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 R2
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 R3
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 R4
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 R5
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 R6
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 R7
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 R8
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 R9
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 R10
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 R11
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.
