1

Jupiter TFM Simulation Environment

2

Topics Left to Impress You With

0900 1640

Number of Topics Left

0

100

3

What is Jupiter TFM Simulation Environment (JSE)?

• JSE is a proven, distributed, human-in-the-loop simulation environment that consists of two parts:

– A core flight simulator (potential to simulate the entire NAS for a day or multiple days)

– An emulator of the traffic flow management infrastructure

• Objectives of using JSE

– Evaluation and development of new concepts in congestion management

• Procedural change evaluation and validation

• Technology integration and evaluation without effecting the operational environment

– Engage key stakeholders through interactive war games

– Fast-time simulations for post analysis and reporting

4

JSE/ISE Operating Environment

Jupiter Simulation Environment

TFMS(Hub Site Emulation)

Host(Flight

Simulation)

Flight Data

ADL

Flight Messaging

CDM Messaging

Flight Messaging

Host(Flight

Simulation)

Host(Flight

Simulation)

Host(Flight

Simulation)

Flight DataFlight Data

ADL

TMI/EDCT

Airlines Operation Center

Generic Substitution

ToolCDM

messaging

FSMCapacity/Demand

Balancing

RMTRoute Options

Generation, Early Intent

Research Organizations

Mitre’s CRCTCollaborative

Routing Coordination Tool

NASA’s FACETATM Concept

Evaluation Tool

ATCSCC

FSAPost

operational delay

analysis

RMTRoute Options

Generation, Early Intent

TFMS Remote Site

FSMCapacity/Demand

Balancing

Flight Messaging

CDM Messaging

5

JSE’s Flight Simulation

• Starts with an historical snapshot of actual flight data– We hold over 7 years of archived flight data

• Simulates the major phases/states of a flight– Scheduled– Filed– Taxi Out/In– Runway departure/arrival– Ascent/Descent– Cruise

• Uses queuing models at constrained NAS resources– Runways (also currently developing a higher granularity simulation for the

airport surface – gates, taxiways, etc.)– Arrival fixes (FCA, FEA, and sector demand managed through human

interaction)– MIT restriction impacts occur through integration with FACET

• Adds unpredictability by random variance in the gate departures

6

JSE’s TFM Infrastructure Emulation

• Allows various users of the system to interact while the simulation is running

– Allows traffic managers, airline dispatchers, and researchers the ability to interact with the simulation

– Network connections exist for remote users to participate in HITLs

• Many of the standard TFM and CDM tools can connect to the simulation environment as they would to the operational environment

– Flight Schedule Monitor

– Enhanced Substitution Module

– Route Management Tool

– Real-time Flight Schedule Analyzer

– Departure Flow Management

7

JSE’s TFM Infrastructure Emulation (Cont’d)

• Runs many of the same algorithms that exist in TFMS today

– Contains Adaptive Compression logic

– CDM Messaging

– Substitution processing

– Pop-up flight EDCT assignments

• Uses an internal trajectory modeler to predict demand at points in the airspace, such as Centers, Sectors, and user-defined Flow Constrained/Evaluation Areas

• Compatible with TFM Modernization

– SEVEN

– Enhanced pop-up processing

8

System Architecture

Sim

ula

tio

n S

yste

m“H

os

t”

Web Container EJB Container

ETMS System Logic

Web Services

DataRequest

DataModification

Data Layer

J2E

E A

pp

lica

tio

n S

erv

er

“ET

MS

”

Flights

Airports

Airspace

Fixes/Navaids

CDM Messaging

Delay Processing

Flight Plan Processing

Demand Predictions

External Application

JSE Feed(XML)

JSE Abstraction Layer (API)

Flights

Airports

Airspace

Fixes/Navaids

Agent

ComWeb

TrajectoryPredictor Fix

AirportFlight

Agent

ComWeb

TrajectoryPredictor Fix

AirportFlight

Simulation Manager

Com

Web

Agent

Time Manager

Data Initializer

Event Manager

ScenarioArchive

Scenario Manager

Simulation History

9

JSE Tools and Technologies

RMT-R

FSM

10

User Interaction with JSE

• Traffic Management Initiatives

– GDP, GS, AFP

– Broadcasts out EDCTs

• Flow Constrained/Evaluation Areas

– Provides back-predicted entry times into airspace using its internal trajectory model

