Topology design for integrating and sequencing flows in terminal maneuvering area

Abstract

The current overloaded airspace near large airports leads the stakeholders to develop more fundamental means to improve the use of available air capacity in dense traffic areas as terminal maneuvering area. A smart planning of aircraft trajectories and an appropriate designing of route structure can be a solution. Therefore, to analyze the capability of them, this paper proposes a novel approach to deal with the merging and sequencing problem of arrival traffic in terminal maneuvering area, and examines the performance of diverse conflict resolution strategies and different terminal maneuvering area route structure. An evolutionary algorithm is employed to resolve potential conflicts, altering one or more of the following decision variables: routes, speeds, and entrance time to terminal maneuvering area (slot). Two different fitness functions were developed. One aims to minimize potential conflicts and the other one aims to minimize at the same time potential conflicts and delay induced at runway. The performance of different combinations of decision variables, or conflict resolution strategies, is evaluated through a set of arrival aircraft to Grand Canaria airport. Also, four different route structures are tested by using the same set of incoming aircraft. The results showed that the slot and speed change and mix of all change strategies can successfully resolve all conflicts in an efficient manner. The results also suggested that topologies with one main merging point are more efficient than the ones that have two merging points. Finally, a significant abatement of delay was observed when minimizing conflicts and delay while achieving conflict-free solutions.

Keywords

Terminal maneuvering area sequencing merging route network optimization airport

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

EUROCONTROL. Airspace concept handbook for the implementation of performance based navigation (PBN). ICAO EUR/EUROCONTROL: EUROCONTROL, 2012.

Szurgyi S, Shresta S, Neskovic D, et al. Analysis of observed aircraft-to-aircraft separations. In: Integrated communications, navigation and surveillance conference (ICNS2008), Bethesda, MD, 22–25 May 2008, pp.1–11.

Ivanescu D, Shaw C, Tamvaclis C, et al. Models of air traffic merging techniques: evaluating performance of point merge. In: 9th Aviation Technology, Integration and Operations Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA), Hilton Head, South Carolina, USA, 21–23 September 2009, Vol.2, pp.1–10.

Favennec B, Symmans T, Houlihan D, et al. Point merge integration of arrival flows enabling extensive RNAV application and CDA – operational services and environment definition. Vol. 1, Technical/Scientific Report No. 2008-003, EUROCONTROL, 2008, pp.1–124.

Hull J, Barmore B and Abbott T. Technology enabled airborne spacing and merging. In: The 23rd digital avionics systems conference (DASC2004), Salt Lake City, UT, 24–28 October 2004, Vol. 1, pp.214–219.

Dear RG and Sherif YS. The dynamic scheduling of aircraft in high density terminal areas. Microelectron Reliab 1976; 29: 743–749.

Balakrishnan H and Chandran B. Scheduling aircraft landings under constrained position shifting. In: The AIAA guidance, navigation and control conference, Keystone, Colorado, 21–24 August 2006, Vol.1, pp.1–23.

Balakrishnan

Chandran

. Algorithms for scheduling runway operations under constrained position shifting. Oper Res 2010; 58: 1650–1665.

Chandran B and Balakrishnan H. A dynamic programming algorithm for robust runway scheduling. In: American Control Conference (ACC2007), NYC, US, 11–13 July, pp.1161–1166.

10.

Beasley

Krishnamoorthy

Sharaiha

. Scheduling aircraft landings – the static case. Transport Sci 2000; 34: 180–197.

11.

Beasley

Sonander

Havelock

. Scheduling aircraft landings at London Heathrow using a population heuristic. J Oper Res Soc 2001; 52: 483–493.

12.

Beasley

Krishnamoorthy

Sharaiha

. Displacement problem and dynamically scheduling aircraft landings. J Oper Res Soc 2004; 55: 5–5.

13.

Dear

Sherif

. The dynamic scheduling of aircraft in high density terminal areas. Microelectron Reliab 1989; 29: 743–749.

14.

Dear

Sherif

. An algorithm for computer assisted sequencing and scheduling of terminal area operations. Transport Res A Gen 1991; 25: 129–139.

15.

Psaraftis

. A dynamic programming approach for sequencing groups of identical jobs. J Oper Res Soc 1980; 28: 1347–1359.

16.

Becker TA, Barker DR and Smith AP. Methods for maintaining benefits for merging aircraft on terminal RNAV routes. In: The 23rd digital avionics systems conference, (DASC2004), Salt Lake City, UT, 24–28 October 2004, Vol. 1, pp.121–133.

17.

Boursier L, Favennec B, Hoffman E, et al. Integrating aircraft flows in the terminal area with no radar vectoring. In: 6th AIAA aviation technology, integration and operations conference (ATIO), Wichita, Kansas, 25–27 September 2006, Vol.1, pp.1–15.

18.

Favennec B, Hoffman E, et al. Merging arrival flows without heading instructions. In: 7th USA/Europe air traffic management R&D seminar, Barcelona, Spain, 2–5 July 2007, Vol.1, pp.1–14.

19.

Hofhan E, Ivanescu D, Shaw C, et al. Analysis of spacing guidance for sequencing aircraft on merging trajectorie. In: 21st digital avionics systems conference, Irvine, California, 27–31 October 2002, Vol. 1, pp.1–13.

20.

Zuniga CA, Piera MA, Ruiz S, et al. A CD.CR causal model based on path shortening/path stretching techniques. Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol 2012; 33: 238–256.

21.

Pallottino

Feron

EAB

. Conflict resolution problems for air traffic management systems solved with mixed integer programming. IEEE Transac Intell Transport Syst 2002; 3: 3–11.

22.

Goldberg

. Genetic algorithms in search, optimization and machine learning, Reading, MA: Addison Wesley, 1989.

23.

Michalewicz Z. Genetic algorithms + data structures = evolution programs. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 1992.

24.

Koza JR. Genetic programming. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT press, 1992.

25.

Schwefel

. Evolution and optimum seeking, New York, NY: Wiley, 1995.