%, as mentioned by the Clean Sky statutes.

- Consideration of an average funding ration of 66% for CfPs (computed for call 1 to 10). - Evolution in the technical activities for some members

See chapter 4.4 for the overview by ITD including SGO. The current funding allocation shows a gap for some members associated to major demonstrations. Most SGO leaders are impacted and have or will increase their own internal funding to compensate the additional costs (this is the case for instance for Airbus, Thales and Liebherr). Nevertheless, some additional funding from JU is requested in order to fund part of the extra costs related to the planned demonstrators, and to expand the technical scope on some specific demonstration objective. The request remains valid for the next exercise should JU funding become available and features on the ranking list agreed at the GB in October 2014. The maximum request for SGO is in the order of magnitude of 1M€.

96/137

10. ECO ITD ACTIVITIES

10.1 DEVELOPMENT PHILOSOPHY, TECHCNICAL APPROACH AND HIGH-LEVEL CONTENT

The purpose of Eco-Design for Airframe and Systems (Eco-Design) ITD is to develop new technologies in order to optimise resources and reduce nuisances along the overall aircraft production, maintenance and disposal cycle while keeping competitiveness of the aeronautic industry. The environmental issues will be addressed through the reduction of input resources and nuisances – energy (warming), liquid and gaseous effluents, solid and crash waste – with a clear impact on CO2 and NOX. It is expected that technologies within the frame of Clean Sky will reach TRL 5-6. The Eco-Design ITD is focused:

On one hand on designing equipped airframe with a minimum of inputs (raw materials, energy, water, …), outputs and nuisances (energy/warming, liquid effluents, gaseous, solid waste, …) all along the life cycle;

On the other hand, on suppressing non-renewable and/or noxious substances (i.e. suppression of conventional hydraulic fluids) during operations and maintenance, while keeping the aircraft at the appropriate level of quality and performance.

The ITD is organised in two parts, the Eco-Design for Airframe applications (EDA) and the Eco-Design for small aircraft Systems application (EDS). The EDA part addresses the full AIRCRAFT life cycle with a particular focus on the AIRCRAFT design & production and AIRCRAFT withdrawal phases, or as could be said the “out of operation phases”. The EDS part only addresses the AIRCRAFT Use & Maintenance phase through progress on the electric vehicle systems concept. In both parts, the usual performance and cost criteria will strongly guide all the R&D activities all along the project.


Eco-design for Airframe (EDA)

The Airframe application is meant to address the following challenges:

To identify and maturate environmentally sound ('green') materials and processes for aircraft production. This includes the optimal use of raw materials, decrease consumption of non-renewable or hardly reusable materials, natural resources, energy, emission of noxious effluents, as well as avoidance of CMT compounds and applications of future regulation such as REACH regulation;

To identify and mature environmentally sound ('green') materials and processes for aircraft maintenance and use processes. In addition, to the production phase, aspect like long-life structure of more 'intelligent' products (e.g. using sensors) will be taken into account;

To improve the field of end-of-life aircraft operations after several decades of operation, including reuse, recyclability and disposal ('elimination') issues;

To provide means for an ecolonomic design process in order to minimize the overall environmental impact of aircraft production, use/maintenance and disposal.

97/137

As shown on here after, EDA is organized in four main technical areas which will be considered for significant parts of the aircraft structure, cabin covering and furniture, vehicle systems components/equipment, engine components, electronics.

EDA framework

It is expected that technologies above TRL 2 to reach TRL 6 in the frame of Clean Sky. For some very limited cases, technologies with TRL below will be used. The Airframe application of ECO ITD will also:

Deliver recommendation to the three vertical ITDs (GRA, GRC, SFWA);

Observe the new technologies proposed by each of those ITDs and then identify the associated ecologically sound design solutions;

Provide information to the TE especially in the field of LCI/LCA data related to “out of operations” phases of the lifecycle.

Interrelations with the Technical Evaluator and other ITDs are highlighted. The activity in EDA is conducted in close relation with the TE for the production, maintenance and withdrawal phases of the aircraft life cycle.

Manufacturing

Product

Use Maintenance

Green Repair

Elimination

Recycling

Eco-Design

for Airframe

Raw Materials

Area 3 : long life

structure

Area 4 : end of life

management

Area 1 : new

materials &

surfaces

Area 2 : green

manufacturing

98/137

Eco-design for Small Aircraft Systems (EDS)

This part of the ECO ITD addresses a significant step towards the concept of the more/all-electric systems aircraft, with particular focus on business jets:

Removing of hydraulic fluid. From the removing of hydraulic fluids it is expected significant benefits in terms of aircraft maintenance and disposal environmental impact.

On board power by wire. The use of electricity as only media for on-board power offers a lot of possibility in terms of energy management (e.g. intelligent load shedding, power regeneration on actuators, sharing of electrical control unit over actuators). From the on board power by wire concept, it is expected benefits in terms of greener power efficiency and subsequently in terms of fuel consumption and consequently CO2 and NOx emission reduction.

The primary objectives are:

To reduce the direct weight and drag-induced non-renewable energy consumptions of aircraft systems;

To demonstrate feasibility and ecolonomic benefits of the more/all-electric aircraft concept;

To reduce ground and flight tests with innovative concepts and technologies.

Other objectives are:

To develop and validate an aircraft design methodology for the optimisation of integrated aircraft systems architecture and the associated tools;

To develop and validate innovative technology models and simulations to reduce amount of H/W testing (towards the virtual aircraft clean design and development).

EDS is organised in four main areas: Common Activities related to development and validation of aircraft optimisation methodology and associated tools, Business Jet, Ground Electrical Test Activities and Ground Thermal Test Activities. In order to master the large electrical network of the more/all-electric aircraft, on ground electrical tests will be conducted for:

The validation of the large electrical network modelling methodology requested for the electrical architecture optimisation

The maturation of electrical technologies, some of which being developed within the SGO ITD or outside Clean Sky.

On ground thermal tests at aircraft level will be conducted for the mastering of the modelling of onboard aircraft thermal transfers becoming critical for the all-electric aircraft. In respect to EDS, it should be noted that:

Common activities with GRA, GRC and SGO ITDs using the generic architecture are performed in the frame of Eco-Design ITD;

H/W components, models and data related to the development of electric and thermal technologies in the frame of the Energy Management part of the SGO ITDs will be used by the ECO ITD at aircraft architecture level for test and analysis.

Trade-off and ecolonomic analysis on specific architectures for business jet, regional and rotorcraft aircraft are performed in the frame of the EDS, GRA and GRC ITDs.

99/137

A strong link is to be considered with the TE with regard to ecolonomic comparison of specific aircraft systems architecture and final benefits analysis. Eco-Design logic flows are summarised here after. Interrelations with the Technical Evaluator and other ITDs are highlighted.

EDA (left) & EDS (right) Logic Flows

100/137


For EDA, a lot of individual technologies were selected for the demonstration (135 technologies). For management purpose the technologies have been gathered into 'Technology Clusters (TC)'. Each cluster is related to a technology area and will then be translated into demonstrators. Eleven TC are currently defined, noted from A to H. Into a cluster, technologies can be at various TRL from 2 up to 5. The process of management of all the technology development is currently under definition on 2011. However, table below gives for each cluster an average picture of the expected TRL evolution of technologies included in the TC. For EDS, figures hereafter are generic since EDS is focused on technology integration but not development. Technology description TRL

at 2008

TRL at 2012

TRL at 2013

TRL at 2014

TRL at 2015

TRL at 2016

Comments

EDA A - Low Energy Curing 3 4 5 5 6 N/A Cluster of technologies including more than one technology with potentially different TRL. Values included on the table are average values.

B - Al-Li Stiffened Panel + Light Alloys/Green metallics (name TBD)

3 4 5 5 6 N/A

C - Composites for high temperatures

3 4 5 5 6 N/A

D - Green PU foams for seating

2 4 5 5 6 N/A

E - Thermoplastic composites for interior applications

3 4 5 5 6 N/A

F - Thermoplastic a/c structures

2 3 4 5 6 N/A

G - Electrostatic Functionality of organic Materials

2 3 4 5 6 N/A

H - Aerospace alloys, surface treatments and coatings suitable for reducing lifecycle environmental impact

3 4 5 5 6 N/A

I - Biocomposites for cabin interior applications

2 4 5 5 6 N/A

J - Materials for electronics

3 4 5 5 6 N/A

H - Mg alloys 2 4 5 5 6 N/A

EDS Electrical Technologies 3 3 4 4 5 N/A Some technologies at TRL 6 on 2015

Thermal Technologies 3 3 4 4 5 N/A Some technologies at TRL 6 on 2015

101/137

10.4 SCHEDULE

102/137


This section details the process and the environmental forecast considered for EDA. This part is the only one focused on environmental impact of the out of operation phases of the aircraft lifecycle.

Eco-Design over the AIRCRAFT Product Life Cycle

EDA Process

The work will be organised according to the following logic flow:

Development Logic for Eco Design / EDA

After the initial evaluation of current technologies (WP A.3.1.2), a set of requirements for future technologies is established (WP A.1). These requirements will be used to select ('green') technologies to be investigated in the frame of EDA (WP A.2).

103/137

Then the most promising technologies are evaluated and matured through a life cycle demonstration (WP A.4, A.5 and A.6).

