Maximizing ATM cost-efficiency by flexible provision of airspace … · 2017. 5. 9. · COCTA...
19
Dr Stefano Starita University of Warwick – Warwick Business School Joint work with: University of Belgrade (Dr Radosav Jovanović, Nikola Ivanov) University of Warwick (Dr Arne Strauss) Hochschule Worms (Prof. Frank Fichert) Maximizing ATM cost-efficiency by flexible provision of airspace capacity SESAR Innovation Days Technical University of Delft 8th – 10th November 2016
Transcript of Maximizing ATM cost-efficiency by flexible provision of airspace … · 2017. 5. 9. · COCTA...
Dr Stefano StaritaUniversity of Warwick – Warwick Business School
Joint work with:University of Belgrade (Dr Radosav Jovanović, Nikola Ivanov)University of Warwick (Dr Arne Strauss)Hochschule Worms (Prof. Frank Fichert)
Maximizing ATM cost-efficiency by flexible provision of airspace capacity
SESAR Innovation Days
Technical University of Delft 8th – 10th November 2016
Project Motivation
COCTA – Maximizing ATM cost-efficiency by flexible provision of airspace capacity – SID 2016 2
This ‘divorced’ planning horizon sometimes leads to overcapacity or capacity shortages, i.e. in both cases extra cost to users.
The estimated cost of en‐route and airport ATFM delay in 2015 was more than 1 billion EUR (EUROCONTROL PRC, 2016)
ANSPs have to plan their capacity provision several weeks in advance, while Aircraft Operators (AO) prefer flexibility and tend to make their route choice decisions at rather short term.
Model assumptions
COCTA – Maximizing ATM cost-efficiency by flexible provision of airspace capacity – SID 2016 3
0
10
20
0 1 2 3 4 5T
SECTOR CAPACITY
0 1 2 3 4 5
T
ANS CHARGE
€€
€€€
€€€€
€Network Manager
Aircraft Operators
Optimization model (1)
COCTA – Maximizing ATM cost-efficiency by flexible provision of airspace capacity – SID 2016 4
Minimize: Total Aircraft Operators’ costs, i.e. the sum of route prices and displacement costs
Subject to:
• Flights in sector/time unit <= sector capacity
• ANS revenue >= cost of capacity provision
Decisions:
• ANS charges
• Sector capacity levels
Optimization model (2)
COCTA – Maximizing ATM cost-efficiency by flexible provision of airspace capacity – SID 2016 5
[RPLC] min
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑦𝑟𝑓𝑑𝑟𝑓+
𝑠∈𝑆
𝑢≤𝑈
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢 𝑝𝑠𝑢 1
s.t.
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑦𝑟𝑓= 1 ∀𝑓 ∈ 𝐹 2
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 = 1 ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝑆, 𝑢 ≤ 𝑈 3
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢𝑦𝑟𝑓≤
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑘𝑠𝑙𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝑆, 𝑢 ≤ 𝑈 4
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢𝑦𝑟𝑓𝑝𝑠𝑢 ≥
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑐𝑠𝑙𝑢𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝑆, 𝑢 ≤ 𝑈 5
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑦𝑟𝑓
𝑠∈𝑆
𝑢≤𝑈
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢 𝑝𝑠𝑢 ≥
𝑠∈𝑆
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑢≤𝑈
𝑐𝑠𝑙𝑢𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 6
𝑦𝑟𝑓, 𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 ∈ 0, 1 ; 𝑝𝑠𝑢 ≥ 0.
Optimization model (2)
COCTA – Maximizing ATM cost-efficiency by flexible provision of airspace capacity – SID 2016 6
[RPLC] min
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑦𝑟𝑓𝑑𝑟𝑓+
𝑠∈𝑆
𝑢≤𝑈
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢 𝑝𝑠𝑢 1
s.t.
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑦𝑟𝑓= 1 ∀𝑓 ∈ 𝐹 2
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 = 1 ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝑆, 𝑢 ≤ 𝑈 3
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢𝑦𝑟𝑓≤
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑘𝑠𝑙𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝑆, 𝑢 ≤ 𝑈 4
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢𝑦𝑟𝑓𝑝𝑠𝑢 ≥
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑐𝑠𝑙𝑢𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝑆, 𝑢 ≤ 𝑈 5
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑦𝑟𝑓
𝑠∈𝑆
𝑢≤𝑈
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢 𝑝𝑠𝑢 ≥
𝑠∈𝑆
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑢≤𝑈
𝑐𝑠𝑙𝑢𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 6
𝑦𝑟𝑓, 𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 ∈ 0, 1 ; 𝑝𝑠𝑢 ≥ 0.
