f066-b10-004 © 2010 the mitre corporation. all rights reserved. modeling nextgen with...
Post on 19-Dec-2015
214 views
TRANSCRIPT
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
Modeling NextGen with systemwideModeler
Pete Kuzminski
Stéphane Mondoloni, PhD
January 2010
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.2
For Release to All FAA. This document has been approved for public release. Distribution is unlimited.
This is the copyright work of The MITRE Corporation and was produced for the U.S. Government under Contract Number DTFA01-01-C-00001 and is subject to Federal Aviation Administration Acquisition Management System Clause 3.5-13, Rights in Data-General, Alt. III and Alt. IV (Oct. 1996). No other use other than that granted to the U.S. Government, or to those acting on behalf of the U.S. Government, under that Clause is authorized without the express written permission of The MITRE Corporation. For further information, please contact The MITRE Corporation, Contract Office, 7515 Colshire Drive, McLean, VA 22102, (703) 983-6000.
The contents of this material reflect the views of the author and/or the Director of the Center for Advanced Aviation System Development, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or Department of Transportation (DOT). Neither the FAA nor the DOT makes any warranty or guarantee, or promise, expressed or implied, concerning the content or accuracy of the views expressed herein.
2010 The MITRE Corporation. As such, the Government retains a nonexclusive, royalty-free right to publish or reproduce this document, or to allow others to do so, for “Government Purposes Only”.
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
Uses of systemwideModeler to Model the NAS
3
Benefits Estimation Operations Analysis
• Future airspace bottlenecks
• Traffic management initiatives
• NextGen operational improvements
• Data communications
• New runways
• Airspace design
• … and more
2007
2009
2011
2013
2015
2017
Fiscal Year
Av
era
ge
An
nu
al D
ela
y
pe
r F
ligh
t* (
min
)
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
CAASD’s System-wideAnalysis Capabilities
4
systemwideModeler
base future
visualizationand analysis
experimentation
scenariogeneration
operationalimprovementabstraction
• Base scenarios data-driven• Future scenarios grown via projection, linking/trimming, airframe routing algorithms• 30+ sample days per treatment• Future airspace/routes
• Fast-time simulation at flight-level• 5-10 minute runtime
• Typically 300-600 runs
• 1-2 days runtime
• Database-based• Visualization
package• Measurement tools
• Operational concept definition, benefits mechanism identification and quantification, model parameterization• NAS EA → operational scenarios → influence diagrams• Some higher resolution modeling for airports and sectors
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
systemwideModeler Approach
5
Flights plansplans
plans
Resources
plansplans
constraints
• Start with initial trajectories and airframe assignments
• Change plans to respect constraints• Delay• Swap airframe• Cancellation• Re-route (research)
• Characterize use by a flight
• Monitor flight plans/progress
• Anticipate resource condition, e.g., occupancy
• Formulate response
• Issue constraints to flights
• Most influential resources– Airports
– Sectors
– Airframes
• For each resource we model– Use (and load in aggregate)
– Acceptable use/load (e.g., capacity)
– Anticipation of use/load
– Response
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
Recent Improvements to systemwideModeler
Document Number Here© 2009 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.6
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
Airport Runway Congestion Model
7
• Use is landing/takeoff; load is throughput
• Acceptable load is throughput over short time periods– Proxy configuration for each weather condition
• Tactical response is queueing
• Strategic response is selection of operating point and called rates
runway layout
runway usage
fleet mix
weather
rules
simulation
interface
separations andrequirements libraries
aux
Tactical Model
Arrivals queue, landingspaced at max rate
Departures queue, takingoff spaced at rate feasiblewrt imminent arrivals
Demand Management
• Monitors departure queue and anticipated traffic• Will call Arrival Acceptance Rate (AAR) to thin arrival stream if departure delays unacceptable
runwaySimulator systemwideModeler
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
Arrival Flow Management Model
8
• minimum spacing over nodes (including AAR)• limits to delay absorption between nodes• planned passage times
scheduling algorithm
spacing definition algorithm
Node detection inpre-processing
• To place realistic loads on TRACONs and en route sectors, systemwideModeler distributes delay absorption for airport arrival congestion
• Maintains anticipated landing schedule; respects AAR
• Solves for node passage times (including pushback and landing)– Limits delays in arrival TRACON, between airborne nodes, and in air before
merge structure
• Spacing definition algorithm used to endogenously define in-trail restrictions over nodes
• Ground delay modeled
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
En Route Sector Congestion Model
9
sector workload
t
delayed entry
threshold
flight workload
tEntry Exit
flight-attributableworkload
tEntry Exit
anon. workload
t
old new
lookahead
• Upon entering sector, flight plans delay absorption
• Generally plans to take fair share in each sectoro “Fair” by relative increase in transit times
• Ability to absorb delay adjustable by sector-pair
Representing Operational Improvements in systemwideModeler
Document Number Here© 2009 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.10
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
Aircraft EquipageRNAV/RNPVNAVCurved path capability (radius to fix)RNP ARLPVEFBData Communication (FANS 1/A+, ATN Baseline 1)Flight Information Services - BroadcastData Communications (ATN Baseline 2)GNSS Landing SystemADS-B outADS-B inCDTIGuidance DisplayPaired Approach Guidance
Transformational ProgramsADS-BSWIMNextGen Network Enabled WeatherNAS Voice SwitchData Communications
Airfield DevelopmentRunways, Taxiways & Airfields
Initiate TBODelegated Responsibility for SeparationOceanic In-trail Climb & DescentAutomation Support for Mixed EnvironmentInitial Conflict Resolution AdvisoriesFlexible Entry Times for Oceanic TracksPoint-in-space MeteringFlexible Airspace ManagementIncreased Capacity and Efficiency Using RNAV/RNP
Increase Arrival/Departures at High Density Airports
Improve Operations to CSPRInitial Surface Traffic ManagementTime-Based Metering using RNP and RNAV Route AssignmentIntegrated Arrival/Departure Airspace Management
Increase Flexibility in the Terminal EnvironmentWTMDGBAS Precision ApproachesUse Optimized Profile DescentProvide Full Surface Situation InformationEnhance Surface Traffic Operations
Improve Collaborative Air Traffic ManagementContinuous Flight Day EvaluationTMI with Flight Specific TrajectoriesImproved Management of Airspace for Special UseTrajectory Flight Data ManagementProvide Full Flight Plan Constraint Evaluation with Feedback
Reduce Weather ImpactTrajectory-Based Weather Impact Evaluation
Improve Safety, Security and Environmental Performance
Safety Management System ImplementationSafety Management Enterprise ServicesAviation Safety and Information Analysis and SharingOperational Security Capability for Threat Detection & Tracking NAS Impact Analysis and Risk-based AssessmentSSA and ISS Integrated Incident Detection and ResponseInformation on System Security and Surveillance Integration/ProtectionEnhanced Air Traffic Procedures, Improved Environmental Technologies and Sustainable Alternative Aviation Fuels, and Integrated Environmental ModelingEMS Implementation and Environmental Policy Support
Transform FacilitiesIntegration, development and operations analysis CapabilityNextGen FacilitiesNet-Centric Virtual Facility
11
Images: source FAA
Document Number Here© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
Decisions, decisions…
Many improvements with implementation decisions & architectural alternatives.
Many candidate decisions to equip
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
Modeling Performance Impact of Decisions
12
40 Independent decisions 1 trillion possible outcomes…start modeling!
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
Discussion focuses here
Evaluating Alternatives
13
Estimate the service provider and user life-cycle costs
Assess the benefit performance of alternatives
Define, Refine, Decompose Operational Concept
Determine feasible alternative evolution paths
Coordinated, iterativeConsistent
Documented in NAS EA • OV-6c• OV-5
Benefit Mechanisms
Used to develop
Influence Diagrams
Documented in
Down-selection
Reduced Influence Diagrams & Timeline
Analysis & Quantification
High-level Operational Requirements
“Functional Clusters”
Influence Diagrams
Used to develop
Consistent with
Down-selection
Timelines
Analysis & Quantification
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
Influence Diagrams – The Basics
• Four types of nodes† used:– Decision Node
– Metric
– Random Variable
– Key Performance Area
• Influences described with arrows• Arrows with dotted lines prevent “cycles”
Decision
Metric
Random Variable
KPAKey Performance Areas (11) from ICAO
†Different tools use different symbols
Plant Locust-
Resistant Crops
Likelihood of Locusts
Crop Yield
14
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
NextGen Example
Inter-departure spacing – parallel
runwaysWTMD Departure Capacity
Taxi Delays
Favorable wind
conditions
Number of par. runways <2500feet apart
Fleet-mix
Fuel Consumed
Gate-to-gate time
Operating Costs
Schedule Predictability
Emissions Environment
Capacity
Efficiency
Predictability
• Use to obtain agreement on single mechanism• Provides line-of-sight with interim metrics• Transparent linkages to corresponding costing elements
15
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
Dependencies & Shared Benefits
• Multiple factors influence the same mechanisms
16
Number of aircraft tactical maneuvers
Number of restrictions
Lateral precision
Route Density
Along-track predictability
Trajectory prediction accuracy
Resolution look-ahead time
Metering Planning Accuracy
… Efficiency
Visualize Dependencies