After extrapolation to real industrial conditions, a final eco-statement is conducted in WP A.3.1.3 to evaluate the environmental impact of newly developed technologies and to benchmark them against current technologies evaluated in WP A.3.1.2 'Current Eco-Statement'.

The activity is conducted for the production, maintenance and withdrawal phases of the aircraft lifecycle ('on-ground lifecycle').

The logic to evaluate environmental benefits is described below:

1 – Modelling tools and methodology

The quantitative evaluation of the environmental impact is based on the LCA (Life Cycle Analysis). The development of the evaluation tools for aeronautics is based on the following steps:

Benchmarking of 4 existing LCA tools: Gabi, Simapro, Airbus tool and OpenLCA. As of today, Gabi and Airbus tool are foreseen to constitute the basis to develop two kinds of LCA tools: advanced and simplified respectively.

Development of the LCA tools for aeronautics: on the basis of the future selected tools, specific functions and databases will be implemented for aeronautic application.

Definition of a metric to quantify the environmental impact of the on-ground aircraft lifecycle.

2 – Quantitative evaluation – Eco-statement

Through the benchmarking and first loop of Eco-Statement, it has been identified that performing a LCA for the entire aircraft is not realistic in the frame of Clean Sky. So, a simplified approach has been defined, based on the following steps:

Description of the aircraft through parts: the aircraft is represented through a limited number of significant parts (reference parts) as examples shown hereafter

1 Metallic fuselage panel

2 Metallic wing bottom cover

3 Cabin lining panel

12 Door

13 Floor

19 Pinion

22 Tail cone

23 Bellmouth

Typical parts describing the aircraft

Definition of a method of combination of the quantified results to produce an eco-evaluation at overall aircraft level. This method will be based mainly on a summing of the parts LCA results, corresponding to manufacturing routes (combination of material and processes) with weighting factors based on the mass sharing.

Eco-statement on the current technology reference aircraft: the LCA will be performed on the parts of the aircraft based on the current technologies. Then the results will be combined to produce the quantification of the environmental impact of current aircraft.

Eco-statement on the future technologies selected and developed in the frame of Clean Sky. The reference parts will be redesigned by taking into account new green technologies and manufacturing processes. A LCA will be performed on these new parts and, after combination of results; a

104/137

quantification of the environmental impact of the future Clean Sky aircraft will be available. The comparison with results on current aircraft will highlight benefits from EDA at end of Clean Sky.

3 – Technology selection and development

List of technology candidates: SoA analysis performed on 2009 produced a list of 235 detailed individual technologies candidates.

Selection of technologies for development and demonstration

The first step to reduce the number of technologies was based on a simple table where technologies were assessed against their compliance with the specifications elaborated in WP A.1 and the first results of the work carried out in the first months of the project ('scoping phase'); this 'downsizing' also encouraged EDA consortium members to identify their company's favourites

To further decrease the number of technology candidates, it was decided to group the technology candidates in WP A.2.1 and A.2.2 into so called 'Technology Clusters' (TC). This step is finalised on the 3

rd quarter of 2010.

The TCs are based on a combination of materials and manufacturing related processes with a common main idea. At this document issue date, 11 clusters have been defined as follows:

A - Low Energy Curing

B - Light Alloys/Green metallics

C - Composites for high temperatures

D - Green PU foams for seating

E - Thermoplastic composites for interior applications

F - Thermoplastic aircraft structures

G - Electrostatic Functionality of organic Materials

H - Aerospace alloys, surface treatments and coatings suitable for reducing

lifecycle environmental impact

I – Bio-composites for cabin interior applications

J - Materials for electronics

H - Mg alloys

The trade-off process finalised at end of 2010 concluded to the selection of 114 individual technologies gathered into the eleven clusters.

At mid 2013 the total number of technologies under development is 111.

Technology development and demonstration

The TRL of the technology candidates are generally estimated at 3. The technologies will be matured individually in order to reach a TRL 5 before going to demonstration. The demonstration itself will allow reaching TRL 6.

The maturation and characterisation of some technologies have been performed until the end of 2010 through the 'scoping'. These activities will now continue through the 'Technology Development phase'. Later the demonstration will be performed through a set of demonstrators based on the TCs.

At mid-2013, 18 demonstrators are defined as shown on the following table, with:

10 airframe demonstrators (green box on the table)

2 cabin interior demonstrators (red characters)

6 equipment demonstrators (blue box)

105/137

Environmental forecast

The environmental evaluation will be based on LCA results of significant parts of the aircraft. The results on parts will be combined to produce an evaluation at overall aircraft level.

A metric of the on-ground environmental impact will be produced through the dedicated WP.

As a first idea, the following figure gives preliminary key parameters. The figures included in the table are preliminary evaluation of improvements brought by the technologies developed within Clean Sky.

Environmental

aspect

Type Rational Comment Target

Process

emission:

e.g.CO2

Quantitative ACARE, Emission

trading

For each phase, sum of the total amount of the

CO2 emitted by all the processes (direct

emissions and indirect emissions i.e. produced

when producing the energy.

20%

reduction

Hazardous

material

Qualitative REACH Qualitative mark using the list of the

substances used by the manufacturing of each

material.

Compliance

to

regulations

Energy Quantitative Resource

consumption

For each phase, sum of the total amount of the

energy used by all the processes (energy

direct and energy indirect i.e. required to

produce the direct energy or recover by

incineration for the end of life phase).

15%

Recycling of

material

Qualitative Future regulation

on recycling and

waste mgt

Qualitative mark using 4 criteria: homogeneity,

compatibility, capacity of segregation and

recycling.

Key Life Cycle Assessment parameters

Demonstrator

A1 CFRP Wing stiffened panels (small scale panels + full scale panel)

A2 Stiffened panel component demonstrator for wing application by thermoset LCM

A3 Stiffened conical skin

A4 Simplified Trailing Edge

A5 Nacelle composite component demonstrator

B1 (Sub)scale flat Fuselage stiffened panel

B2 Low weight green metallic fuselage section

B3 Main landing gear shock absorber piston (shaft)

C2 Plenum, valve body, Inlet Scroll with CE resins and/or HT TP

D1 Green PU seating cushion

E1 Prototype of an air filter equipment using thermoplastic components

F1 Airframe panel

F3 Ventral door

H1 Parts of air cooling unit

H3 Engine parts & specimen manufactured with EMB & SLM processes

I2 Mid- cabin cabinet

I3 Acoustic treatments to be integrated at the rear cone of air conditioning system fans

J1 Cables, connectors

K1 Shelf removal assembly

106/137


The initial budget assumption for the Eco-Design ITD in 2008 was based on a total activity equivalent to 87,077 M€ for the ITD Leaders and the associates (Members) and 14,5 M€ of funding to launch CfP (with a funding from 50% to 75%).

Compared to this initial target the following led to adjustment:

Confirmation by JU that the available funding for ITD shall exclude the part reserved for JU running costs (3% of overall Clean Sky funding).

Consideration of the real average funding ratio for CfPs, computed for call 1 to 13 and taken as being 70% for remaining CfP 14 and 15.

Planning updates due to evolution in the technical activities on some WPs.

For the partners, evolution of the technical content of some WP introduced modifications to the planned funding. For example, in the frame of WP A.2 (EDA technology development) the definition of the topics came after the selection of the most promising technologies highlighted through the state-of-the-art analysis.

The ITD informed the JU mid 2014 that it would be able to release funding from its overall envelope in the order of 1m €. This was taken into account for the October GB decision related to complementary funding. This release does not affect the overall objectives of the ITD and its work plan for the remaining period. In any case, the JU will continue to monitor the actual spend for the remaining years as shall propose the appropriate re-allocations together with the respective ITDs as soon this is ready.

107/137

11. TE ACTIVITIES

11.1 SCOPE OF TECHNOLOGY EVALUATOR AND TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION

The general philosophy in assessing the environmental impact is outlined in Chapter 3. This chapter describes the technical aspects of the TE. The TE will perform a continuous assessment process, based on a set of dedicated tools, with three main goals:

Monitor by simulation and analysis the environmental progress brought by ITDs technology outputs throughout the Clean Sky duration, for JU Stakeholders;

Ensure a consistent technical assessment approach with respect to ACARE environmental objectives, including a global Air Traffic System view. It will consider all segments of commercial aviation, ranging from large and regional aircraft, to helicopters and business jets;

Help identify inter-dependencies of impacts by trade-off studies and provide elements of guidance for decision-making on technologies within Clean Sky, to maximize synergy effects.

The air transport will be considered as a process with inputs, outputs and impacts, characterized through inventories and relevant metrics. Environmental impact assessments will be done at three complementary and independent levels:

Mission level, considering one single aircraft flying a mission from airport or heliport A to airport or heliport B. In case of helicopters, typical missions will specifically defined;

Airport (operations) level, for instance around an airport, considering all departing and arriving flights on a single (representative) day;

Global air transport system level, considering all air traffic in a single (representative) month.

Life Cycle Assessment of aircraft (i.e., from the manufacturing phase to operation / in-service, including maintenance, to the disposal at the end of life) will also be considered. Because of the aeronautical technology-orientated nature of Clean Sky, the assessments will be limited to actual impacts directly linked to aeronautical technologies. Many modeling/assessment activities have already been performed or are being conducted on ATS operations in Europe. The TE aims to assure the integration / complementarities of these efforts with the specific TE activities.