• Initial Flight Plans and Amended Flight Plans

– Introduce new flights using a flight plan

– Simulates flights on their revised trajectories

• CDM Messaging

– Updated gate times

– Substitutions (simplified and slot credit)

– Flight cancellations and new flight creation

11

Successful Uses of JSE (2002-2008)

• Slot Credit Substitutions

– From concept to operational deployment in 14 months

• Vision 100 Collaborative Planning exercises

• General Aviation Airport Programs (GAAP)

• Airspace Flow Programs

– Tremendous involvement from industry stakeholders (Bi-weekly HitLs during concept development)

– Heavy emphasis on procedural development

• TFM Training

– Multiple scenarios

• Departure Flow Management

– User group HitLs

• SEVEN

– Ongoing user group HitLs leading to an operational deployment in 2010/2011

12

SEVEN – System Enhancements for Versatile Electronic Negotiation

Interactive Dynamic Flight ListUser Submitted Prioritized List with Multiple Options

13

Basic Idea

• Users submit “flight plans” with multiple routing options and update these options as often as needed

• FAA identifies areas of interest/concern by creating interactive dynamic flight lists

• As conditions change, the demand allowed through the constrained area is adjusted up or down by checking/unchecking flights on list

• Unchecked flights are placed on highest available priority option that drop them from the list or if no such option exists then a flight is delayed on ground

• System impact assessment capabilities allow the FAA to model impacts on the NAS of different actions

• Manages uncertainty by being extremely agile• Allows the easy recovering of resources if conditions improve/change

reducing need for “Wait and See”• Gets the FAA out of the business of finding routes (new paradigm)

14

Multiple Routing Options

• Prioritized routing options consist of different combinations of routes, altitudes, speeds, and ptimes

• Users update/adjust list of options dynamically as needed• Tools like ROG could help users to develop a set of

feasible options that avoid constraints for a particular flight

• Default last choice option = wait on the ground– If ground delay issued then user can still update list

of options to avoid constraint and remove ground delay

• Options & priorities remembered until updated by user (or expire)

• Only user submitted options (or ground delay) would be considered, thus avoiding need for electronic exception

Example option set:

1. Fly route XYZ (through FEA) as planned

2. Same route, but leave 20 minutes late (Minimize fuel burn)

3. Same route, but lower cruise altitude to fly under FEA and leave on time

4. Fly route ABC (5% longer route (a CDR) around FEA), at altitude H (optimum?), at slightly slower speed (fuel efficient), and leave on time

15

Interactive Dynamic Flight Lists

• Lists can be created for any NAS resource of “interest”

• Lists are dynamic: update as changes occur• Lists are interactive: demand is managed from within

the list• Flights that are checked can use the resource • Unchecked flights are placed on highest priority

option that avoids the resource. If no such option exists, then a flight is delayed on ground (if not yet active)

• “Auto-suggest” algorithms could automate which flights are removed/added to list based on rationing/equity concerns (dial-up/dial down concept)

• Lists allow for the re-capture of capacity when conditions unexpectedly improve/change (dial-up concept)

16

Collaborative Routing Resource Allocation Tool (CRRAT)

Functionality

FACET interaction

and HITL usage

17

CRRAT Overview

CRRAT allows NAS users to input multiple routing options with associated switching criteria to FAA resource allocation processes (right). Demand for airspace is brought down below capacity levels (below) by the CRRAT rationing algorithm.

18

What is CRRAT?

• An algorithm to assign scarce (constrained) NAS resources to flights and/or carriers, given capacities on those constraints and requests to use them

• Both equity and efficiency of solution are considered• Fast run time to this NP-hard scheduling problem

– Solving NAS-wide problems (several hundred resources and thousands of flights) in seconds to minutes.

• Highly flexible and configurable– ‘Resources’ could be airports, runways, taxi spots, waypoints,

sectors, etc. It doesn’t know/care what the resources are

• Collaborative: designed to dovetail with user needs and input – Multiple route options per flight

19

Multi-Objective Purpose

• Allocate scarce NAS resources• Maximize (i) system efficiency, (ii) airline

efficiency, and (iii) equitysubject to constraints that

– Each flight be assigned a viable path and departure time

– For each time period, and for each resource, the capacity is not violated

20

Sample Applications

• NAS-wide flow control– E.g. All sectors and airports

• Flow Constrained Area (FCA) – Sectors not recommended

• GDP airports (trivial application)• Large-scale weather fronts

– e.g. that restrict flow to the east coast of the United States, storm systems that block passage across Cleveland Center, and the TFM desire to reduce arrival flow to the New York City area.

• Multi-fix GDP problem– Each fix is established as a resource, as well as the airport itself.– Each flight intending to arrive at the GDP airport requires use of

exactly one of the arrival fix resources and the airport resource.

21

Configurable Priority Rules

Examples of flight prioritization rules that can be achieved

• Grover-Jack (First-come First-served)

• Ration-by-Schedule (RBS)/(First-scheduled First-served)

• Accrued Delay

• Time-ordered Accrued Delay (TOAD)

• Random Flight Selection

• And many more…

• Best algorithms achieving 15-30% less total delay than RBS

By rearranging the order of the priority modules,

variations on the algorithm can be created by the user. (Mr. Potato Head, if you will)

22

CRRAT Software Summary

CRRAT allocates multiple, capacitated resources…

…to flights with alternate route preferences…

…using customizable rationing schemes.

23

Input / Output

Demand forecast:

Proposed routes and depart times for

flights.

Capacity forecast:

Max arrival rate for airports and airspace sectors in each future t.

CRRAT Dispatching Rule:

Process flights one at a time (resource hopping).

Apply flight prioritization rules

Set control actions on each flight.

Controls:

• Controlled departure time

• Controlled route

Input Algorithm Output

Metrics:

Equity

Total delay

Etc.

Repeat

24

CRRAT Library

• Generic Java library with the core resource allocation capabilities from CRRAT– Multi-resource, interdependent scheduling

– Multiple routes per flight

• Stable, reusable software, currently used by – SEVEN

– Command and Control SBIR

– CRRAT

25

FACET Interaction

• CRRAT exists as an application with NASA’s Future ATM Concepts Evaluation Tool (FACET)

Flights

NAS Element Definitions

Projected Flight Demand for Constraints

FACET CRRAT

26

CRRAT HITLs

• CRRAT played a large role in the launching of the Airspace Flow Program (AFP) Traffic Management Initiatives– AFP supporting analysis in 2004-2005

• Demonstrated the failings of GDPs in support of SWAP and proffered AFPs as an alternative

– CRRAT served as a prototype AFP system, integrated with JSE

• Demonstrations to senior FAA decision makers in early 2005

– AFPs went operational in 2006

27

CRRAT HITLs

Period of constraint

FEA over and around weather

GDP airports

28

CRRAT HITLs

Effect of 10 GDPs

Most delay assigned to flights not in FCA

Most flights in FCA not controlled at all

29

Backup Slides

30

Brief History

• Phase 1 and Phase 2 SBIR project sponsored by NASA (2002-2004)– Major features and methodology developed

• Elaboration of Jason Burke MS thesis (UMD)• Further embellishment through C2 SBIR and

various FAA projects • Used in support of initial AFP analysis and

demonstrations (2005)

31

More Detailed Input / Output

32

Core Algorithm

Award resources to f1 in accordance with stated route preference and capacity availability

Until no more flights

Update status (available capacity) of affected resources.

Order the current list of flights by nested priority rules: f1, f2,…,fn

Using combination of priority algorithms. Equity and efficiency can be taken into account here. Simple algorithms (e.g. RBS) make one pass thru flight list

– very quick!

Capacity constraints taken into account here User preferences: carrier-specified tradeoff between

ground and air delay for route selection.

Incremental progress toward a feasible solution

33

Output (Decision Variables)

• Each flight f F receives a path (sequence of resources) that it will use along with the time it should be at each resource

34

The objective is to create an algorithm that allocates

en route resources in a strategic, CDM-compatible

manner

35

Alternate Approaches We Considered

• Bertsimas-Stock (MIT)

• Goodhart & Yano (UCB)

• Ray Staats (AFIT)

• NEXTOR-UMD: ERAP

• CDM-FCA Working Subgroup

• Mitre-CAASD: CRCT offspring

• MetronAV/NASA: CRRAT

• EUROCONTROL) Computer Aided Route Allocation Tool (CARAT) is an optimization rerouting tool

Academic (optimization models) