WP3- Development: Milestone M3 Lisbon 30 January 2004 National Technical University of Athens.

WP3- Development: Milestone M3

Lisbon 30 January 2004

National Technical University of Athens

WP3- Development: Milestone M3

FACT: The global architecture of F-MAN has been very well described in the Technical Annex of the project where the three modules of the system where described.

• The Tracking System module

• The Data Processing module

• The Asset Management module


WP3- Development: Credits

This is due to the effective work of Eckhard Kuhla and Valerio Recagno, who both put a significant effort for the preparation of the Technical Annex of the of this project.


=WP3- Development: Overall view


The research work that followed, investigated several aspects, problems and dilemmas of the architecture. It has made a big round and ended-up at the start-up point.

This presentation gives a brief description of the above research work.

=WP3- Development: Research trends


Investigate advanced decision support management solutions

Follow the functional

requirements

Finito palabra

Track-and-trace is OK

Riv 2000 Don’t do ….

=WP3- Development: Interim work (1)


……………………………

=WP3- Development: Interim work (2)


……………………………

RESULT: Partly success !!!!!!!!!!!

=WP3- Development: Achievements


• The completeness of the initial approach was confirmed

• Certain elements were developed

• functional requirements

•User management part of DPM

•ETA

•Transport order structure of AMM

• Several major aspects are still not finalised (Optimisation, Business Rules)

Dilemma #1: Clever OBT or dummy OBT ?


Clever OBT Dummy OBT Advantages It delivers precise and

detailed information

Messages will certainly be sent more frequently

Disadvantages Messages could be sent at large intervals and could only be sent in case of hazards detection Higher hardware cost Higher energy consumption Higher Maintenance requirements

It delivers enough and not elaborated information

Dilemma #1 Solution: Select an OBT “from the shelf”

antenna

Dilemma #2: One central Ground Station VS spatial distributed locations


One central ground applications config.

Country A

Country B Country COBT

Fleet Manager

Internet connection

Internet connection

OBT

Internet connection

Local GroundApplications


Local Ground Applications

Nationalprovider

Nationalprovider

NationalproviderOBT Roaming

Fleet Manager

Fleet Manager

OBT

Self reliant local ground applications config.

Country ACountry B

Country COBT

OBT

Fleet Manager

Internet connection

Leased lines


OBT


Leased lines CentralGround Applications

Nationalprovider

Nationalprovider

Fleet Manager

Fleet Manager

NationalProvider

Master-slave ground applications config

Country ACountry B

Country C

Internationalprovider

OBT

Nationalprovider


Roaming

Users’ premisesUsers’

premisesUsers’ premises

Internet connection

Internet connection

Internet connection

Roaming

Central GroundApplications

OBT OBT

One Centralised Station

Self- reliant local ground applications

Master-slave ground applications

Advantages Reduced SMS cost Shared distribution of workload among the local ground stations

Reduced SMS cost Elimination of overlapping areas

Disadvantages All traffic is gathered to one point imposing high service rate requirements

High labour costs (due to the existence of many instances of ground applications) Complexity (associated to the treatment of the overlapping areas)

Relatively high demand for personnel Significant cost of the leased lines (or alternatively GPRS services)

Dilemma #2 Solution : One central Ground Station


One central ground applications config.

Country ACountry B

Country C


OBT

Nationalprovider


Roaming

Users’ premisesUsers’

premisesUsers’ premises

Internet connection

Internet connection

Internet connection

Roaming

Central GroundApplications

OBT OBT

Country A

Country B Country COBT

Fleet Manager

Internet connection

Internet connection

OBT

Internet connectionLocal GroundApplications


Local Ground Applications

Nationalprovider

Nationalprovider NationalproviderOBT Roaming

Fleet Manager Fleet

Manager

OBT

Self reliant local ground applications config.

Country ACountry BCountry COBT

OBT

Fleet Manager

Internet connection

Leased lines


OBT


Leased lines CentralGround Applications

NationalproviderNationalprovider

Fleet Manager

Fleet Manager

NationalProvider

Master-slave ground applications config

Dilemma #3: System architecture F-MAN version VS Pinto’s/ RIV 2000 oriented version

Implementation #1 Scheme

Implementation #2 Scheme

1 Basic Functionality A computer based tool that proposes to the Fleet Manager a “best” (and some second “best”) solutions that satisfy his needs having always in mind the optimisation of the whole system.

An advanced booking system that accommodates on one hand Fleet Managers and Leasing Companies that may offer their empty wagons under specific terms (=wagon owners), and on the other hand Fleet Managers who seek for available empty wagons for their transport activities (=wagon lessees). Also, Decision Support and track and trace capabilities are provided by the system.

2 “Track and Trace” Usage

The system requires this information to estimate ETA and automatically exclude wagons that cannot be delivered on time.

The system has an “optional” capability to safeguard” the wagon timetable. This is achieved via an electronic timetable-form that is stored to the OBT, through the Ground Station. This way the actors involved are informed for deviations on the scheduled timetable. Also, on-line negotiations for the identification of another solution are enabled.

