National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

ACRP Report 45: Optimizing the Use of Aircraft Deicing and Anti-Icing Fluids (2011)
Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP)

Citation Manager

D'Avirro, John, Chaput, Michael, Transportation Research Board. "Recommendations." ACRP Report 45: Optimizing the Use of Aircraft Deicing and Anti-Icing Fluids. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2011.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
91
bottomleft bottomright
Page
91
Front Matter (R1-R11)
Holdover Time Variance Across an Airfield (1-1)
Increased Use of Aircraft De/Anti-Icing Fluid Dilutions (2-2)
Organization (3-3)
Literature Review and Data Examination (4-4)
Survey (5-5)
Preliminary List of De/Anti-Icing Optimization Technologies and Procedures (6-6)
Development of Final List of Technologies and Procedures (7-8)
Focus Group Survey Inputs on Final List of Technologies and Procedures (9-16)
Overall Ranking of Optimization Technologies and Procedures (17-21)
Recommendations for Further Study (22-22)
Recommendations for Phase II (23-23)
Bibliography (24-27)
Additional Testing (Winter 200809) (28-28)
Equipment and Methodology for Precipitation Measurement (29-29)
Sequence of Events (30-31)
Tests Conducted (32-37)
Scatter Diagram of Logged Data (38-40)
Data Analysis (41-43)
Between-Site Differences in HOT (44-46)
Examination of Site Separation Distance (47-48)
Examination of Lake-Effect Snowfall on HOT Differences (49-50)
Comparison of HOTDS Results to Current Operational Practices (51-51)
HOTDS Implementation Strategy and Timeline (52-52)
Conclusions (53-53)
Recommendations (54-54)
References (55-55)
Objective (56-56)
Laboratory Tests (57-60)
Focus Group Survey (61-62)
Step 1: Examination of Potential Cost-Benefit Model Parameters (63-63)
Step 2: Cost-Benefit Model Development and Testing (64-64)
Examination of Current Government and Industry Regulations, Guidance Material, and Standards (65-65)
Laboratory Tests (66-67)
Focus Group Survey (68-68)
Cost-Benefit Model (69-69)
Conclusions (70-71)
Recommendations (72-72)
Suggested Research (73-73)
Objective (74-74)
Focus Group Survey (75-76)
Step 2: Cost-Benefit Model Development and Testing (77-79)
Examination of Current Government and Industry Regulations, Guidance Material, and Standards Related to the Use of Fluid Dilutions (80-80)
Findings of the Focus Group Survey (81-82)
Application of Findings to Current Practice (83-85)
Application of Findings to Create Cost-Benefit Model (86-86)
Conclusions (87-90)
Recommendations (91-91)
Appendixes (92-92)
Abbreviations used without definitions in TRB publications (93-93)

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 91
91 BREAKEVEN SCHEDULE Winter Capital Setup Operational Total Lifetime Breakeven Season Costs Costs Savings Savings Savings Year 1 $1,150,000 $19,000 $1,111,122 -$57,878 -$57,878 no 2 n/a n/a $1,111,122 $1,111,122 $1,053,243 yes 3 n/a n/a $1,111,122 $1,111,122 $2,164,365 reached prior 4 n/a n/a $1,111,122 $1,111,122 $3,275,487 reached prior 5 n/a n/a $1,111,122 $1,111,122 $4,386,609 reached prior 6 n/a n/a $1,111,122 $1,111,122 $5,497,730 reached prior 7 n/a n/a $1,111,122 $1,111,122 $6,608,852 reached prior 8 n/a n/a $1,111,122 $1,111,122 $7,719,974 reached prior 9 n/a n/a $1,111,122 $1,111,122 $8,831,095 reached prior 10 n/a n/a $1,111,122 $1,111,122 $9,942,217 reached prior 11 n/a n/a $1,111,122 $1,111,122 $11,053,339 reached prior 12 n/a n/a $1,111,122 $1,111,122 $12,164,460 reached prior 13 n/a n/a $1,111,122 $1,111,122 $13,275,582 reached prior 14 n/a n/a $1,111,122 $1,111,122 $14,386,704 reached prior 15 n/a n/a $1,111,122 $1,111,122 $15,497,826 reached prior 16 n/a n/a $1,111,122 $1,111,122 $16,608,947 reached prior 17 n/a n/a $1,111,122 $1,111,122 $17,720,069 reached prior 18 n/a n/a $1,111,122 $1,111,122 $18,831,191 reached prior Figure 35. Sample breakeven schedule page. non-recurring basis. Additional maintenance training is ids in the deicing operation. In many cases, the financial out- required, since most modern blending systems incorporate lay to implement use of diluted fluids can be recouped in a microprocessor controllers and in-line refractometers. year or two. · Additional flight crew training is not required. Recommendations A user-friendly cost-benefit model was developed for use by operators to determine if making a switch from ready-to- Several survey respondents expressed the need for clarifica- use Type I fluid or neat Type II/III/IV fluid to diluted fluids tion and possibly expansion of the current guidance material is financially advantageous. The model will estimate the related to fluid dilutions; it is therefore recommended that lan- annual cost savings, annual glycol savings, and number of guage be added to the guidance material to encourage the use years until the initial investment has been recouped. When of dilutions. Examples could also be provided to show that applied to typical airport conditions, the model output diluted fluids are not as difficult to incorporate into operations clearly shows the value of implementing the use of dilute flu- as commonly perceived.