108/137


Besides WP0 dedicated to management, the technical activities are organized as follows:

WP1 - TE Requirements and architecture

The general objective of this WP is the further definition of requirements and architecture of the TE. This includes the definition of the technological content of the TE assessments on the basis of the ITDs's main demonstration planning, and of the trade-off studies as requested by the ITDs Based on findings and agreements reached in the preparation phase – as reflected in the TE WBS – this task will further detail TE requirements and respective architecture of the model framework and the overall work.

WP2 - Models development and validation

Models (software, databases, and scenarios), with the exception of ITD aircraft models, will be developed/enhanced and validated/verified in WP2. Starting point for the development will be the requirements, Use Cases and TE architecture, as specified in WP1. The models will then be integrated into the simulation framework, as part of WP3.3. WP2 is broken down in line with the three assessment levels: WP2.1 Mission level, WP2.2 Airport level, and WP 2.3 ATS level. Concept, 2000 technology and 2020 'bau' technology aircraft and rotorcraft models will be delivered by SFWA, GRA, and GRC ITDs, as so-called ITD aircraft models. Additional models will be developed/enhanced in the TE, where necessary.

109/137

WP3 – Simulation framework development

The objectives of this work package are threefold:

Build up a TE information system as reporting facility to access all TE assessment results;

Perform the integration of models from REs and ITDs into the assessment platforms (Mission, Airport, ATS) where necessary;

Implement interfaces where needed for the three assessment levels.

The activities of WP3 are structured into 4 work packages at level 2:

WP3.1: TE input data base structure definition;

WP3.2: Development of simulation framework;

WP3.3: Integration, verification, validation;

WP3.4: Simulation configuration control.

WP4 - Assessment of impact & trade-off studies

The objectives of WP4 are to perform TE assessments and trade-off studies based on specific requests from the ITDs.. WP4 is structured in the following way:

WP4.1 TE Input data preparation support;

WP4.2 Trade-off studies;

WP4.3 Assessment of JTI technologies at mission level;

WP4.4 Assessment of JTI technologies at airport level;

WP4.5 Assessment of JTI technologies at ATS level;

WP4.6 Synthesis of assessments;

WP4.7 Contribution to external reporting and communication;

11.3 TECHNICAL APPROACH

The assessment methodology will be threefold: At Mission level year 2000 technology aircraft are compared with year 2020 Clean Sky concept aircraft flying the same mission in order to determine the noise and emission performance and to show the Clean Sky benefit. The assessments will consider all promising green technologies selected by ITDs, not on a unitary basis, but grouped as clusters in in so called 'concept aircraft' configurations that will be prepared under the responsibility of manufacturers in Clean Sky’s ITDs (GRA, SFWA, GRC). At fleet levels (airport level and global ATS level) the methodology is to first establish a reference situation, corresponding to the fleet of the year 2020 including the traffic increase in this fleet since 2000 through a forecast. This 2020 reference fleet will contain existing and "business as usual" technology aircraft.

110/137

This reference situation will then be compared with a 'Clean Sky' scenario, including a 100% insertion. of 2020 Clean Sky concept aircraft in the fleet where relevant (i.e. in terms of corresponding aircraft sizes and ranges). By comparing the 2020 fleet with and without Clean Sky technologies the Clean Sky benefit in terms of emission and noise performance will be shown. In order to consider possible SESAR program inputs to the TE (e.g. optimized flight procedures) a liaison is established between Clean Sky and SESAR JUs.

11.4 TE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

The primary goal of the TE is to perform the Clean Sky environmental assessment and to provide to the European Commission, and for the public interest, the assessment results of the environmental improvements brought by technologies developed in Clean Sky. Two major assessment cycles are foreseen. The preliminary assessment has resulted in a report early 2012; the second one will result in a final report by the end of 2016. Besides these two major assessments, intermediate assessment results will be reported in 2013 and 2014

Each assessment will generally involve three levels of evaluation, that is, Mission level, Airport level and ATS level.

It should be noted that the ACARE Goals, which form the backdrop and principal touchstone for the Clean Sky Programme results, are all de facto Mission Level parameters.

Mission level will focus on single aircraft operations from a location A to a location B, and on single rotorcraft missions. Reference aircraft and rotorcraft, as well as new aircraft and rotorcraft concept configurations with Clean Sky technologies developed by the ITDs will be simulated at this level. To perform mission level simulation, models for Reference and Concept Aircraft (including rotorcraft) will be provided by SFWA, GRA and GRC ITDs. For existing aircraft in the aviation operational fleet, existing models from the research centres will be used.

The Mission level assessment will indicate the level of achievement towards the ACARE goals for aircraft and rotorcraft (year 2020 technology versus 2000-technology aircraft) on:

Noise on ground for aircraft; noise on ground in vicinity and over flown area for rotorcraft;

Fuel burn and CO2 emissions for each segment along a mission, including ground operations;

NOX emissions at the aircraft level for a mission;

Life cycle assessment to evaluate environmental impact of manufacturing, maintenance, and disposal processes.

Airport level will focus on Clean Sky Reference and Concept Aircraft (including rotorcraft), inserted into a fleet to simulate local air traffic around airports and to address contribution to local air quality, perceived noise on ground and airport capacity/throughput. The aim is to consider SESAR results as input.

111/137

The Airport Level assessment will indicate the impact that the forecast level of achievement of the Clean Sky Programme can have in a year 2020 Airport environment.

Airport and terminal maneuvering area (TMA) throughput;

Noise impact in the airport vicinity and population exposed to certain noise levels;

Fuel burn and emissions in the airport vicinity below 3000 ft AGL ;

Contribution to local air quality;

Environmental impact of maintenance processes.

Global ATS level will cover the regional and global environmental impact of Reference and Clean Sky Concept aircraft and rotorcraft. ATS level will perform EU regional noise and global emission inventories by using the Year 2020 reference fleet versus 2020 fleet with insertion of Clean Sky concept aircraft.

ATS level will indicate the impact that the forecast level of achievement of the Clean Sky Programme can have in a year in a 2020 Air Transport System environment on:

2020 Reference global fleet fuel and emission inventory

2020 Reference noise exposed European population

2020 Reference contribution on local air quality

2020+ traffic demand, fleet, routing and mission forecasts

2020 Clean Sky scenario global fleet fuel and emission inventory

2020 Clean Sky scenario of noise exposed European population

2020 Clean Sky scenario contribution to local air quality at major EU airports

2020 fleet LCA analysis

These quantifications will make use of the results from mission level (technology improvements of single aircraft) and from airport level (with regard to noise exposed citizens and contribution to local air quality). For Year 2020, the TE will replace selected percentages of the Year 2020+ fleet with Concept aircraft incorporating Clean Sky technologies and show the environmental delta with respect to a 2020 fleet with no Clean Sky Concept aircraft replacement.

112/137

Reference vs. Clean Sky aircraft and fleet at global level

11.5 PLANNING

Technology Evaluator planning up to the end of the project (year 2016) and the main milestones are shown in the following figure.

This diagram presents the TE’s master plan over 9 years, as best estimated at the date of issue of this document. Two main assessment cycles have been planned: The first one, which started beginning 2012, has been completed in April 2013.The corresponding results have been provided in the two following TE deliverables: DJU4.6-1; DJU4.6-2 The second one is planned to be completed before end of 2016. This final assessment will be prepared by intermediate TE progress demonstrations which will be issued with a periodicity of about 12 to 18 month, depending on delivery dates of the ITDs models updates. These

2016

113/137

updates depends on the technology steps (TRL) which are passed inside these ITDs. These progress demonstrations will be phased in order to realize the best trade off between the completeness of the assessment, and the integration of a maximum of ITDs aircraft models updates


The Technology evaluator is on target to spend its allocated envelope by the end of the programme. The budget execution for 2014 could however show some underspending which may or may not be able to be redistributed within the JU. The grant agreement for members for 2015-2016 will provide further details on the final estimated costs – at which point – the JU will be in a better position to suggest or not, a re-allocation of part of the relatively small TE envelope. The cost claims for 2014 will first be analysed before this proposal could be further prepared and only if applicable.

114/137

12. MANAGEMENT OF ITD INTERDEPENDENCIES

12.1 MANAGEMENT OF INTERDEPENDENCIES WITHIN THE PROGRAMME

As a general principle, the ITDs and the Members should deal directly with one another at the project execution level regarding the inputs and outputs needed from each other in order to perform the activities of the Programme. Nevertheless, as each ITD has entered into a contractual relation with the CSJU and not directly with the other ITDs, the CSJU will monitor interfaces, arbitrate where necessary and ensure issues are addressed and resolved regarding the interfaces between different ITDs and between Beneficiaries thereof. The JU will not arbitrate with respect to interface issues within an ITD, this being the responsibility of the ITD Members and the relevant Steering Committee.

Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) can be one of the issues to be dealt with when managing the interfaces between ITDs and between Members, and in such a case, the Legal Officers of the Parties and of the CSJU will find the appropriate contractual constructs and instruments to allow the execution of the tasks. Conflicting priorities in the (technical) work programme of different ITDs (or the TE) can cause execution risk at the overall Programme level. One of the aims of this Development Plan is hence to ensure visibility of interfaces exists and timely action is in place in any cases where divergent priorities could create risk. The JU will ensure that the overall progress of the Clean Sky Programme is not endangered by interface issues (such as but not limited to IPR or resource priorities), and will retain management oversight and governance rights in concert with its Governing Board to adequately ensure the efficient and effective flow of relevant information is maintained. As a safeguard to ensure that interface ‘input/output’ (I/O) and roles and responsibilities are clear and unambiguous, the GAMs (and associated Annex 1) and the AIPs will be cross-correlated under supervision of the JU, and all key deliveries (output) from one ITD to another ITD (or TE) will be ‘hard-wired’ as JU Deliverables, with defined output and due dates, into the relevant GAMs for monitoring (and for contractual performance management by the JU, as and when necessary).

12.2 GLOBAL INTERFACES BETWEEN ITDS

The table overleaf gives a global picture of the interfaces between the ITD's Concept Aircraft (C), Demonstration Programmes (D) and Technologies (T). The key interface areas, their topic areas and scope are described later in this chapter. Broadly speaking, there are specific and unique interfaces with defined input/output flows and accompanying milestones and deliverables in the following areas:

Between SAGE and the Aircraft ITDs concerning the aircraft/propulsion integration and technology insertion from the propulsion area into the aircraft as ‘system’.

Between SGO and the Aircraft ITDs concerning the adoption and integration of aircraft systems-based technologies and aircraft-systems level design solutions in overall aircraft designs / architectures.

Between ECO and both the Aircraft ITDs (EDA) and the other Transversal ITDs (EDS) concerning the adoption and use of eco-design processes and technologies.

Between the Aircraft ITDs and the TE concerning the provision of Concept Aircraft and modelling tools and/or data as laid out by the TE ‘Description of Model Requirements’ for use in the TE Assessments of the Clean Sky Programme’s environmental impacts and benefits. The principles of documenting and managing interfaces (Interface Control Document) is explained in para 12.3

115/137

Legend:

Inputs required into TE (from: along horizontal axis) Inputs required into Concept Aircraft (from: along horizontal axis)

Inputs required into Demonstrators (from: along horizontal axis) Technology Inputs from Transversal ITDs into Aircraft ITDs (from: along horizontal axis)

C D T C D T C D T D M T M

M A E

1 2 3 4 5 6 D E D A

E D S

TE CONCEPTS

SFWA DEMONSTRATORS

TECHNOS GRA CONCEPTS

DEMONSTRATORS

TECHNOS GRC CONCEPTS

DEMONSTRATORS

TECHNOS

SGO DEMONSTRATORS MTM MAE

SAGE1

SAGE2

SAGE3

SAGE4

SAGE5

SAGE6 ED DEMONSTRATORS

EDA

EDS

SFWA SGO

GRC

SAGE

SAGE

ED

ED

SGO

GRC

SFWA

GRA

T E

GRA

116/137

12.3 MANAGEMENT OF KEY INTERFACES: INTERFACE CONTROL DOCUMENTS

Each interface area as set out in para 12.2 is documented in the Technical Annexes of the GAMs of the ITD supplying as well as the ITD receiving data, reports, results and similar Outputs and Deliverables. The JU, during the process of annual renewal and updating of the GAMs validates the equivalence of inputs and outputs between the ITDs both in definition, specification, and due date. Whilst it is the joint and several responsibilities of the ITDs with shared interfaces to ensure the flow of Outputs and Deliverables is adequately defined and managed, the JU nonetheless considers this an area of sufficient overall programme risk to engage actively in the finalisation of interface definitions.

117/137

13. MONITORING OF TRL PROGRESS

13.1 SYNTHESIS OF THE ITDS TRL LEVELS

Tables from 1 to 6 show the synthesis of the updated TRL levels provided by the ITDs in the new TRL table template for the preparation of the Clean Sky programme Development Plan (20/11/2104). Evolution in time of the TRL levels of the different technologies can be estimated from the analysis of these data. As it can be noted, SFWA presents now 16 technologies, as showed in Table 1 instead of the 10 of last year.

TRL Level 2008 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

1 0 0 0 0 0 0

2 11 6 1 0 0 0

3 5 7 10 7 3 3

4 0 3 5 9 4 2

5 0 0 0 0 9 4

6 0 0 0 0 0 7

Number of techn. 16 16 16 16 16 16

Table 1 – SFWA ITD – TRL table fully updated

TRL 2008 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

1 1 1 1 0 0 0

2 0 0 0 1 0 0

3 13 8 5 1 1 1

4 1 4 7 9 2 2

5 0 2 2 4 10 10

6 0 0 0 0 2 2

Number of techn. 15 15 15 15 15 15

Table 2 – GRA ITD – TRL Table fully updated.

TRL Level 2008 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

1 2 0 0 0 0 0

2 9 8 3 0 0 0

3 3 5 9 4 0 0

4 0 1 2 6 2 2

5 0 0 0 4 6 4

6 0 0 0 0 6 8

Number of techn. 14 14 14 14 14 14

Table 3 – GRC ITD – TRL Table fully updated.

118/137

TRL Level 2008 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

1 0 0 0 0 0 0

2 17 3 3 3 0 0

3 3 12 7 4 3 1

4 7 7 6 7 7 3

5 0 5 9 9 4 7

6 0 0 2 4 13 16

Number of Techn. 27 27 27 27 27 27

Table 4 – SAGE ITD – TRL table fully updated

TRL Level 2008 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

1 0 0 0 0 0 0

2 28 8 2 0 0 0

3 0 18 13 11 4 3

4 2 3 13 12 9 9

5 0 0 1 6 14 10

6 0 1 1 1 3 8

Number of Techn. 30 30 30 30 30 30

Table 5 – SGO ITD - TRL table fully updated

TRL LEVEL 2008 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

1 0 0 0 0 0 0

2 5 0 0 0 0 0

3 8 4 0 0 0 0

4 0 9 4 2 0 0

5 0 0 9 11 2 2

6 0 0 0 0 11 11

Number of Techn. 13 13 13 13 13 13

Table 6 – ECO ITD - TRL Table fully updated.

119/137

By collecting these data for TRL levels, a synthetic and useful summary TRL table has been produced and showed in Table 7. Graphs of these data help to understand the evolution of the TRL.

TRL Level 2008 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

1 3 1 1 0 0 0

2 70 25 9 4 0 0

3 32 54 44 27 11 8

4 10 27 37 45 24 18

5 0 7 21 34 45 37

6 0 1 3 5 35 52

Number of technologies 115 115 115 115 115 115

Table 7 – Synthesis of the TRL level for all ITDs

13.2 TRL EVOLUTION

The graphical representation of the data of Table 7 shows the evolution of the TRL levels in the years, as can be seen by observing

Figure 1. It has to be stressed how the low TRL levels, such as 1, 2 and 3, decrease in the years. They do not completely disappear since some technologies have been stopped or suspended as not promising as previously anticipated. Conversely, higher TRL levels, such as 4 and 5 or 6, start to increase later reaching the maximum values.

Figure 1 – Evolution of the TRL levels in the programme Clean Sky

Even if this graph provides useful insight concerning the evolution of the TRL levels in the time, it does not provide any information regarding the current status of the TRL level. By comparing this diagram to the 2013 one, it appears that, in 2016, more technologies reach TRL level 6. In order to have at least an estimation of the TRL level today available, an average value on all the technologies and ITDs has been computed and

120/137

shown in the Table 8. This TRL level provides an indication on the general status of the TRL level in the programme. Table 8 shows also the comparison between the values of the average TRL level computed in 2013 and today. The forecast for 2014, computed last year, was too much optimistic since the TRL level seems closer to 4 as than foreseen.

AVERAGE TRL LEVEL Average TRL 2013 Average TRL 2014

2008 2,44 2,43

2012 3,19 3,15

2013 3,67 3,67

2014 4,38 4,08

2015 5,02 4,90

2016 5,28 5,16

Table 8 – Average TRL level for every year

The graphical representation of Table 8 showed in

Figure 2, shows how the average TRL level increases when going to the end of the project. In addition, it provides an estimation of the today average TRL level (in yellow) that is around 4,08. By crossing these data with information provided in Figure 1, you can imagine that many technologies have a level of maturity equal to 3 and 4 but that some have already reached level 5.

Figure 2 – Temporal evolution of the average TRL level

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

2008 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Average TRL Level

Average TRL Level

121/137

122/137

PART 3: APPENDICES

Appendices

(Page Intentionally blank)

123/137

A. ABBREVIATIONS

The abbreviations as used in the document are as follows:

AIRCRAFT: Aircraft ACARE: Advisory Council for Aeronautics Research in Europe AIP: Annual Implementation Plan CS: Clean Sky CSDP: Clean Sky Development Plan CSMM: Clean Sky Management Manual CSTR: Clean Sky Technology Register DoW: Description of Work ECO: Eco-Design (ITD) Envt: Environment GAM: Grant Agreement for Members GAP: Grant Agreement for Partners GRA: Green Regional Aircraft (ITD) GRC: Green RotorCraft (ITD) ITD: Integrated Technology Demonstrator JTI: Joint Technology Initiative JU: Joint Undertaking MMD: Manufacture, Maintenance & Disposal SAGE: Sustainable And Green Engines (ITD) SGO: Systems for Green Operations (ITD) S/S: Sub-System SFWA: Smart Fixed Wing Aircraft (ITD) TE: Technology Evaluator WBS: Work Breakdown Structure

124/137

B. CLEAN SKY CONCEPT AIRCRAFT

B.1 LOW-SPEED BIZJET, TF POWERED:

Year 2000 technology: F2000EX with some modifications. Year 2020 Concept Aircraft : F2000EX with some modifications, incl. SFWA techno. Engine data to be provided by SNECMA.

B.2 HIGH-SPEED BIZJET, TF POWERED:

HSBJ 2000 : F900 blended with F7X. Not yet defined how far this aircraft is deviating from existing AIRCRAFT. Engine data from Dassault. HSBJ 2020: F900 blended with F7X, F2000EX with some modifications, including SFWA technologies. Engine data from Dassault.

B.3 GRA 90PAX, TP POWERED:

TP 2000: The Reference A/C includes the same technologies of the ATR 72 - 500 and the same Top Level A/C requirements of the Concept 90 Pax A/C. This is done by means of well-established engineering design methodologies. This process retains all the technological basic features while allowing making comparison in terms of non-dimensional “efficiency” with the same level of “productivity”, and eliminating all the size effects. Currently, the need for this methodology is at mission level only. Resizing to a 90-seater for TE assessment on operational and global level will not be considered. TP90 2020: Basis is an GRA90 TP powered aircraft based on GRA technologies. Engines modelling and technological assessment are performed inside GRA, by GRA members SNECMA and RR. Development activities are arranged in three Design Loops.

B.4 GRA 130PAX, GTF POWERED:

TF 130 2000: The Reference A/C includes the same technologies of the Embraer E190 and the same Top Level A/C requirements of the Concept 130 Pax A/C. As already clarified for the GRA 90 Pax TP, to clean up the contribution of aircraft size on efficiency evaluation and to perform a comparison at the same level of 'productivity' a resizing to a 130 seats (since Embraer 190 has ~100) is performed, exclusively for the scope of comparison at Mission Level with a suitable 'metric'. For the TE assessment at the Airport (operational) and ATS (global) level the Reference Aircraft has to be considered ‘as-is’ (without re-sizing). GTF 130 2020: In the initial Clean Sky GRA and SAGE DoWs no interaction and interface with SAGE 4 for “Geared TF” was planned. Nevertheless in consideration of the high potential technological contribution of GTF engines for

125/137

regional aircraft and to comply with Clean Sky global evaluation and assessment scenario GRA and SAGE4 started cooperation. This Concept A/C will be the only representative 130 pax A/C in the TE assessment from 2012 to 2016 years. Development activities are arranged in two Design Loops.

B.5 GRA 130PAX, CROR POWERED:

CROR 130 2020: GRA130 CROR powered aircraft based on GRA technologies was considered the basic “Green 130pax Regional Aircraft”. This Concept will be used only for the internal GRA performance evaluation. Engines modelling and technological assessment for performance, emissions and aero-acoustic are performed by Snecma and RR partly in GRA and partly in SAGE (SAGE1 and SAGE2) with appropriate interface among GRA and SAGE. GRA will continue to develop this Concept A/C with the Engine Manufactures as well, but, as reported before, GRA will not consider this A/C for the TE 130 Pax Assessment. Development activities are arranged in three Design Loops.

B.6 GRA 130PAX, A-TF POWERED:

A-TF 130 2020: In the past, as a back-up alternative and to manage the risk that not sufficient engine data and manufacturers support would be available during the Clean Sky time frame due to low level of maturity of CROR and subsequent changes of strategies, a 'Green 130Pax A-TF ' powered with Advanced TF was considered. GRA will continue to develop this Concept A/C with the Engine Manufactures as well, but, as reported above, GRA will not consider this A/C for the TE 130 Pax Assessment. This Concept will be used only for the internal GRA performance evaluation. Engines modelling and technological assessment for performance, emissions and aero-acoustic for such Advanced TF are performed by Snecma and RR as in the GRA DoW. Development activities are arranged in three Design Loops.

B.7 SHORT/MEDIUM RANGE (SMR), TURBOFAN POWERED COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT

RPL1 2000: Basis is the A320 reference with CMF 56 series engines. To avoid any confusion, this reference will be named 'SFWA reference platform 1' (SFWA RPL1) APL4 2020: Basis is the A320 reference, but re-engined with the most advanced series of available TF engines. The conceptual aircraft will be named 'SFWA Advanced Platform 4' (SFWA APL4).

B.8 SHORT/MEDIUM RANGE (SMR), CROR POWERED COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT

RPL1 2000: Basis is the A320 reference with CMF 56 series engines. To avoid any confusion, this reference will be named 'SFWA Reference Platform 1' (SFWA RPL1). APL1/2 2020: Basis is an all new SFWA SMR aircraft, equipped with key SFWA technologies, re-engined with SAGE1 respectively SAGE 2 CROR engines. The conceptual aircraft will be named 'SFWA Advanced Platform 1' and Advanced Platform 2' respectively (SFWA APL1 and SFWA APL2).

126/137

B.9 LONG RANGE (LR), 3 SHAFT-TURBOFAN POWERED COMMERCIAL AIRCAFT

RPL2 2000: Basis is the A330 reference with Trent 700 series engines. To avoid any confusion, this reference will be named 'SFWA Reference Platform 2' (SFWA RPL2). APL3 2020: Basis is the A330 reference, re-engined with SAGE 3 conceptual engines. The conceptual aircraft will be named 'SFWA Advanced Platform 3' (SFWA APL3).

B.10 GENERIC SINGLE ENGINE LIGHT (SEL) TURBO-SHAFT POWERED HELICOPTER

SEL 2000: Generic Light Single engine with a generic small turboshaft associated to conventional main rotor blades, flying in conventional VFR conditions & procedures. SEL 2020: Conceptual Light Single Engine with a conceptual turboshaft (SAGE 5 concept), blades profile optimized for dual speed rotor and low noise, low drag airframe and enhanced engine integration. Flying in VFR approach and departure with pilot guidance system.

B.11 GENERIC SINGLE ENGINE LIGHT (SEL HELICOPTER, DIESEL POWERED

DEL 2000: Generic Light Single engine with a generic small turboshaft associated to conventional main rotor blades, flying in conventional VFR conditions & procedures. SEL 2020: Conceptual Light Single Engine with a low emission Diesel Engine, blades profile optimized for dual speed rotor and low noise, a low drag airframe. Flying in VFR approach and departure with pilot guidance system.

B.12 GENERIC TWIN ENGINE LIGHT (TEL) TURBO SHAFT POWERED HELICOPTER

TEL 2000: Generic Light Twin engine with a generic twin turboshaft associated to conventional main rotor blades, conventional mechanical & hydraulic on-board energy, flying in conventional VFR conditions & procedures. TEL 2020: Conceptual Light Twin engine with a conceptual twin turboshaft (SAGE 5 concept), associated to enhanced engine installation, rotor blades optimized for dual speed rotor and low noise, low drag airframe, mechanical & hydraulic on-board energy. Operated in optimized VFR approach and departure with pilot guidance, and with fully optimised flight path in IFR (terminal phases and cruise).

B.13 GENERIC TWIN ENGINE MEDIUM (TEM) HELICOPTER

TEM 2000: Generic Medium Twin engine with a generic medium turbo shaft, conventional main rotor blades, conventional airframe and tail surfaces, mechanical & hydraulic on-board energy. Operated in conventional VFR and IFR conditions & procedures.

127/137

TEM 2020: Conceptual Medium Twin engine with a conceptual medium turboshaft (SAGE 5 concept), associated to enhanced engine installation, rotor blades optimized for dual speed and controlled by active Gurney flaps, drag-optimised airframe possibly including active control (flow separation control, controlled tail surfaces), more electrical on board equipment including possibly an electrical tail rotor drive. Operated in optimized VFR approach and departure with pilot guidance, and with fully optimised flight path in IFR (terminal phases and cruise).

B.14 MULTI- ENGINE HEAVY HELICOPTER

TEH 2000: Heavy Twin engine with generic medium turboshaft engines associated to conventional main rotor blades, conventional airframe and tail surfaces, mechanical & hydraulic on-board energy. Operated in conventional IFR conditions & procedures. TEH 2020: Conceptual Heavy Twin engine with a conceptual large turboshaft (SAGE 5 concept), associated to enhanced engine installation, rotor blades optimized for dual speed and controlled by active Gurney flaps, drag-optimised airframe including controlled tail surfaces and possibly flow separation control, more electrical on board equipments including possibly an electrical tail rotor drive. Operated with fully optimised flight path in IFR (terminal phases and cruise).

B.15 TILT ROTOR AIRCRAFT

TLR 2000: No appropriate reference available to match 'ERICA' concept TLR 2020: 'ERICA' Concept, with a conceptual large turbo shaft, hub spinner, reduced prop rotor/nacelle interaction, tilt rotor body component optimisation, optimized installation, Low noise IFR Approach and departure, as well as optimized path.

128/137

C. HIGH LEVEL PLAN FOR TECHNOLOGY UPTAKE IN TE ASSESSMENTS

C.1 TECHNOLOGY PLANNING – SFWA SMR AND LR ASSESSMENT

not included in model included in model

2011 2012 2013 2014 2014 2015

ITD demo.

ActivityLSD (Q3/4) HSDP passive (Q3/4)

tables tables PANEM 1.1.5PANEM

1.2.4/1.2.7

PANEM

1.3.0PANEM 1.4

ac types APL1, APL-ATF, RPL1, RPL2APL2, APL3,

RPL1, RPL2

APL2, APL3, RPL1,

RPL2

APL2, APL3,

RPL1, RPL2

APL2, APL3,

RPL1, RPL2

APL2, APL3, RPL1,

RPL2

SAGE1

ATF SAGE2 SAGE2 SAGE2 SAGE2 SAGE2

SAGE3 SAGE3 SAGE3 SAGE3 SAGE3

SAGE6 SAGE6 SAGE6

noise output NPD na

SEL

footprints , 3

ICAO points

(EPNLdB)

SEL

footprints , 3

ICAO points

(EPNLdB)

SEL footprints , 3

ICAO points

(EPNLdB)

Fuel/emission output fuel , CO2 fuel , CO2fuel , CO2,

NOX

fuel , CO2,

NOXfuel , CO2, NOX

4D capacity no no yes yes yes yes

"any" range

capacity 3D/4Dno

yes (with

interpolati

on)

yes (with

interpolation)

yes (with

interpolatio

n)

yes (with

interpolation)

SMR CROR

aircraftTechnologies TRL 2011 TRL 2012 TRL 2013 TRL 2014 TRL 2014 TRL 2015

Natura l Laminar Flow 4 4 4 4 4

Hybrid Laminar Flow Control 3 3 3 3 3

Load Control Functions and

Architectures3 4 4 4 5

Buffet Control Included in NLF 3 3 3 3 3

CROR Engine Integr 3 3 3 3 4

Engine SAGE1 (CROR RR) 2

SAGE2 (CROR SN) 3 3 4 4 4

SGO MCDP (end March 2015) 3 4 5 6

A-IGS 3 4 4 5 6

MAE (end Sep 2015) 3 3 to 5 5

PANEM model

delivery date

Test

vers ion

APL2: 7 Sep

2012

PANEM 1.1.5:

20.02.2013;

PANEM1.2.4:

05.03.2014;

PANEM1.2.7:

29.04.2014;

PANEM 1.3.0 :

31/10/2014

PANEM 1.4.0:

30.09.2015

LR aircraft Technologies 2011 TRL 2012 TRL 2013 TRL 2014 TRL 2015

Hybrid Laminar Flow Control no 3 n/a n/a n/a

Fluidic control surface no 2 n/a n/a n/a

Load Control Functions and

Architecturesno 3 n/a n/a n/a

Buffet Control no 3 n/a n/a n/a

Engine SAGE3 3 4 4 5 6

SAGE6 3 3 4 4 4 5

SGO A-IGS 3 4 4 5 6

MSC 4 4 4 5

MAE (end Sep 2015) 3 3 to 5 5

PANEM model

delivery date

Emiss ion

tables :

30.01.2012

NPD tables :

January 2013;

PANEM 1.15:

20.02.2013

PANEM1.2.4:

05.03.2014;

PANEM1.2.7:

29.04.2014;

PANEM 1.3.0:

31.10.2014

PANEM 1.4.0/1:

31.03.2015,

30.09.2015

Airframe

SFWA Airbus

ITD ac model

Model and version including:

engine type

Airframe

Technology no more in PANEM models

129/137

C.2 TECHNOLOGY PLANNING – SFWA BUSINESS JETS ASSESSMENT


2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

ITD demo.

Activity

biz. PANEM1.0/1.1/1.2 biz. PANEM1.3 biz. PANEM1.4 30.09.2014 30.09.2015

ac typesLSBJ2000, LSBJ2020;

HSBJ2000, HSBJ2020

LSBJ2000,

LSBJ2020;

HSBJ2000,

HSBJ2020

HSBJ2000,

HSBJ2020

LSBJ2000,

LSBJ2020

HSBJ2000,

HSBJ2020

engine type SNECMA SNECMA SNECMA SNECMA SNECMA

noise outputLamax footprints , 2

ICAO points (EPNLdB)

Lamax

footprints , 2

ICAO points

Lamax

footprints , 2

ICAO points

Lamax

footprints , 2

ICAO points

Lamax

footprints , 2

ICAO points

Fuel/emission output fuel , CO2, NOXfuel , CO2,

NOX

fuel , CO2,

NOX

fuel , CO2,

NOX

fuel , CO2,

NOX

4D capacity no no no no no

LSBJ aircraft Technologies TRL 2011 TRL 2012 TRL 2013 TRL 2014 TRL 2015

Low drag natura l laminar wing 4 4 4 5 5

U-Tai l 4 4 4 4 4

Fluidic flow control leading

edge- - - - -

Less hydraul ic power

architecture3 3 4 4 4

Electro-thermal WIPS:

included in NLF3 3 3 4 4

Load control 3 3 4 5 5

Compos ite wing - - - - -

Smart flap 3 3 4 4 4

EngineEngine with a 2020 EIS

(provided by SNECMA)2 2 2 2 2

SGO no no no no no no

biz. PANEM

model delivery

date

biz. PANEM 1.2:

16.12.2011

biz. PANEM

1.3: 12.06.2012

no LSBJ

update

biz. PANEM

1.5: 30.09.2014

no LSBJ

update

HSBJ aircraft Technologies TRL 2011 TRL 2012 TRL 2013 TRL 2014 TRL 2015

Load & vibration control 3 3 4 5 6

HLFC on Li fting surfaces 3 3 3 3 3

NLF on Li fting surfaces control 3 3 4 4 5

Innovative 3-engine afterbody 3 3 4 4 5

NLF wing (lower s ide) 3 3 4 4 5

Smart flap 3 3 3 4 5

Engine DA-2020 / SN-2020 ? (tbc) 2 2 2 2 2

SGO no no no no no no

biz. PANEM

model delivery

date

biz. PANEM 1.2:

16.12.2011

biz. PANEM

1.3: 12.06.2012

biz. PANEM

1.4: 30.09.2013

no HSBJ

update30.09.2015


ITD ac model

Airframe

SFWA Dassault

airframe

130/137

C.3 TECHNOLOGY PLANNING – REGIONAL AIRCRAFT ASSESSMENT


2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

ITD demo.

ActivityWTT (Q3) WTT (Q1/2/4)

Ground test

(Q4)

GRASM v1.0 GRASM 3.2GRASM 4.0

(updated loop 2)GRASM loop3

GRASM loop3

+ MTM

ac typesTP90 2000/2020,

TF130 2000/2020

TP90 2000/2020,

TF130

2000/GTF130 2020

TP90 2000/2020,

TF130

2000/GTF130 2020

TP90 2000/2020,

TF130

2000/GTF130 2020

TP90

2000/2020,

TF130

2000/GTF130

2020

engine type TP & A-TF (GRA)TP (GRA),

GTF (SAGE 4)

TP (GRA),

GTF (SAGE 4)

TP (GRA),

GTF (SAGE 4)

TP (GRA),

GTF (SAGE 4)

noise output

SEL footprints , 3

ICAO points

(EPNLdB)

SEL footprints , 3

ICAO points

(EPNLdB)

SEL footprints , 3

ICAO points

(EPNLdB)

SEL

footprints , 3

ICAO points

(EPNLdB)

Fuel/emission output fuel , CO2 fuel , CO2, NOX fuel , CO2, NOX fuel , CO2, NOXfuel , CO2,

NOX

4D capacity NoPredefined

ranges

Predefined

ranges

Predefined

ranges

Predefined

ranges

TP 90 aircraft CS technologies TRL 2011 TRL 2012 TRL 2013 TRL 2014 TRL 2015

Advanced Metal l ic Materia l 4 4 N/A N/A N/A

Advanced Compos ite Materia ls 4 4 5 5 6

Structure Health Monitoring 4 4 5 5 6

Drag Reductions 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Load Control / Al leviation 3 3 3 4 5

Low Noise Landing Gear 3 3 3 3 5

Low Noise & High Efficiency High

Li ft Devices3 4 4 4 5

EMA for Primary Fl ight Control

System Actuation 3 4 4 4 5

EMA for Landing Gear Actuation 3 3 3 3 5

Advanced Electrica l Power

Generation and Dis tribution

System

3 3 3 4 5

Electrica l Environmental Control

System3 3 3 4 5

Hybrid Wing Ice Protection System 3 3 3 (*) 3 (*) N/A

Hybrid Wing Ice Protection System

(2nd Generation technology)N/A N/A

Developped Out

of Clean Sky

Developped Out

of Clean Sky3 (**)

In cooperation

with SGO

MTM

Green Fl ight Management System 3 3 3 3 5

Engine Next generation turboprop TP (GRA) TP (GRA) TP (GRA) TP (GRA) TP (GRA)

TurboProp

EngineCS technologies TRL 2011 TRL 2012 TRL 2013 TRL 2014 TRL 2015

Very low NOx emiss ion combustor

No information

provided by engine

manufacturers

No information

provided by

engine

manufacturers

No information

provided by

engine

manufacturers

No information

provided by

engine

manufacturers

5

Propel ler system (benefi ting of

SAGE 2 open rotor blade

technology)

No information

provided by engine

manufacturers

No information

provided by

engine

manufacturers

No information

provided by

engine

manufacturers

No information

provided by

engine

manufacturers

5

AC Model

delivery date

GRASM v1.0:

04.11.2011

GRASM 3.2:

10.12.2012

GRASM 4.0

(updated loop 2):

28.06.2013

GRASM loop3:

31.10.2014

GRASM loop3

+ MTM:

31.10.2015

* Technologies developed outs ide of Clean Sky

GRA

ITD ac model


In cooperation

with SGO MAE

131/137


2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

ITD demo.

ActivityWTT (Q3) WTT (Q1/2/4)

Ground test

(Q4)

GRASM v1.0 GRASM 3.2GRASM 4.0

(updated loop 2)GRASM loop3

GRASM loop3

+ MTM

ac typesTP90 2000/2020,

TF130 2000/2020

TP90 2000/2020,

TF130

2000/GTF130 2020

TP90 2000/2020,

TF130

2000/GTF130 2020

TP90 2000/2020,

TF130

2000/GTF130 2020

TP90

2000/2020,

TF130

2000/GTF130

2020

engine type TP & A-TF (GRA)TP (GRA),

GTF (SAGE 4)

TP (GRA),

GTF (SAGE 4)

TP (GRA),

GTF (SAGE 4)

TP (GRA),

GTF (SAGE 4)

noise output

SEL footprints , 3

ICAO points

(EPNLdB)

SEL footprints , 3

ICAO points

(EPNLdB)

SEL footprints , 3

ICAO points

(EPNLdB)

SEL

footprints , 3

ICAO points

(EPNLdB)

Fuel/emission output fuel , CO2 fuel , CO2, NOX fuel , CO2, NOX fuel , CO2, NOXfuel , CO2,

NOX

4D capacity NoPredefined

ranges

Predefined

ranges

Predefined

ranges

Predefined

ranges

TF 130 aircraft CS technologies TRL 2011 TRL 2012 TRL 2013 TRL 2014 TRL 2015

Advanced Metal l ic Materia l 4 4 N/A N/A N/A

Advanced Compos ite Materia ls 4 4 5 5 6

Structure Health Monitoring 4 4 5 5 6

Drag Reductions 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Natura l Laminar Flow Wing 3 4 4 4 5

Load Control / Al leviation 3 3 3 4 5

Low Noise Landing Gear 3 3 3 3 5

Low Noise & High Efficiency High

Li ft Devices3 4 4 4 5

EMA for Primary Fl ight Control

System Actuation 3 4 4 4 5

EMA for Landing Gear Actuation 3 3 3 3 5

Aerodynamic & Aeroacoustic

Integration3 3 3 4 5

Advanced Electrica l Power

Generation and Dis tribution

System

3 3 3 4 5

Electrica l Environmental Control

System3 3 3 4 5


(*)3 3 3 (*) 3 (*) N/A


(2nd Generation technology) (**)N/A N/A

Developped Out

of Clean Sky

Developped Out

of Clean Sky3 (**)

In cooperation

with SGO

MTM

Green Fl ight Management System 3 3 3 3 5

Engine ATF, GTF (SAGE4) ATF (GRA) SAGE4 SAGE4 SAGE4 SAGE4

TRL 2011 TRL 2012 TRL 2013 TRL 2014 TRL 2015

CLEAN SKY technologies

Advanced fan gearbox N/A 4 4 4 6

High efficiency high pressure

compressorN/A 5 5 5 6

High speed low pressure turbine

(incl . new materia l )N/A 4 4 4 6

Aggress ive aero-structures / New

l ight weight exhaust frameN/A 5 5 5 6

Non-CLEAN SKY technologies

Advanced UHBR fan technology N/A 5 5 5 5

Advanced high speed booster

technologyN/A 5 5 5 5

Advanced burner technology N/A 5 5 5 5

Advanced HP turbine technology N/A 5 5 5 5

Advanced l ight weight nacel le


Advanced low noise des ign


AC Model

delivery date

GRASM v1.0:

04.11.2011

GRASM 3.2:

10.12.2012

GRASM 4.0

(updated loop 2):

28.06.2013

GRASM loop3:

31.10.2014

GRASM loop3

+ MTM:

31.10.2015

In cooperation

with SGO MAE

Geared TurboFan Engine SAGE 4

GRA

ITD ac model


132/137

(*)

(**)

Formal review of TRL 3 for SGO Zodiac technology declared not conclus ive. In particular, the path to upper TRL for the Electro-mechanical technology has been interrupted. This technology wi l l be uti l i zed for the 2013 and 2104 year,

waiting the H-WIPS second generation data

Appl icable only If second generation technology development wi l l pass the decis ion gate planned for December 2014

133/137

C.4 TECHNOLOGY PLANNING – ROTORCRAFT ASSESSMENTS


2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

ITD demo. ActivityGRC1 ground & flight

test Q1-4

GRC1 ground & flight

test Q1-4

GRC2 flight test Q1-4

GRC3 ground tests Q3-4 GRC3 ground tests Q1-4 GRC3 ground tests Q1-2

GRC4 flight test Q3-4 GRC4 flight test Q1-2


tests Q1-4


tests Q1-4


tests Q1-2

Phoenix V1.1 Phoenix V2.1: Phoenix V7.1

ac types TEL TEL U1 TEL U2

a/c performance info yes yes yes

engine type

TEL with GSP + TM

benefi ts 10% s fc and

60% Nox

GSP with TM

veri fication SAGE5

noise output SEL footprints SEL footprints SEL footprints

Fuel/emission output fuel , CO2 fuel , CO2, NOX fuel , CO2, NOX

4D capacity yes yes yes

TEL rotorcraft CS technologies TRL 2011 TRL 2012 TRL 2013 TRL 2014 TRL 2015 TRL 2016

GRC1 Technologies

1.3 Optimised pass ive rotor 2 2 3 3 4 5

1.1 Blades with active Gurney flap control 2 2 3 4 5 6

1.2 Actively twis ted blades 2 2 3 3 3 4

GRC2 Technologies

TP1B Rotor hub cap and mast fa i ring optimised for low

drag2 2 3 3 6 6

TP6 LMS ClosedSynthetic Jets and s teady blowing on blunt aft body 2 unable to reach 3 CLOSED CLOSED CLOSED CLOSED

TP8 Pass ive shape optimisation/vortex generators on a

blunt aft body 2 2 3 4 6 6

TP8 Aerodynamica l ly optimised Landing skids 2 2 3 6 6

TP11 New air inlet des ign on a l ight r/c 2 2 2 3 6 6

GRC3 Technologies

3.4.1 Brushless s tarter generators (1A) - (improved

electrica l system efficiency)3 3 4 4 & 5 5

3.4.2 Power Convertor (1A)-(improved electrica l system

efficiency)3 3 3 & 4 4 & 5

3.4.3 Energy Storage - (improved electrica l system

efficiency)2 2 & 3 3 & 4 4 & 5

3.4.6 REFERENCE TASK Thermal Energy Recovery & Management of Energy

Recovery

3.4.6.1 Thermal Energy (Partner - Recycle) 3

3.4.6.2 Management of Energy Recovery Dev (Partner -

Renergise)

3.5.1 EMA for l ight rotorcraft (hydraul ics deletion) 3 CLOSED N/A N/A N/A N/A

3.5.2 EMA for fl ight control systems (medium) (1A)

(hydraul ics deletion)

3.5.3 REFERENCE TASK EMA for uti l i ty consumer system(1A)(hydraul ics

deletion)

3.5.3.1 EMA for landing gear 2 2 2 & 3 4 & 5 4 & 5 4 & 5

3.5.3.2 EMA for rotor brake 2 2 3 5 5 5

3.6.1 Electric ta i l rotor (conventional open rotor) -

(hydraul ics deletion)2 2

2 & 3 3 4 4

3.6.2 Electric ta i l rotor (fenestron)- (hydraul ics deletion)

3.7 Piezo Electrica l Power - (Enabler for environmental

objectives )2 2

3 4 4 4

GRC5 Technologies

Low Noise VFR approach & Departure with pi lot

guidance system not ava i lable4 & 5 6 6

Low Noise IFR approach & Departure with automatic

system not ava i lable

GRC6 Ecodesign Demonstrators for Rotorcraft

6.1

Skid fa i ring (appl ied from Phoenix V4.1 onwards ie

TEM-C) NEW TECHNOLOGY5 5 5

6.2 Thermoplastic Ta i l Demonstrator 4 5 5

6.2 Thermoplastic Roof Panel 4 6 6

6.4 Transmiss ion shaft welding 5 5 5

6.4 Thermoplastic compos ites transmiss ion shaft 5 5 5

SAGE ITD Technologies

SAGE 5, GSP GSP + Predictions GSP + TM Ver SAGE TRL 6 ?

MEMS model TBC

AC Model delivery date Phoenix V1.1

(09.11.2011)

Phoenix V2.1: TEL U1

(31.05.2012)

Phoenix V7.1: TEL U2

(01.06.2015)

GRC DEL Phoenix V5.1: DEL

(31.12.2014)

Phoenix V9.1: DEL U1

(30.04.2016)

GRC Tiltrotor Phoenix V8.1: TLR

(28.02.2016)

GRC AW-Eurocopter

ITD A/c model


134/137


2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

ITD demo. ActivityGRC1 ground & flight

test Q1-4

GRC1 ground & flight test

Q1-4




GRC5 ground & flight tests

Q1-4


tests Q1-4


tests Q1-2

PhoeniX V2.1 Phoenix V5.1 Phoenix V8.1

ac types SEL SEL U1 SEL U2

a/c performance info yes yes yes

engine typeGSP with TM

verification SAGE 5 TM SAGE 5 TM

noise output SEL footprints SEL footprints SEL footprints

Fuel/emission output fuel, CO2 fuel, CO2, NOX fuel, CO2, NOX

4D capacity yes yes yes

SEL rotorcraft CS technologies TRL 2011 TRL 2012 TRL 2013 TRL 2014 TRL 2015 TRL 2016

GRC1 Technologies

Optimised passive rotor 2 2 3 3 4 5

Blades with active Gurney flap control N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Actively twisted blades 2 2 3 N/A N/A 4 (GRC1 TBC)

GRC2 Technologies

TP1A/1BRotor hub cap and fairings optimized for low

drag2 3 3 4 & 6 4

TP4Synthetic Jets and steady blowing on blunt aft

body2 3 4 4

TP8 ?

Passive shape optimisation/vortex

generators on a blunt fuselage2 3 & 4 3 ? 6

TP8 ? Aerodynamically optimised Landing skids 2 3 & 4 4 ? 6

TP11 New air inlet design on a light r/c 2 2 2 3 6 6

GRC3 Technologies

All electrical on-board energy ? 3 ? ? ? ?

EMA for flight control system 3

EMA for rotor braking system 2

PPS for Piezo Actuators 2

Brushless Starter Generator 3 4 5

Battery 2 4 5

Primary Distribution ? ? ?

Secondary Distribution ? ? ?

Converters DC/DC 2 ? ?

GRC5 Technologies

Low Noise VFR approach & Departure with

pilot guidance system currently not availableTBA 6 6

Low Noise IFR approach & Departure with

automatic system currently not availableNA NA NA NA NA NA

GRC6 Technologies

6.1 Cross tube fairing 5 5

6.2 Roof panel 4 6

6.2 Tail cone 4 5

6.3 Tail gear box 4 5

6.3 Main rotor shaft 5 5

6.4 Intermediate gear box NA NA NA NA NA NA

6.4 Transmission shaft welding 5 5

6.4Thermoplastic composites transmission

shaft5 5


SAGE 5 / GSP 4 4 & 5 ? 5 & 6 ? 6

MEMS model UC MEMS model?

AC Model delivery

date

Phoenix V2.1: SEL U1

(31.05.2012)


(31.12.2014)


(28.02.2016)

GRC AW-Eurocopter

ITD A/c model


135/137


2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

ITD demo. ActivityGRC1 ground & flight test

Q1-4


Q1-4





Q1-4


Q1-4


Q1-2

Phoenix V4.1.1 Phoenix V8.1

ac types TEM TEM U1

engine type SAGE 5 SAGE 5

noise output SEL footprints SEL footprints

Fuel/emission output fuel , CO2, NOX fuel , CO2, NOX

4D capacity yes yes

TEM rotorcraft CS technologies TRL 2011 TRL 2012 TRL 2013 TRL 2014 TRL 2015 TRL 2016

GRC1 Technologies

Optimised pass ive rotor 2 2 3 3 4 5

Blades with active Gurney flap control 2 2 3 4 5 6

Actively twis ted blades N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

GRC2 Technologies

TP2 Rotor hub cap and mast fa i ring optimised

for low drag2 2 3 3 6 6

TP8 Pass ive shape optimisation/vortex

generators on a blunt aft body 2 2 3 4 6 6

TP8 Aerodynamica l ly optimised Landing skids 2 2 3 6 6

TP11 New air inlet des ign on a l ight r/c 2 2 2 3 6 6

GRC3 Technologies

3.4.1 Brushless s tarter generators (1A) -

(improved electrica l system efficiency)3 3 4 4 & 5 5

3.4.2 Power Convertor (1A)-(improved electrica l

system efficiency)3 3 3 & 4 4 & 5

3.4.3 Energy Storage - (improved electrica l system

efficiency)2 2 & 3 3 & 4 4 & 5

3.4.6 REFERENCE TASK Thermal Energy Recovery & Management of

Energy Recovery

3.4.6.1 Thermal Energy (Partner - Recycle) 3

3.4.6.2 Management of Energy Recovery Dev

(Partner - Renergise)

3.5.1 EMA for l ight rotorcraft (hydraul ics deletion) 3 CLOSED N/A N/A N/A N/A

3.5.2 EMA for fl ight control systems (medium) (1A)

(hydraul ics deletion)

3.5.3 REFERENCE TASK EMA for uti l i ty consumer

system(1A)(hydraul ics deletion)

3.5.3.1 EMA for landing gear 2 2 2 & 3 4 & 5 4 & 5 4 & 5

3.5.3.2 EMA for rotor brake 2 2 3 5 5 5

3.6.1 Electric ta i l rotor (conventional open rotor) -

(hydraul ics deletion)2 2 2 & 3 3 4 4

3.6.2 Electric ta i l rotor (fenestron)- (hydraul ics

deletion)N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

3.7 Piezo Electrica l Power - (Enabler for

environmental objectives )2 2 3 4 4 4

GRC5 Technologies


pi lot guidance system not ava i lable4 & 5 6 TBC


automatic system not ava i lableN/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A


SAGE 5 4 4 & 5 5 & 6 6

MEMS model UC MEMS model?

AC Model delivery datePhoenix V4.1.1: TEM

(30.09.2014)

Phoenix V8.1: TEM U1

(28.02.2016)

GRC AW-Eurocopter

ITD A/c model


136/137


2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

ITD demo. ActivityGRC1 ground & flight test

Q1-4


Q1-4





Q1-4


Q1-4


Q1-2

PhoeniX V3.1 Phoenix V6.1

ac types TEH TEH U1

engine type SAGE 5 SAGE 5

noise output SEL footprints SEL footprints

Fuel/emission output fuel , CO2, NOX fuel , CO2, NOX

4D capacity yes yes

TEH rotorcraft CS technologies TRL 2011 TRL 2012 TRL 2013 TRL 2014 TRL 2015 TRL 2016

GRC1

3D blade profi le optimized for dual speed

rotor2 2 3 3 or 4 4 or 5

Blades with active Gurney flap control 2 2 or 3 3 3 4

Actively twis ted blades 2 3 3 4 4

GRC2

Rotor hub cap and mast fa i ring optimised for

low drag2 3 4 5 6

Synthetic Jets and s teady blowing on blunt aft

body2 3 4 4

Pass ive shape optimisation/vortex generators

on a blunt aft body 2 2 or 3 4 5 6

Optimised geometry for common platform and

relevant weight class2 2 3 4 6

New a ir inlet des ign on a heavy r/c 2 2 or 3 3 4 6

GRC3

Al l electrica l on-board energy 3 ? ?

270 Vdc Dis tribution ? ?

EMA for fl ight control system 2 2 & 3 3 3 & 4 4 & 5 5

EMA for rotor braking system 2 2 3 5 5 5

PPS for Piezo Actuators 2 2 3 4 4 4

ECS ? ? ?

Brushless Starter Generator 270vdc 2 2 & 3 4 4 4 & 5 5

Battery 3 4 5 5

Generator ? ?

APU Starter ? ?

Primary Dis tribution ? ?

Secondary Dis tribution ? ?

Converters DC/DC 3 4 4 5

Removal of hydraul ic ci rcui t (including fl ight

control system)2 2 & 3 3 3 & 4 4 & 5 5

Electrica l Landing gear 2 2 2 & 3 4 & 5 4 & 5 4 & 5

Electrica l ta i l rotor drive (in part) 2 2 2 & 3 3 4 4

GRC5


pi lot guidance system not ava i lablen/a n/a


automatic system not ava i lablen/a n/a

SAGE ITD technologies

SAGE 5 ? ?

MEMS model n/a in progress UC MEMS model?

AC Model delivery date

PhoeniX V3.1: TEH

(30.04.2013)

Phoenix V6.1: TEH U1

(31.012.2014)

GRC AW-Eurocopter

ITD A/c model


137/137

C.5 TECHNOLOGY PLANNING – LIFECYCLE IMPACT ASSESSMENTS (ALL A/C)

CLEAN SKY TE LCA PLAN 2012-2016

Made compatible with EDA plan and timescales 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Jan-June July-Dec Jan-June July-Dec Jan-June July-Dec Jan-June July-Dec Jan-June July-Dec

LCA Mission level analysis

Extend data collection for materials cakes for parts

to all CleanSky reference aircraft/rotorcraft

Collect LCA data on use phase and end-of life phase

for CLeanSky reference aircaft/rotorcraft

Updated 1st Assessment: Extend 1st assessment

demonstration calculation to all Cleansky reference

aircraft/rotorcraft

Collect LCA data for CleanSky conceptual

aircraft/rotorcraft: all phases

Final assessment: mission level

LCA Ground operations analysis

Define model

Collect ground operations data for CleanSky

reference aircraft/rotorcraft

Perform LCA for ground operations for CleanSky


Collect ground operations data for CleanSky concept

aircraft/rotorcraft

Assessment: ground operations Perform LCA for

ground operations for CleanSky concept

aircraft/rotorcraft

LCA Fleet analysis

Upscale Cleansky LCA data to fleet level for CleanSky


Upscale Cleansky LCA data to fleet level for CleanSky

concept aircraft/rotorcraft

LCA Final assessment and report

clean sky 2 joint undertaking · 2018-03-23 · 1/137 clean sky 2 joint undertaking clean sky...

Documents