Cover Image

Not for Sale



View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( R2


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
ACRP AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM REPORT 45 Sponsored by the Federal Aviation Administration Optimizing the Use of Aircraft Deicing and Anti-Icing Fluids

OCR for page R1
ACRP OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE* TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2011 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE* CHAIR OFFICERS James Wilding CHAIR: Neil J. Pedersen, Administrator, Maryland State Highway Administration, Baltimore Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (re- VICE CHAIR: Sandra Rosenbloom, Professor of Planning, University of Arizona, Tucson tired) EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board VICE CHAIR MEMBERS Jeff Hamiel MinneapolisSt. Paul J. Barry Barker, Executive Director, Transit Authority of River City, Louisville, KY Metropolitan Airports Commission Deborah H. Butler, Executive Vice President, Planning, and CIO, Norfolk Southern Corporation, Norfolk, VA MEMBERS William A.V. Clark, Professor, Department of Geography, University of California, Los Angeles James Crites Eugene A. Conti, Jr., Secretary of Transportation, North Carolina DOT, Raleigh DallasFort Worth International Airport James M. Crites, Executive Vice President of Operations, Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport, TX Richard de Neufville Paula J. Hammond, Secretary, Washington State DOT, Olympia Massachusetts Institute of Technology Kevin C. Dolliole Adib K. Kanafani, Cahill Professor of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley Unison Consulting Susan Martinovich, Director, Nevada DOT, Carson City John K. Duval Michael R. Morris, Director of Transportation, North Central Texas Council of Governments, Arlington Austin Commercial, LP Tracy L. Rosser, Vice President, Regional General Manager, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Mandeville, LA Kitty Freidheim Steven T. Scalzo, Chief Operating Officer, Marine Resources Group, Seattle, WA Freidheim Consulting Steve Grossman Henry G. (Gerry) Schwartz, Jr., Chairman (retired), Jacobs/Sverdrup Civil, Inc., St. Louis, MO Jacksonville Aviation Authority Beverly A. Scott, General Manager and CEO, Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, Tom Jensen Atlanta, GA National Safe Skies Alliance David Seltzer, Principal, Mercator Advisors LLC, Philadelphia, PA Catherine M. Lang Lawrence A. Selzer, President and CEO, The Conservation Fund, Arlington, VA Federal Aviation Administration Gina Marie Lindsey Kumares C. Sinha, Olson Distinguished Professor of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, West Los Angeles World Airports Lafayette, IN Carolyn Motz Daniel Sperling, Professor of Civil Engineering and Environmental Science and Policy; Director, Institute of Hagerstown Regional Airport Transportation Studies; and Interim Director, Energy Efficiency Center, University of California, Davis Richard Tucker Kirk T. Steudle, Director, Michigan DOT, Lansing Huntsville International Airport Douglas W. Stotlar, President and CEO, Con-Way, Inc., Ann Arbor, MI EX OFFICIO MEMBERS C. Michael Walton, Ernest H. Cockrell Centennial Chair in Engineering, University of Texas, Austin Paula P. Hochstetler EX OFFICIO MEMBERS Airport Consultants Council Sabrina Johnson Peter H. Appel, Administrator, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, U.S.DOT U.S. Environmental Protection Agency J. Randolph Babbitt, Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration, U.S.DOT Richard Marchi Rebecca M. Brewster, President and COO, American Transportation Research Institute, Smyrna, GA Airports Council International--North America Laura McKee Anne S. Ferro, Administrator, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, U.S.DOT Air Transport Association of America John T. Gray, Senior Vice President, Policy and Economics, Association of American Railroads, Henry Ogrodzinski Washington, DC National Association of State Aviation Officials John C. Horsley, Executive Director, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Melissa Sabatine Officials, Washington, DC American Association of Airport Executives Robert E. Skinner, Jr. David T. Matsuda, Deputy Administrator, Maritime Administration, U.S.DOT Transportation Research Board Victor M. Mendez, Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, U.S.DOT William W. Millar, President, American Public Transportation Association, Washington, DC SECRETARY Tara O'Toole, Under Secretary for Science and Technology, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Christopher W. Jenks Washington, DC Transportation Research Board Robert J. Papp (Adm., U.S. Coast Guard), Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC Cynthia L. Quarterman, Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S.DOT Peter M. Rogoff, Administrator, Federal Transit Administration, U.S.DOT David L. Strickland, Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S.DOT Joseph C. Szabo, Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration, U.S.DOT Polly Trottenberg, Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy, U.S.DOT Robert L. Van Antwerp (Lt. Gen., U.S. Army), Chief of Engineers and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC Barry R. Wallerstein, Executive Officer, South Coast Air Quality Management District, Diamond Bar, CA *Membership as of October 2010. *Membership as of March 2011.