Minimize sum of route prices and displacement costs
Optimization model (2)
COCTA – Maximizing ATM cost-efficiency by flexible provision of airspace capacity – SID 2016 7
[RPLC] min
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑦𝑟𝑓𝑑𝑟𝑓+
𝑠∈𝑆
𝑢≤𝑈
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢 𝑝𝑠𝑢 1
s.t.
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑦𝑟𝑓= 1 ∀𝑓 ∈ 𝐹 2
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 = 1 ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝑆, 𝑢 ≤ 𝑈 3
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢𝑦𝑟𝑓≤
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑘𝑠𝑙𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝑆, 𝑢 ≤ 𝑈 4
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢𝑦𝑟𝑓𝑝𝑠𝑢 ≥
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑐𝑠𝑙𝑢𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝑆, 𝑢 ≤ 𝑈 5
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑦𝑟𝑓
𝑠∈𝑆
𝑢≤𝑈
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢 𝑝𝑠𝑢 ≥
𝑠∈𝑆
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑢≤𝑈
𝑐𝑠𝑙𝑢𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 6
𝑦𝑟𝑓, 𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 ∈ 0, 1 ; 𝑝𝑠𝑢 ≥ 0.
Every flight f must be assigned to a route
Optimization model (2)
COCTA – Maximizing ATM cost-efficiency by flexible provision of airspace capacity – SID 2016 8
[RPLC] min
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑦𝑟𝑓𝑑𝑟𝑓+
𝑠∈𝑆
𝑢≤𝑈
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢 𝑝𝑠𝑢 1
s.t.
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑦𝑟𝑓= 1 ∀𝑓 ∈ 𝐹 2
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 = 1 ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝑆, 𝑢 ≤ 𝑈 3
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢𝑦𝑟𝑓≤
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑘𝑠𝑙𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝑆, 𝑢 ≤ 𝑈 4
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢𝑦𝑟𝑓𝑝𝑠𝑢 ≥
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑐𝑠𝑙𝑢𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝑆, 𝑢 ≤ 𝑈 5
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑦𝑟𝑓
𝑠∈𝑆
𝑢≤𝑈
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢 𝑝𝑠𝑢 ≥
𝑠∈𝑆
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑢≤𝑈
𝑐𝑠𝑙𝑢𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 6
𝑦𝑟𝑓, 𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 ∈ 0, 1 ; 𝑝𝑠𝑢 ≥ 0.
Every sector s must operate at one capacity level l at any given time u
Optimization model (2)
COCTA – Maximizing ATM cost-efficiency by flexible provision of airspace capacity – SID 2016 9
[RPLC] min
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑦𝑟𝑓𝑑𝑟𝑓+
𝑠∈𝑆
𝑢≤𝑈
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢 𝑝𝑠𝑢 1
s.t.
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑦𝑟𝑓= 1 ∀𝑓 ∈ 𝐹 2
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 = 1 ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝑆, 𝑢 ≤ 𝑈 3
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢𝑦𝑟𝑓≤
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑘𝑠𝑙𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝑆, 𝑢 ≤ 𝑈 4
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢𝑦𝑟𝑓𝑝𝑠𝑢 ≥
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑐𝑠𝑙𝑢𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝑆, 𝑢 ≤ 𝑈 5
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑦𝑟𝑓
𝑠∈𝑆
𝑢≤𝑈
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢 𝑝𝑠𝑢 ≥
𝑠∈𝑆
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑢≤𝑈
𝑐𝑠𝑙𝑢𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 6
𝑦𝑟𝑓, 𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 ∈ 0, 1 ; 𝑝𝑠𝑢 ≥ 0.
The sum of the flights using sector s at time u must be less or equal than sector’s capacity
Optimization model (2)
COCTA – Maximizing ATM cost-efficiency by flexible provision of airspace capacity – SID 2016 10
[RPLC] min
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑦𝑟𝑓𝑑𝑟𝑓+
𝑠∈𝑆
𝑢≤𝑈
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢 𝑝𝑠𝑢 1
s.t.
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑦𝑟𝑓= 1 ∀𝑓 ∈ 𝐹 2
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 = 1 ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝑆, 𝑢 ≤ 𝑈 3
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢𝑦𝑟𝑓≤
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑘𝑠𝑙𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝑆, 𝑢 ≤ 𝑈 4
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢𝑦𝑟𝑓𝑝𝑠𝑢 ≥
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑐𝑠𝑙𝑢𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝑆, 𝑢 ≤ 𝑈 5
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑦𝑟𝑓
𝑠∈𝑆
𝑢≤𝑈
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢 𝑝𝑠𝑢 ≥
𝑠∈𝑆
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑢≤𝑈
𝑐𝑠𝑙𝑢𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 6
𝑦𝑟𝑓, 𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 ∈ 0, 1 ; 𝑝𝑠𝑢 ≥ 0.
Capacity provision cost of a sector s at time uis equally split among flights using that sector
Optimization model (2)
COCTA – Maximizing ATM cost-efficiency by flexible provision of airspace capacity – SID 2016 11
[RPLC] min
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑦𝑟𝑓𝑑𝑟𝑓+
𝑠∈𝑆
𝑢≤𝑈
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢 𝑝𝑠𝑢 1
s.t.
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑦𝑟𝑓= 1 ∀𝑓 ∈ 𝐹 2
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 = 1 ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝑆, 𝑢 ≤ 𝑈 3
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢𝑦𝑟𝑓≤
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑘𝑠𝑙𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝑆, 𝑢 ≤ 𝑈 4
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢𝑦𝑟𝑓𝑝𝑠𝑢 ≥
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑐𝑠𝑙𝑢𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 ∀𝑠 ∈ 𝑆, 𝑢 ≤ 𝑈 5
𝑓∈𝐹
𝑟∈𝑅𝑓
𝑦𝑟𝑓
𝑠∈𝑆
𝑢≤𝑈
𝑎𝑟𝑠𝑢 𝑝𝑠𝑢 ≥
𝑠∈𝑆
𝑙≤𝐿
𝑢≤𝑈
𝑐𝑠𝑙𝑢𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 6
𝑦𝑟𝑓, 𝑧𝑠𝑙𝑢 ∈ 0, 1 ; 𝑝𝑠𝑢 ≥ 0.
Total revenue must fully recover capacity provision costs
Case study network
COCTA – Maximizing ATM cost-efficiency by flexible provision of airspace capacity – SID 2016 12
R
D
L
U
C
Boeing 777-200 (B772)
Airbus 321 (A321)
Embraer 145LR (E145)
Optimal capacity levels
COCTA – Maximizing ATM cost-efficiency by flexible provision of airspace capacity – SID 2016 13
0
1
2
3
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Cap
acit
y le
vel
Time periods (min)
L C U D R
Trade-off between displacement and capacity costs
COCTA – Maximizing ATM cost-efficiency by flexible provision of airspace capacity – SID 2016 14
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Co
st (
EUR
)
Number of flights assigned to favorite route
Total displacement costs Additional capacity provision cost System's Cost
Policies comparison
COCTA – Maximizing ATM cost-efficiency by flexible provision of airspace capacity – SID 2016 15
Static PricingFixed Capacities
(SPFC)
RPLC
Pricing
Capacity
Pricing
Capacity
Pricing
Capacity
Dynamic PricingFixed Capacities
(DPFC)
Policies comparison: Results
COCTA – Maximizing ATM cost-efficiency by flexible provision of airspace capacity – SID 2016 16
2
3
4
5
6
SPFC DPFC RPLC
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Flights assigned to favourite routes % Cost improvement compared with SPFC
(%)
Sector charges
COCTA – Maximizing ATM cost-efficiency by flexible provision of airspace capacity – SID 2016 17
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65
RPLC DPFC Flights crossing R
Sector R charges(EUR)
Number of flights
Conclusions and future research
Future steps:
• Test the model with a realistic case-study
• More sophisticated choice models to represent AOs’ behaviours
• Introducing other performance indicators in the objective function
• Develop efficient solution algorithms
COCTA – Maximizing ATM cost-efficiency by flexible provision of airspace capacity – SID 2016 18
Results look promising: Allowing the NM to set variable prices and capacities results in more flights assigned to their favourite routes and an overall cost reduction.
This project has received funding from the SESAR Joint Undertaking under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No [699326]
The opinions expressed herein reflect the author’s view only. Under no circumstances shall the SESAR Joint Undertaking be responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained herein.
Thank you very much for your attention!
Maximizing ATM cost-efficiency by flexibleprovision of airspace capacity
