006 Climb, Cruise and Descent 3D Trajectory Optimization Algorithm For A Flight Management System

AIAA 2014-3018
AIAA Aviation
16-20 June 2014, Atlanta, GA
AIAA/3AF Aircraft Noise and Emissions Reduction Symposium
Climb, Cruise and Descent 3D Trajectory Optimization

Algorithm for a Flight Management System
Roberto Salvador Félix Patrón 1, Yolène Berrou 2 and Ruxandra Mihaela Botez 3
ETS, Laboratory of Research in Active Controls, Avionics and AeroServoElasticity (www.larcase.etsmtl.ca),
Montreal, Quebec, H3C-1K3, Canada
Global warming is one of the major issues in the Earth today. Many studies are intended
Downloaded by ECOLE DE TECHNOLOGIE SUPERIEURE on September 18, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2014-3018
to reduce aircraft’s fuel consumption to minimize aviation’s footprint. This article presents
the combination between two different trajectories’ optimization types: one optimizing the
vertical navigation profile, and the other optimizing the lateral navigation profile. The
aircraft model is obtained from a performance database, which offers an improved precision
over aircraft modeled trough equations of motion, constantly used on the literature. The
calculation of the optimal trajectory is obtained by implementing dynamic weather
information. The VNAV algorithm calculates the optimal altitudes, speeds and step climbs to
reduce fuel consumption, while the LNAV algorithm searches for alternative horizontal
trajectories. The aircraft takes advantage of tail winds and avoids head winds. The results
were compared with real flight information, and the fuel burn reduction obtained is
encouraging.
Nomenclature
CI cost index
DP dynamic programming
ETMS Enhanced Traffic Management System
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FMS Flight Management System
IAS indicated airspeed
LNAV lateral navigation
PDB performance database
TOC top of climb
TOD top of descent
VNAV vertical navigation
I. Introduction
As the global warming issue becomes more important, many researchers have been trying to reduce aircraft fuel
consumption. In 2011, more than 676 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) were emitted. The goal is to reduce by
two the CO2 production of 2005 by 2050 [1].
There are many research axes in terms of aircraft fuel consumption, and to optimize the cruise phase is one of
them. Actually, 80% of the CO2 emissions produced by aviation come from long flights (more than 1,500 km or 810
nm), and the cruise is where most of the fuel in consumed [1]. Jensen et al. presented a speed optimization method
during the cruise with fixed lateral movement by analyzing radar data from the United States Federal Aviation
Administration’s (FAA) Enhanced Traffic Management System (ETMS). Their results showed that most of the
flights in the USA do not fly at an optimal speed, which increases the fuel consumption [2]. Dancila developed an
algorithm to predict the fuel burn for an aircraft during the cruise phase, at a constant speed and flight segments, in
order to improve flight trajectories calculations and reduce fuel burn [3, 4]. Miyazawa et al. studied an optimal flight
1
Ph.D. Student, LARCASE, 1100 Notre Dame West, Montreal, QC, H3C-1K3, Canada.
2
Undergraduate Student, LARCASE, 1100 Notre Dame West, Montreal, QC, H3C-1K3, Canada.
3
Professor, LARCASE, 1100 Notre Dame West, Montreal, QC, H3C-1K3, Canada.
1
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Copyright © 2014 by Roberto Salvador Félix Patrón, Yolène Berrou, Ruxandra Mihaela Botez. Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., with permission.
trajectory using dynamic programming (DP). They minimized the fuel consumption, including arrival time
constraints and vertical distance safety separation with other aircrafts. They modeled the aircraft’s performance
using BADA (Base of Aircraft Data), which is an open source database of aircraft models. Information from the
Japan Meteorological Agency was used to analyze the wind influence [5]. A different study of formation flights was
conducted by Kent and Richards. Formation flights were used to reduce drag, and thus, fuel burn. Two different
methods were used: an extension to the Fermat-Torricelli problem allowing them to find optimal formations for
many routes, and a geometric method to be able to apply the influence of the wind [6]. Nangia and Palmer reduced
overall drag of the order of 15-20% for commercial aircraft flying in formation [7]. Murrieta et al. presented an
algorithm which optimized the vertical and horizontal trajectory, taking into account the wind as well as the
variation of the cost index (CI) [8]. Gagné et al. found the optimal vertical profile by performing an exhaustive
search of all the available speeds and altitudes [9]. Bonami et al. studied a trajectory optimization method capable of
guiding the aircraft through different waypoints considering the wind, and reducing fuel burn with a multiphase
mixed-integer control [10]. Franco and Rivas analyzed the minimal flight consumption for a cruise at a fixed
altitude, with a variable arrival-error cost which penalized the late and early arrivals. They showed that the minimal
cost is obtained once that the arrival-error cost is null. Different optimal cruise altitudes were found to obtain the
minimal cost and fuel consumption with a fixed estimated arrival time [11].
Other studies are conducted to create new wing profiles [12, 13], produce a new type of fuel [14, 15] or improve
the air traffic management, which has increased significantly. This has also opened a research domain in conflict
detection algorithms to increase air security [16-18]. By 2030, an estimated number of 5.9 billion passengers is
expected, doubling the amount from 2010 [1]. Delgado and Prats worked in the concept of aircraft speed reduction
with the objective to cause an in-flight delay to avoid traffic congestions near the airports. This research was
performed to delay the aircraft during the flight, without an extra consumption of fuel compared with the initially
planned flight and considering possible uncertainties due to the weather [19]. Margellos and Lygeros examined a
new concept of target windows, with 4D imposed constraints at different places of the flight trajectory, looking to
increase safety by avoiding conflicts with a better prediction [20]. Fays developed a 4D algorithm treating
meteorological conditions or air traffic restrictions in the air space, and defining them as obstacles, to improve the
FMS trajectory creation capabilities [21]. Air traffic conditions are also the cause for aircraft missed approaches
[22]. Dancila created an analysis tool to estimate the fuel and emissions cost produced by aircraft during a missed
approach [23].
The algorithm here presented improves the current performance of a commercial flight management system
(FMS), conducted under the project “Optimized Descents and Cruise”, in collaboration with the Canadian Green
Aviation Research and Development Network (GARDN), founded in 2009.
Previously, different vertical and horizontal profile optimization algorithms were developed at the Research
Laboratory in Active Controls, Avionics and Aeroservoelasticity (LARCASE) [24-28]. The numerical model of the
aircraft is obtained from the performance database (PDB) for different types of commercial aircraft. The vertical
profile algorithm calculated precisely the climb, cruise and descent of the flight, as well as the performance of step
climbs, in order to obtain the optimal altitude and speed to reduce fuel burn. However, this algorithm did not analyze
alternative horizontal trajectories. Another algorithm was developed to analyze the horizontal profile during the
cruise, where four alternative trajectories were added, each trajectory divided into waypoints, where the aircraft
could take in-flight deviations in order to take advantage of the tail winds, or avoid head winds. Different time
optimization algorithms, such as the golden section search and genetic algorithms have been implemented in order
to reduce calculation time.
This article presents the implementation of both, the vertical and the horizontal profiles, where the optimal
altitudes, speeds and directions are obtained to reduce fuel burn, all by considering precise dynamic weather
information (wind data is updated as the aircraft advances in time), and implementing a genetic algorithm to reduce
calculation time.
II. Methodology
The methodology implemented to develop the flight trajectories optimization algorithm is described in this
section. This optimization algorithm consists in calculating the optimal trajectory to reduce flight cost, by analyzing
all the flight’s phases. In Section A, the PDB used as the aircraft’s numerical model and the wind implementation is
defined. In Section B, the climb phase of the VNAV (vertical navigation) profile is explained. Section C defines the
LNAV (lateral navigation) profile optimization algorithm used to analyze alternative horizontal trajectories. Finally,
Section D analyzes the performance of step climbs during the cruise and the final descent.
2
A. Aircraft and wind models
1. Aircraft’s performance database
The algorithms presented below were developed in Matlab®, using a PDB from different commercial aircraft.
The PDB is a database of over 30,000 lines containing information on real flight performance. The PDB represent
the numerical model of this aircraft. The inputs and outputs contained in these databases are described in Table 1.
This information represents the performance (outputs) of each aircraft for different parameters (inputs), at each
phase of the flight.
Table 1 Inputs and outputs of the PDB

Type of table Inputs Outputs

Center of gravity
Speed
Fuel burn (kg)
Climb Gross weight
Horizontal distance (nm)
ISA deviation
Altitude
Gross weight
Fuel burn (kg)
Initial Speed
Climb acceleration Horizontal distance (nm)
Initial Altitude
Delta altitude (ft)
Delta speed
Speed
Gross weight
Cruise Fuel flow (kg/hr)
ISA deviation
Altitude
Vertical speed
Gross weight Fuel burn (kg)
Descent deceleration Initial speed Horizontal distance (nm)
Final altitude Delta altitude (ft)
Delta speed
Speed
Gross weight Fuel burn (kg)
Descent
Standard deviation Horizontal distance (nm)
Altitude
An example of data provided by the PDB is shown in Fig. 1. The framed value shows the consumption of the
aircraft cruising with a center of gravity at 28% of the mean aerodynamic chord, flying at Mach 0.8 with a total
gross weight of 100 tons, at an altitude of 30,000ft and a standard deviation temperature of -10°C.
Figure 1 Example of the PDB

3
2. Wind model
Wind influences the aircraft’s trajectory. It directly affects the horizontal distance which is traveled with respect
to ground level, and indirectly affects the fuel consumption. The ground speed is calculated in order to be considered
in the horizontal distance calculation. Speeds below are expressed in knots <kt>.
Ground speed = Airspeed + Effective wind speed (1)
The airspeed is the aircraft’s speed relative to the air mass, and the wind represents the horizontal movement of
this air mass relative to the ground. Here, the effective wind is the wind’s component on the aircraft’s trajectory, and
the crosswind is the component perpendicular to the effective wind speed. This can be seen on Fig. 2.
Effective wind speed = Airspeed - Crosswind (2)
Figure 2 Airspeed, crosswind and effective wind [29]
The horizontal distance traveled at the ground level is the norm of the ground speed vector. Figure 3 shows the
influence of the wind of a mass moving from WPT(n) to WPT(n+1).
Figure 3 Wind factor calculation [30]
Wind data used in this algorithm is extracted from Environment Canada 4. The information is presented under a
Global Deterministic Prediction System (GDPS) format. The GDPS model provides a 601×301 latitude-longitude
grid with a resolution of 0.6×0.6 degrees. At each point of this grid, information such as the direction of the wind,
speed, temperature, and the pressure can be obtained for different altitudes, in 3-hour time period blocks.
The wind data is interpolated in the optimization algorithm at each required geographical position between two
consecutive waypoints. At each waypoint between the departure and arrival airports, the altitude, flight time, latitude
and longitude are used as an input to obtain from Environment Canada’s database the outputs such as the wind
speed, wind direction and air temperature. This interpolation is used at each phase of the flight (climb, cruise,
descent). For the vertical interpolation, the wind vectors are analyzed, according to the Northern and Eastern axes of
the Earth (selected arbitrarily as a reference parameter) for two different altitudes. Afterwards, an interpolation is
4
Canada, E. "Weather maps - Environment Canada.", weather.gc.ca, 2013.
4
made between these axes at the required altitude, to obtain the wind vector (speed and direction). The horizontal
interpolation is obtained between consecutive waypoints. That can be seen in Fig. 4.
Figure 4 Wind interpolation method [30]
In the flight cost optimization algorithm, wind’s influence is calculated dynamically, i.e. updated as the aircraft
advances in space and in time.
3. Flight cost
In aviation, fuel consumption is not the only information considered for the planning of aircraft trajectories. In
this algorithm, it is the global cost that is calculated, and not only the fuel burned. The cost index is a variable which
influences the global cost of a flight; it is a term used by airlines to calculate operation costs for their flights.
The global cost is defined by:
Global cost = ∑ Fuel burn + Cost index * Flight time (3)
Where the Fuel burn is expressed in <kg>, the Cost index in <kg/hr> and the Flight time in <hr>, therefore, the
Global cost is given in <kg>. Since the fuel price (in <$/kg>) changes continuously, the global cost is given in <kg>
of fuel. The global cost in money <$> can be obtained multiplying it by the price of one kg of fuel.
The global cost can be expressed by:
Global cost = Fuel flow * Flight time + Cost Index * Flight time (4)
Where the fuel flow is given in <kg/hr> and can be obtained directly from the PDB. Therefore, Eq. 4 can be
further written as follows:
Global cost = Flight time * (Fuel flow + Cost Index) (5)
5
The algorithm optimizes the global cost of the flight.
B. VNAV - Climb
The climb is calculated for altitudes between 2000ft and the TOC (top of climb), since the PDB does not provide
information for the take off procedure. During the climb, the aircraft flies at a constant IAS (indicated airspeed) of
250kt, from 2000ft to 10,000ft. At 10,000ft, an acceleration phase begins until the optimal IAS is reached (speed at
which the distance/consumption ratio is the lowest). Once the crossover altitude is reached (altitude at which the
speeds switch from IAS to Mach number), the aircraft continues the climb at the optimal Mach number. All the
possible IAS/Mach speed schedules available in the PDB are calculated.
An example of crossover altitudes for a commercial aircraft can be seen on Table 2. Altitudes are rounded to the
closest thousand.
Table 2 Crossover altitudes for the PDB’s available speeds

IAS/Mach 240 260 280 300 320 335
0.6 27000 23000 20000 16000 13000 10000
0.62 29000 25000 21000 18000 15000 12000
0.64 30000 27000 23000 20000 16000 14000
0.66 32000 28000 25000 21000 18000 16000
0.68 33000 30000 26000 23000 20000 17000
0.7 35000 31000 28000 24000 21000 19000
0.72 36000 32000 29000 26000 23000 20000
0.74 37000 34000 30000 27000 24000 22000
0.76 39000 35000 32000 28000 25000 23000
0.78 40000 36000 33000 30000 27000 25000
0.8 41000 37000 34000 31000 28000 26000
0.82 42000 39000 35000 32000 29000 27000
0.84 43000 40000 36000 33000 31000 28000
At the end of the climb, the TOC is known and the optimal cruise is then analyzed.
C. LNAV
At the climb phase, the optimization algorithm calculated an optimal Mach speed and altitude until the TOC. At
this point, the optimization algorithm has calculated the fuel burnt during the climb phase. The LNAV profile
optimization during the cruise is explained in this Section. Alternative horizontal flight trajectories are analyzed to
calculate the best trajectory in terms of flight time, and thus, flight cost.
1. The grid
To optimize the horizontal trajectory, a grid is created to analyze the different possible trajectories, from the TOC
to the TOD (top of descent). Two parallel trajectories are added to each side of the original trajectory (geodesic of
another trajectory introduced manually), divided into n waypoints. The more n increases, the more precisely the
trajectories will be calculated, but the more the calculation time will be higher; in this paper, 13 waypoints are
considered, knowing that the first and last waypoints correspond to the departure and the arrival airport. An example
of a flight from Porto to Toronto is shown on Fig. 5. The first and last waypoints correspond to the TOC and TOD,
not the airport coordinates.
6
Figure 5 Porto-Toronto flight showing a grid according to a real trajectory with 11 cruise waypoints
Table 3 represents the coordinates (latitudes and longitudes) of the flight presented in Fig. 5 (cruise). The rows
represent the number of each route, and the columns give the ID number of each waypoint (first and last waypoints
correspond to the TOC and TOD). Route 3 represents the original trajectory.
Table 3 Latitudes and longitudes for the grid presented in Fig. 5
LATITUDES
WP 2 WP 12
ID WP 3 WP 4 WP 5 WP 6 WP 7 WP 8 WP 9 WP 10 WP 11
(TOC) (TOD)
1 43.5 48.9 51.1 50.4 49.5 49.1 48.7 48.0 46.9 46.0 45.5
2 43.5 48.9 51.3 50.7 49.8 49.3 48.9 48.3 47.1 46.0 45.5
3 43.5 49.0 51.6 50.9 50.0 49.6 49.2 48.5 47.4 46.3 45.5
4 43.5 49.1 51.8 51.2 50.2 49.8 49.4 48.8 47.6 46.5 45.5
5 43.5 49.1 52.0 51.4 50.5 50.1 49.7 49.0 47.8 46.5 45.5
LONGITUDES
WP 2 WP 12
ID WP 3 WP 4 WP 5 WP 6 WP 7 WP 8 WP 9 WP 10 WP 11
(TOC) (TOD)
1 -14.9 -20.3 -28.6 -41.4 -49.9 -53.1 -56.0 -59.7 -64.9 -71.4 -75.6
2 -14.9 -20.3 -28.4 -41.4 -50.0 -53.2 -56.1 -59.8 -65.0 -71.4 -75.6
3 -14.9 -20.0 -28.2 -41.4 -50.0 -53.3 -56.2 -59.9 -65.2 -71.5 -75.6
4 -14.9 -19.7 -28.0 -41.4 -50.0 -53.3 -56.3 -60.0 -65.3 -71.6 -75.6
5 -14.9 -19.7 -27.8 -41.4 -50.1 -53.4 -56.3 -60.1 -65.4 -71.6 -75.6
2. The genetic algorithm
Due to the stochastic and non-linear nature of the wind, a genetic algorithm has been used to calculate the
optimal trajectory in a reasonable calculation time. It is based on Darwin’s theory of evolution, where the fittest
survive to reproduce. Meteorological forecast is used in the calculation process in order to take advantage of tail
winds and avoid head winds.
The creation of the optimal trajectory is made in four steps. In the first step, the genetic algorithm creates
individuals, defined as random trajectories. These individuals can be created only within the grid boundaries, and
7
must respect two important constraints: the aircraft can only fly to an adjacent waypoint, while the initial and final
waypoints have to be the TOC and the TOD.
Then, the cost of the flight is calculated for each individual with Eq. (5). The next step is to select individuals
which will reproduce. The method selected is the “roulette”, which offers a possibility for all individuals to be
chosen, where the more fitted individuals still have more possibilities to be selected. This method, however, gives to
the less fitted individuals the possibility of being selected, increasing the genetic diversity in each generation.
Finally, the selected individuals reproduce to create a new generation. A crossover method has been selected.
This reproduction method consists in crossing the first part of an individual with the second part of another
individual. Since each individual (trajectory) is represented by a vector, the crossover takes place at the middle
number of each vector. Each individual (father) is divided in two parts, and each part of this individual is crossed
with a part of another individual, to create two new trajectories (two sons). An example of this crossing method is
shown in Table 4. The crossover takes place in the middle waypoint. In this example, the crossover’s waypoint is the
WP 7. The number shown at each waypoint represents the horizontal route that the aircraft should follow.
Table 4 Example of reproduction with the genetic algorithm
WP 2 WP 3 WP 4 WP 5 WP 6 WP 7 WP 8 WP 9 WP 10 WP 11 WP 12
Father 1 3 3 2 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 3
Father 2 3 4 4 3 2 2 3 4 5 4 3
Son 1 3 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 4 3
Son 2 3 4 4 3 2 2 2 3 3 4 3
If a crossover gives an invalid trajectory by not respecting the conditions of adjacent waypoints, an adaptation
of the method is done to obtain a valid trajectory. To increase the diversity of each generation, a number of
individuals chosen randomly is added. The process is repeated until a predetermined number of generations are
reached. A route is defined by a vector of waypoints numbers. The numbers in the vector represent the position of
the route in the grid. At the end of the optimization algorithm, the optimal trajectory is obtained, represented by a set
of coordinates that the aircraft should follow to reduce fuel burn. This optimal trajectory is defined as the trajectory
which better uses the wind in order to reduce flight time and fuel burn, by a complete analysis of the wind. The
LNAV optimization algorithm finds an optimal trajectory which profits from tail winds, and avoids as much as
possible the head winds.
D. VNAV – Cruise and descent
After the LNAV profile optimization is done, an exhaustive research of possible step climbs to reduce fuel burn
is analyzed. Once the horizontal coordinates are obtained, the algorithm calculates if, at each waypoint of the
horizontal optimal trajectory calculated during the LNAV, it is possible to perform step climbs depending on the
wind to reduce fuel burned.
After the calculation of the step climbs, the vertical algorithm calculates the optimal descent. The descent is
calculated as the climb, but backwards. The descent starts at a constant Mach speed, and then switches to a constant
IAS speed at the crossover altitude, before beginning the deceleration phase. From 10,000ft, the aircraft descends
with a constant IAS speed of 250kt until 2000ft. The algorithm does not calculate the landing because the PDB do
not includes information on the landing parameters.
III. Results
The results have been obtained by comparing the algorithm’s optimal trajectory with the results of a real flight,
from the website Flightaware 5. This website allows following a flight online; data is available for free. For each
flight, the aircraft type and the airline are provided, as well as information such as time, position, orientation, speed
and altitude. However, the website does not provide information about the initial gross weight of the aircraft.
In the test presented in this article, the gross weight used is the standard aircraft weight given by the PDB for a
commercial aircraft. The fuel’s quantity added to the aircraft in the optimization algorithm is calculated so it is
sufficient to complete the test’s flight.
5
FlightAware. "FlightAware - Live Flight Tracking.", flightaware.com, 2013.
8
The real flight analyzed for this test is a flight from Porto to Toronto, on September 23rd, 2013. The aircraft in
this flight took off at 8:40 UTC.
To obtain reliable results, the flight information from Flightaware was adapted to the optimization algorithm.
From the table provided by Flightaware, 13 waypoints had been selected, in order to recreate the trajectory that the
real aircraft used as closely as possible. Then, these waypoints were manually introduced in the algorithm to
calculate the fuel burned of the real trajectory. The flight’s day weather is also introduced at the time when the plane
took off. The cruise speed and the step climbs’ altitudes of the real flight from Flightaware at each waypoint were
also considered.
Figure 6 shows the LNAV profile optimization. As it can be seen, the aircraft took a horizontal deviation with
respect to the original trajectory to improve the aircraft’s performance with the influence of the wind.
Figure 6 Horizontal deviation from the optimal trajectory in the LNAV profile.
Figure 7 represents the VNAV profile optimization on the Porto to Toronto Flight. Trajectory 1 represents the
vertical profile followed by the real aircraft from Flightaware, and trajectory 2 represents the vertical profile
obtained with our optimization algorithm. The difference in altitudes selected by each trajectory influenced an
important global flight cost reduction.
Figure 7 Step climbs performed during the VNAV (real and optimal flights)
9
Table 5 shows the differences obtained between the real flight and the original trajectory that had been
calculated with our optimization algorithm. Final results are shown in Table 6.
Table 5 Example of reproduction with the genetic algorithm
Real flight trajectory

WPT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Latitudes 41.2 43.4 49.0 51.5 50.9 50.0 49.5 49.1 48.5 47.3 46.2 45.5 43.6
Longitudes -8.6 -14.8 -20.0 -28.2 -41.3 -50.0 -53.2 -56.1 -59.8 -65.1 -71.4 -75.5 -79.6
Altitude 2000 31000 33000 33000 33000 34000 36000 36000 36000 36000 36000 36000 2000
Speed 320 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 240
Optimal flight trajectory

WPT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Latitudes 41.2 43.4 49.1 51.9 51.1 50.0 49.3 48.6 48.0 46.8 46.0 45.5 43.6
Longitudes -8.6 -14.8 -19.6 -27.8 -41.3 -50.0 -53.2 -56.0 -59.7 -64.9 -71.4 -75.5 -79.6
Altitude 2000 37000 39000 39000 39000 39000 39000 39000 39000 39000 39000 39000 2000
Speed 320 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 240
Table 6 Comparison between the real flight and the optimal trajectory
Total distance (nm) Flight time (hr) Global cost (kg)

Real flight 3167.18 6.63 28031.75
Algorithm 3148.21 6.76 25439.08
The algorithm optimizes the global cost by 8.53%, in comparison to the real trajectory. This percentage is due
to a better selection of the altitudes (step climbs included), speeds and selecting an alternative horizontal trajectory
where the wind helps reduce the global cost. However, a small penalty of 1.96% in time has been obtained.
IV. Conclusion
The trajectory optimization is one of the essential elements of efficient flight analysis and synthesis. The work
done here presents the implementation of two different types of optimization, such as the VNAV and LNAV. It
shows a complete trajectory’s optimization, from the climb to the descent, in the presence of the wind.
The algorithm calculates optimal speeds and altitudes for the trajectory, and the optimal horizontal trajectory,
according to the speed and direction of the wind. Once the horizontal trajectory is fixed, it allows performing a step
climb during the cruise, if conditions allow it.
The algorithm presented in [25] improves the vertical flight profile of a commercial FMS with a reduction in the
flight cost of 2.57% in the absence of the wind, and the algorithm presented in [27] improves the horizontal flight
profile reducing costs by 0.54%. The results obtained by these previously developed algorithms were compared with
a commercial FMS in order to improve the trajectories’ creation capabilities of this system.
The test performed in this article, however, was compared to real flight information obtained from Flightaware.
The algorithm here presented shows an optimization of 8.53% by calculating better speeds, altitudes and horizontal
profiles, still considering flight trajectories close to the original trajectory flown. This result has been obtained by
optimizing a real flight from Porto to Toronto, which with real weather data and real flight information.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank for the financial support to the Green Aviation Research & Development Network
(GARDN), CMC Electronics – Esterline and CONACYT. Special thanks are dues to Mr. Rex Hygate and Mr. Claude
Provencal. Software support for the use of the FlightSIM® product was obtained from the company Presagis.
10
References
1
ATAG. "Aviation benefits beyond borders." Geneva, Switzerland, 2012, p. 52.
2
Luke, J., Hansman, R. J., Joseph, C. V., and Tom, R. "Commercial Airline Speed Optimization Strategies
for Reduced Cruise Fuel Consumption," 2013 Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations
Conference. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2013.
3
Dancila, B., Botez, R. M., and Labour, D. "Altitude Optimization Algorithm for Cruise, Constant Speed
and Level Flight Segments," AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference. American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2012.
4
Dancila, B., Botez, R. M., and Labour, D. "Fuel burn prediction algorithm for cruise, constant speed and
level flight segments," The Aeronautical Journal Vol. 117, No. 1191, 2013.
5
Yoshikazu, M., Navinda, K. W., Akinori, H., and Yuto, M. "Dynamic Programming Application to
Airliner Four Dimensional Optimal Flight Trajectory," AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC)
6
Thomas, E. K., and Arthur, G. R. "On Optimal Routing For Commercial Formation Flight," AIAA
Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC) Conference. American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, 2013.
7
Nangia, R., and Palmer, M. "Formation Flying of Commercial Aircraft, Variations in Relative
Size/Spacing - Induced Effects & Control Induced Effects & Control," 25th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics
8
Murrieta Mendoza, A. "Vertical and lateral flight optimization algorithm and missed approach cost
calculation." Ecole de Technologie Superieure (Canada), Canada, 2013.
9
Gagné, J., Murrieta Mendoza, A., Botez, R. M., and Labour, D. "New method for aircraft fuel saving using
Flight Management System and its validation on the L-1011 aircraft," AIAA Aviation 2013. American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2013.
10
Bonami, P., Olivares, A., Soler, M., and Staffetti, E. "Multiphase Mixed-Integer Optimal Control
Approach to Aircraft Trajectory Optimization," Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics Vol. 36, No.
5, 2013, pp. 1267-1277.
11
Franco, A., and Rivas, D. "Minimum-Cost Cruise at Constant Altitude of Commercial Aircraft Including
Wind Effects," Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics Vol. 34, No. 4, 2011, pp. 1253-1260.
12
Freitag, W., and Schulze, T. "Blended Winglets Improve Performance." Boeing, 2009, p. 5.
13
Nguyen, N., Trinh, K., Reynolds, K., Kless, J., Aftosmis, M., Urnes, J., and Ippolito, C. "Elastically
shaped wing optimization and aircraft concept for improved cruise efficiency," 51st AIAA Aerospace
Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition 2013., AIAA, Grapevine,
TX, United states, 2013.
14
Hendricks, R. C., Bushnell, D. M., and Shouse, D. T. "Aviation Fueling: A Cleaner, Greener Approach,"
International Journal of Rotating Machinery, 2011, p. 782969 (13 pp.).
15
Sandquist, J., and Guell, B. M. "Overview of biofuels for aviation," Chemical Engineering Transactions
Vol. 29, 2012, pp. 1147-1152.
16
Gariel, M., Kunzi, F., and Hansman, R. J. "An algorithm for conflict detection in dense traffic using ADS-
B," 2011 IEEE/AIAA 30th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC), 16-20 Oct. 2011. IEEE,
Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2011, pp. 4-3.
17
Kuenz, A., Mollwitz, V., and Korn, B. "Green trajectories in high traffic TMAS," 26th DASC Digital
Avionics Systems Conference - 4-Dimensional Trajectory-Based Operaions: Impact on Future Avionics
and Systems, October 21, 2007 - October 25, 2007. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.,
Dallas, TX, United states, 2007, pp. 1B21-1B211.
18
Visintini, A. L., Glover, W., Lygeros, J., and Maciejowski, J. "Monte Carlo Optimization for Conflict
Resolution in Air Traffic Control," Intelligent Transportation Systems, IEEE Transactions on Vol. 7, No. 4,
2006, pp. 470-482.
19
Delgado, L., and Prats, X. "Effect of Wind on Operating-Cost-Based Cruise Speed Reduction for Delay
Absorption," Intelligent Transportation Systems, IEEE Transactions on Vol. 14, No. 2, 2013, pp. 918-927.
20
Margellos, K., and Lygeros, J. "Toward 4-D Trajectory Management in Air Traffic Control: A Study
Based on Monte Carlo Simulation and Reachability Analysis," Control Systems Technology, IEEE
Transactions on Vol. 21, No. 5, 2013, pp. 1820-1833.
21
Fays, J., and Botez, R. M. "Algorithm for the aircraft trajectories considering No Fly Zones for a Flight
Management System," INCAS Bulletin Vol. 5, No. 3, 2013, p. 77.
11
22
Murrieta Mendoza, A., Botez, R. M., and Ford, S. "Estimation of Fuel Consumption and Polluting
Emissions Generated during the Missed Approach Procedure," The 33nd IASTED International Conference
on Modelling, Identification, and Control (MIC 2014) IASTED, Innsbruck, Austria, 2014.
23
Dancila, R., Botez, R. M., and Ford, S. "Fuel burn and emissions evaluation for a missed approach
procedure performed by a B737-400," 2013 Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference.
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2013.
24
Félix Patrón, R. S., Botez, R. M., and Labour, D. "Vertical profile optimization for the Flight
Management System CMA-9000 using the golden section search method," IECON 2012 - 38th Annual
Conference on IEEE Industrial Electronics Society. 2012, pp. 5482-5488.
25
Félix Patrón, R. S., Botez, R. M., and Labour, D. "New altitude optimisation algorithm for the flight
management system CMA-9000 improvement on the A310 and L-1011 aircraft," The Aeronautical Journal
Vol. 117, No. 1194, 2013.
26
Félix Patrón, R. S., Botez, R. M., and Labour, D. "Low calculation time interpolation method on the
altitude optimization algorithm for the FMS CMA-9000 improvement on the A310 and L-1011 aircraft,"
AIAA Aviation 2013. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2013.
27
Félix Patrón, R. S., Kessaci, A., Botez, R. M., and Labour, D. "Flight trajectories optimization under the
influence of winds using genetic algorithms," AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference.
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2013.
28
Félix Patrón, R. S., Oyono Owono, A. C., Botez, R. M., and Labour, D. "Speed and altitude optimization
on the FMS CMA-9000 for the Sukhoi Superjet 100 using genetic algorithms," AIAA Aviation American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2013.
29
Du Puy de Goyne, T. P., Yves; Besse, Jacques. Initiation à l'aéronautique. Toulouse, France: Cépaduès-
Éditions, 2009.
30
Langlet, B. "Étude d’Optimisation du Profil Vertical de Vol du FMS CMA-9000 de CMC Electronics."
École de technologie supérieure, Montréal, 2011.
12

006 Climb, Cruise and Descent 3D Trajectory Optimization Algorithm For A Flight Management System

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

006 Climb, Cruise and Descent 3D Trajectory Optimization Algorithm For A Flight Management System

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AIAA 2014-3018

Climb, Cruise and Descent 3D Trajectory Optimization

1. Aircraft’s performance database

Table 1 Inputs and outputs of the PDB

Type of table Inputs Outputs

Figure 1 Example of the PDB

Ground speed = Airspeed + Effective wind speed (1)

Effective wind speed = Airspeed - Crosswind (2)

Figure 2 Airspeed, crosswind and effective wind [29]

Figure 3 Wind factor calculation [30]

Figure 4 Wind interpolation method [30]

Global cost = ∑ Fuel burn + Cost index * Flight time (3)

Global cost = Flight time * (Fuel flow + Cost Index) (5)

Table 2 Crossover altitudes for the PDB’s available speeds

Table 3 Latitudes and longitudes for the grid presented in Fig. 5

2. The genetic algorithm

Table 4 Example of reproduction with the genetic algorithm

D. VNAV – Cruise and descent

Table 5 Example of reproduction with the genetic algorithm

Real flight trajectory

Optimal flight trajectory

Total distance (nm) Flight time (hr) Global cost (kg)

You might also like