OCR for page R1
AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM ACRP REPORT 45 Optimizing the Use of Aircraft Deicing and Anti-Icing Fluids John D'Avirro Michael Chaput APS AVIATION INC. Montreal, QC Subscriber Categories Aviation Maintenance and Preservation Environment Operations and Traffic Management Research sponsored by the Federal Aviation Administration TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2011 www.TRB.org

OCR for page R1
AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM ACRP REPORT 45 Airports are vital national resources. They serve a key role in trans- Project 10-01 portation of people and goods and in regional, national, and inter- ISSN 1935-9802 national commerce. They are where the nation's aviation system ISBN 978-0-309-15551-9 connects with other modes of transportation and where federal respon- Library of Congress Control Number 2011924371 sibility for managing and regulating air traffic operations intersects with the role of state and local governments that own and operate most 2011 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. airports. Research is necessary to solve common operating problems, to adapt appropriate new technologies from other industries, and to introduce innovations into the airport industry. The Airport Coopera- COPYRIGHT INFORMATION tive Research Program (ACRP) serves as one of the principal means by Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining which the airport industry can develop innovative near-term solutions written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously to meet demands placed on it. published or copyrighted material used herein. The need for ACRP was identified in TRB Special Report 272: Airport Research Needs: Cooperative Solutions in 2003, based on a study spon- Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the sored by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The ACRP carries understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB or FAA endorsement out applied research on problems that are shared by airport operating of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the agencies and are not being adequately addressed by existing federal material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate research programs. It is modeled after the successful National Coopera- acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of tive Highway Research Program and Transit Cooperative Research Pro- the material, request permission from CRP. gram. The ACRP undertakes research and other technical activities in a variety of airport subject areas, including design, construction, mainte- nance, operations, safety, security, policy, planning, human resources, NOTICE and administration. The ACRP provides a forum where airport opera- tors can cooperatively address common operational problems. The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the Airport Cooperative Research Program, conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the The ACRP was authorized in December 2003 as part of the Vision Governing Board of the National Research Council. 100-Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act. The primary partici- pants in the ACRP are (1) an independent governing board, the ACRP The members of the technical panel selected to monitor this project and to review this report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. Oversight Committee (AOC), appointed by the Secretary of the U.S. The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to Department of Transportation with representation from airport oper- procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved ating agencies, other stakeholders, and relevant industry organizations by the Governing Board of the National Research Council. such as the Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA), The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the the American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE), the National researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Association of State Aviation Officials (NASAO), and the Air Transport Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. Association (ATA) as vital links to the airport community; (2) the TRB The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research as program manager and secretariat for the governing board; and Council, and the sponsors of the Airport Cooperative Research Program do not endorse (3) the FAA as program sponsor. In October 2005, the FAA executed a products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers' names appear herein solely because contract with the National Academies formally initiating the program. they are considered essential to the object of the report. The ACRP benefits from the cooperation and participation of airport professionals, air carriers, shippers, state and local government officials, equipment and service suppliers, other airport users, and research orga- nizations. Each of these participants has different interests and respon- sibilities, and each is an integral part of this cooperative research effort. Research problem statements for the ACRP are solicited periodically but may be submitted to the TRB by anyone at any time. It is the responsibility of the AOC to formulate the research program by iden- tifying the highest priority projects and defining funding levels and expected products. Once selected, each ACRP project is assigned to an expert panel, appointed by the TRB. Panels include experienced practitioners and research specialists; heavy emphasis is placed on including airport pro- fessionals, the intended users of the research products. The panels pre- pare project statements (requests for proposals), select contractors, and provide technical guidance and counsel throughout the life of the project. The process for developing research problem statements and Published reports of the selecting research agencies has been used by TRB in managing cooper- AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM ative research programs since 1962. As in other TRB activities, ACRP are available from: project panels serve voluntarily without compensation. Primary emphasis is placed on disseminating ACRP results to the Transportation Research Board Business Office intended end-users of the research: airport operating agencies, service 500 Fifth Street, NW providers, and suppliers. The ACRP produces a series of research Washington, DC 20001 reports for use by airport operators, local agencies, the FAA, and other interested parties, and industry associations may arrange for work- and can be ordered through the Internet at shops, training aids, field visits, and other activities to ensure that http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore results are implemented by airport-industry practitioners. Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. On the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, on its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transporta- tion Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Board's varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individu- als interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org