Many decisions can lead to same impact on interim measures
Arrival Flow Gaps
Some paths provide additional mechanisms
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
Each “Influence” requires modeling E.g. FMS Offsets
17
Controller Workload
Sector Capacity
En Route Delay
Gate-to-gate time
Fuel Consumed
Emissions Costs
Airline Schedule
Predictability
Number of aircraft flow maneuvers
Offset resolutions
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
FMS Route Offsets Time/Fuel
• Quantification– From assumptions: 6.4 NMI additional for lead
– Trailing aircraft saves time, but likely incurs a fuel penalty (from operating at cost index > 0)
• Could add many smaller influences
18
SLOWFAST
SLOWSLOWf
FASTFASTff
V
X
V
XT
V
XVW
V
XVWW
)(
8 NMI45ºX
Change in Fuel (Wf) and time (T) of trailing aircraft
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
FMS Route Offsets Time/Fuel (cont’d)
19
Only consider circumstances where cost to lead < benefit to trailing
Speed Distribution
VSLOWVFAST
Compute Implied CI:
Sample:
60% of Conflicts†
Total Conflicts
Number of Overtaking
TWTCICostFactor f )100(
Duration Distribution
Number of beneficial options (50%)
~N(450,18)
100
12
2
qS
WCqSCCI DDo
Sample Aircraft Types
Average benefit equivalent to X lbs of fuel per eventApplies in 30% of all conflicts (60%*50%)Benefit of 0.3X lbs per conflict
† From Bilimoria, K.,D., Methodology for the Performance Evaluation of a Conflict Probe, J. of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, Vol. 24, No.3, May-June 2001
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
Linked Benefit Mechanism Influence Diagrams (In Progress)
20
Surface
Arrival/Departure
CATM, Wx, Airspace
RNAV/RNP, TMA
En Route
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
Parameter Setting - Example
• Influence diagrams documents parameter setting in systemwideModeler
21
Number of aircraft conflict
maneuvers
Trajectory Prediction Accuracy
Use of RTA
Establish Metrics & Relationships
Other things
Affects systemwideModeler Parameters
Model the influence
. . . Further influences
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
Accuracy Affects Conflicts
Look-ahead
• Detect using 5 NMI + Buffer• Buffer selected to get very few missed alerts† at 5 minutes • Begin responding to alerts at a look-ahead > 5 minutes• False alerts* result in additional conflict resolution
workload• Applied Monte Carlo simulation to obtain buffers• With radar-level accuracy, required buffer = 3 NMI
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
FA R
ate
MA Rate
CD SOC Curves - Radar
20 MIN
15 MIN
10 MIN
5 MIN23
45
Look-ahead
Increasing buffer
*False alerts = A detected conflict at a specified look-ahead that does not result in loss of separation†Missed alert = A loss of separation that is not detected at a specified look-ahead time‡ Monte-Carlo compared against: Bilimoria, K.D., Lee, H.Q., Properties of Air Traffic Conflicts for Free and Structured Routing, AIAA-2001-4051, GN&C Conference, Montreal, PQ, August, 2001
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
0-60 60-120 120-180
Perc
ent o
f Con
flict
s
Encounter Angle
Conflict Geometries
Simulation
Measured
‡
22
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
RTA – Improves Prediction Accuracy
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
Spee
d (f
ps)
Time (sec)
Open loop speed dynamics
Air
Ground
Wind
Wind variability†
Aircraft dynamics
† Mondoloni, S., A multiple-scale model of wind-prediction uncertainty and application to trajectory prediction, AIAA-2006-7807, ATIO 2006, Wichita, KS
Only controls to time as approach RTA point, speed limited, infrequent speed target changes
-30000
-20000
-10000
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Alon
g-tr
ack
erro
r (fe
et)
Look-ahead (sec)
Along-track prediction error (open-loop)
RMS
-10000
-5000
0
5000
10000
15000
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Alo
ng-t
rack
Err
or (f
eet)
Look-ahead (sec)
Along-track prediction error (w/ RTA)
RMS
Design choice
23
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
Improved Conflict Detection(based on Monte Carlo Simulation)
• ADS-B Improves over radar (better current speed estimation & position error)• RTA Improves further through closed-loop control
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%
20 15 10 5
Rate
Look-Ahead (minutes)
Missed Alert Rate
Radar
ADS-B
RTA
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
20 15 10 5
Perc
enta
ge R
educ
tion
Look-Ahead (minutes)
Reduction in Total Alerts from Radar
ADS-B
RTA
†
† Validated against FAA-2007-29305-0012.1 (supporting material to NPRM for ADS-B out)
False Alert Rate
24
F066-B10-004© 2010 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
Summary
• Improving both models and analysis process– Improving and expanding modeling features of
systemwideModeler
– Applying a structured process from concept to simulations
– Improves capturing of benefit dependencies
– Process reflects benefit and costs dependencies
25
Operational Concept
Benefits Mechanisms
Benefits Quantification
sM Parameter Setting
Operational Concept
sM Parameter Setting
Operational Concept
sM Parameter Setting
Benefits Mechanisms
Benefits Quantification