3 Wagon transportation to required place/terminal and associated responsibilities

The knowledge that the proposed wagon set can be available at the required place at the required time is a prerequisite for the formulation of a “best solution”. Therefore, the F-MAN tool should be responsible if this best solution cannot be implemented.

The Fleet Manager, who wishes to book the wagons, is solely responsible to check if these wagons can be transported to the desired terminal on time, as well as for making all arrangements necessary for bringing these wagons to the required terminal.

4 Wagon fleet optimisation Very good. The system treats all users on an equal base (decisions performed by algorithms).

Medium. Each Fleet Manager tries to optimise his own fleet. Nevertheless, since the Fleet Manager can ensure (through F-MAN tool) the availability of his wagons on certain future points he is potentially more willing/prompt to dispose his wagons to other FMS and therefore increases the wagon utilization.

5 “Timetable” Usage Necessary for the determination of the “best solution”

Only as informative element.

6 Actions when foreseen “available” wagons are not shown or when the “track and trace” system indicates that it is impossible for them to be on time

The system recalculates another “best solution”.

The system alerts/informs the interested Fleet Managers and supports the interactive “negotiations” between them and other Fleet Managers that have already arranged a booking (short-term leasing contract) but can rescheduled it for adequate compensation.

Dilemma #3 Solution : Only F-MAN Version exists !!!!

F-MAN Version

Pinto/ RIV 2000 oriented version

timeWorking meeting in Bled

Problem : High SMS communication traffic


OBT to OBT communication

SMS management through timetable information (timetable-mode)

Linking of track and trace information coming from many OBTs from the same train

F-MAN: Developed elements

Operational Managers and other authorised actors

Tracking systemmodule

Estimated Time of Arrival (ETA) calculations

wagon offers & wagon requirements

wagon track and trace

information

Operational Managers, Infrastructure managers & Station managers

Asset Management moduleDecision Support System

Technical and operational

availability per wagon type

Internet link

Wagon Maintenance Managers

Fleet Managers asking for wagons

Wagon Leasing Companies

Fleet Managers offering wagons to the pool

Data processingmodule

ETA Functionality / ETA Indicators

Most common value = average value

R

Pro

babi

lity

e1 Arrival time

1. The average value 2. The most frequent value

Arrival timeR

Pro

babi

lity

e2

R/2

Most common valueAverage value

e2 e1

Pro

babi

lity

Arrival time

E3

3. The 100%, 99%, 90% indicators

100%

e8e10

90%

10%

e9

99%95%

e11

F11

F10

3 hours

H= 4 hours

ETA provided based on 90% indicator== 3 hours with 10% non-shown probability

Probability required by Mr. Bean

1% 9%

Order 1 (delayed)

Time margin between consecutiveorders using the same wagon

Order 2

H=4 hours

Tim

Cumulative distribution method (Proposed ETA Method)

Probability of Non-shown= 100-P

Cumulative probability (%)

0%

100%P

HoursH

Time

Order 1 (delayed)

Time margin between consecutiveorders using the same wagon

Order 2

H=4 hours

22/5/2003Actual position at +8:00

H2=3.6 hH1=2.2 h

Cumulative probability that the wagon will arrive at the destination terminal at the required time

83%17% Probability of non-shown for Fleet Manager B

42 % Probability of non-shown for Fleet Manager A

58%

A C D

+2:00 +8:00 +16:00 +36:00

E

+22:00

(Xa, Ya) (Xb, Yb) (Xc, Yc) (Xd, Yd) (Xe, Ye)

(Xact,Yact)

450km B

Cumulative probability for station B

Time

Fleet Manager A requires his wagon within 2,2 hours.

Order 1 (delayed)

H1= 2,2 hours

Order 2

Fleet Manager B requires his wagon within 3,6 hours

Order 1 (delayed)

H2= 3,6 hours

Time

Order 2

F-MAN Architecture: Current Scheme

SERVER

EDC HUB

e-mail (SMPT)

DPM

AMM

DB

TCP

Mobile operation

SMS SMS

OBT

www

Internet

http

IVU web sitehttp://rentals2.ivu.de:8000/fman-amm

;

NTUA web sitehttp://localhost:8000/fman/index.jsp

F-MAN Architecture: Three tier architecture

AMM

DPM

WEB Tier

(Presentation Logic)

Business Tier

(Business Logic)

Data Tier

F-MAN Architecture -DPM

F-MAN Architecture- AMM

Bid-and-offer.

Decision support

Delay management

Scheduling of transport orders

Statistics - pricing strategy info

Management aspects need enhancement

So far, so good…………..

Many ideas 2% patents 5% products

Conclusions and future work

ETA methodology should be proved

WP3- Development: Milestone M3 Lisbon 30 January 2004 National Technical University of Athens.

Documents

Transcript of WP3- Development: Milestone M3 Lisbon 30 January 2004 National Technical University of Athens.