OCR for page R1
COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS CRP STAFF FOR ACRP REPORT 45 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Crawford F. Jencks, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs Michael R. Salamone, ACRP Manager Edward T. Harrigan, Senior Program Officer Melanie Adcock, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Margaret B. Hagood, Editor ACRP PROJECT 10-01 PANEL Field of Operations Jorge E. Panteli, McFarland-Johnson, Inc., Concord, NH (Chair) Janell Barrilleaux, Federal Aviation Administration, Renton, WA John A. Lengel, Jr., Gresham, Smith and Partners, Columbus, OH Danuta Leszczynska, Jackson State University, Jackson, MS Alec J. Simpson, Transport Canada, Ottawa, ON Bryan C. Wagoner, Wayne County (MI) Airport Authority, Detroit, MI George Legarreta, FAA Liaison Richard Marchi, Airports Council InternationalNorth America Liaison Christine Gerencher, TRB Liaison

OCR for page R1
FOREWORD By Edward T. Harrigan Staff Officer Transportation Research Board ACRP Report 45: Optimizing the Use of Aircraft Deicing and Anti-Icing Fluids provides practical technical guidance on procedures and technologies to reduce the use of aircraft deicing and anti-icing fluids (ADAF) while maintaining safe aircraft operations across the wide range of winter weather conditions found in the United States and Canada. This guid- ance is presented as (1) a series of best management practices that are immediately imple- mentable and (2) the detailed findings and recommendations of experiments to evaluate holdover time determination systems, spot deicing for aircraft frost removal, and ADAF dilutions. The report will be of direct interest to airport and airline staff responsible for air- craft deicing and anti-icing operations and the mitigation of their environmental impacts. Current understanding of the mechanisms of the formation, retention, and removal of ice from critical aircraft surfaces is incomplete, leading to conservative deicing and anti- icing practices that may waste some portion of the ADAF used for this critical function. Fur- ther, airports are under regulatory pressure to minimize the quantity of spent ADAF dis- charged to waterways or sewage treatment plants because the fluids can contribute to aquatic toxicity, excessive chemical and biological oxygen demand, and deterioration of the airport infrastructure. Mitigation of storm water runoff containing ADAF can require the expenditure of sums in excess of $10 million at individual airports. The objective of ACRP Project 10-01 was to identify procedures and technologies that optimize the use of ADAF, thus reducing their environmental impact while assuring safe aircraft operations in conditions requiring deicing and anti-icing. The project was con- ducted by APS Aviation, Inc., Montreal, Quebec, Canada. The project team first reviewed the worldwide literature to identify a wide range of pro- cedures and technologies to optimize ADAF use and then conducted a combination of engi- neering analyses and laboratory and field experiments to measure and validate the effective- ness of the most promising procedures and technologies selected in consultation with the ACRP project panel. The report is organized into five chapters. Chapter 1 is a concise summary of the research conducted in the project. Chapter 2 presents the key findings of a literature review to iden- tify technologies and procedures that could potentially optimize ADAF use and reduce envi- ronmental impact while maintaining or even enhancing the safety of aircraft operations. In addition, Chapter 2 describes the results of a focus group organized to gain industry insights and feedback on current and future ADAF optimization practices. The focus group looked at 34 potential optimization technologies and procedures, many of which were ultimately deemed to possess technical or operational deficiencies, or to not offer an adequate envi-

OCR for page R1
ronmental or operational enhancement, and were thus eliminated from further examina- tion with the concurrence of the ACRP project panel. Chapter 3 presents the results of field experiments conducted at four airports in the United States and Canada to examine whether a holdover time (HOT) precipitation sensor at a single location can reliably report precipitation conditions for an entire airport. The experiment was carried out by measuring precipitation intensity simultaneously at several sites at an airport during winter weather events. The experimental results indicate that dif- ferences in between-site HOTs for snow can be significant to the operation, and that they are a function of distance. Specifically, the differences in HOT generated from different sites begins to impact the operation when the sites are separated by mid-range distances (7,000 to 13,500 ft), and have a definite impact at long separation distances (on the order of 28,000 ft). Chapter 4 presents the findings of an investigation into the use of spot deicing for frost removal, which is a procedure that involves deicing small frost-contaminated spots on air- craft wings in lieu of deicing the entire wings. A significant number of operators are not familiar with the spot deicing procedure; training, lack of qualified individuals to make assessments, and asymmetrical application are obstacles to its use. As a result of this proj- ect, guidance material for spot deicing for frost removal will be incorporated into SAE ARP 4737. A cost-benefit model and presentation aids were prepared to assist operators in assess- ing the benefits of implementing spot deicing for frost removal in their operations and con- sequentially encouraging its use. In Chapter 5, the results of an investigation to assess the use of ADAF dilutions and to ascertain potential savings in the use of glycol for deicing and anti-icing of aircraft are doc- umented. ADAF dilutions are not widely used, although adequate regulations and guide- lines for their use exist. Indeed, their use can be shown to be cost beneficial for many oper- ations. A cost-benefit model and presentation aids were developed to give operators the tools they need to assess whether implementing the use of fluid dilutions would be benefi- cial for their operation. The final part of the report presents 16 Fact Sheets describing promising technologies and procedures from Chapter 2, singly or in combination, in the form of readily implementable best management practices. The Fact Sheets complement those in ACRP Project 02-02, "Managing Runoff From Aircraft and Airfield Deicing and Anti-Icing Operations," as pres- ented in ACRP Report 14: Deicing Planning Guidelines and Practices for Stormwater Manage- ment Systems. Each Fact Sheet includes (1) a description of the technology or procedure; (2) implementation considerations; and (3) cost information. The appendixes from the contractor's final report, computational tools, and presentation media may be downloaded from the ACRP Project 10-01 webpage at http://apps.trb.org/ cmsfeed/TRBNetProjectDisplay.asp?ProjectID=122.

OCR for page R1
CONTENTS 1 Chapter 1 Project Summary 1 Phase I: Promising De/Anti-Icing Source Reduction Practices 1 Phase II: Research and Development on Four Selected Topics 1 Fact Sheets for De/Anti-Icing Optimization 1 Holdover Time Variance Across an Airfield 2 Increased Use of Spot Deicing for Aircraft Frost Removal 2 Increased Use of Aircraft De/Anti-Icing Fluid Dilutions 3 Chapter 2 Promising De/Anti-Icing Source Reduction Practices 3 Introduction 3 Objective 3 Organization 4 Research Approach 4 Literature Review and Data Examination 5 Focus Group 5 Survey 6 Findings and Applications 6 Aircraft De/Anti-Icing Optimization Technologies and Procedures 6 Preliminary List of De/Anti-Icing Optimization Technologies and Procedures 7 Elimination of Items with Low Potential for Success 7 Development of Final List of Technologies and Procedures 9 Focus Group Survey Inputs on Final List of Technologies and Procedures 17 Overall Ranking of Optimization Technologies and Procedures 22 Conclusions and Recommendations 22 Conclusions 22 Recommendations for Further Study 23 Recommendations for Phase II 24 Bibliography 28 Chapter 3 Holdover Time Variance Across an Airfield 28 Introduction 28 Preliminary Testing (Winter 200708) 28 Additional Testing (Winter 200809) 29 Research Approach and Methodologies 29 Test Procedures for Data Collection 29 Focus Airports 29 Test Locations and Remote Test Unit 29 Equipment and Methodology for Precipitation Measurement 30 Sequence of Events 32 Personnel 32 Data Forms

OCR for page R1
32 Description of Data and Methodology Used to Process 32 Tests Conducted 38 Summary of Test Events 38 Test Data Log 38 Scatter Diagram of Logged Data 41 Data Analysis 44 Findings and Applications 44 Between-Site Differences in HOT 47 Examination of Site Separation Distance 49 Examination of Lake-Effect Snowfall on HOT Differences 51 Comparison of HOTDS Results to Current Operational Practices 52 HOTDS Implementation Strategy and Timeline 53 Conclusions and Recommendations 53 Conclusions 54 Recommendations 55 References 56 Chapter 4 Increased Use of Spot Deicing for Aircraft Frost Removal 56 Introduction 56 Deicing for Frost Removal 56 Spot Deicing for Frost Removal 56 Objective 57 Research Approach and Methodologies 57 Examination of Current Government and Industry Regulations, Guidance Materials, and Standards 57 Laboratory Tests 61 Focus Group Survey 63 Cost-Benefit Model 63 Step 1: Examination of Potential Cost-Benefit Model Parameters 64 Step 2: Cost-Benefit Model Development and Testing 65 Findings and Applications 65 Examination of Current Government and Industry Regulations, Guidance Material, and Standards 66 Laboratory Tests 68 Focus Group Survey 69 Cost-Benefit Model 70 Conclusions, Recommendations, and Suggested Research 70 Conclusions 72 Recommendations 73 Suggested Research 74 Chapter 5 Increased Use of Aircraft De/Anti-Icing Fluid Dilutions 74 Introduction 74 Background 74 Objective 75 Research Approach and Methodologies 75 Examination of Current Government and Industry Regulations, Guidance Materials, and Standards Related to the Use of Fluid Dilutions 75 Focus Group Survey

OCR for page R1
77 Cost-Benefit Model 77 Step 1: Examination of Potential Cost-Benefit Model Parameters 77 Step 2: Cost-Benefit Model Development and Testing 80 Findings and Applications 80 Examination of Current Government and Industry Regulations, Guidance Material, and Standards Related to the Use of Fluid Dilutions 81 Findings of the Focus Group Survey 83 Application of Findings to Current Practice 86 Application of Findings to Create Cost-Benefit Model 87 Conclusions and Recommendations 87 Conclusions 91 Recommendations 92 Appendixes Note: Many of the photographs, figures, and tables in this report have been converted from color to grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the Web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions.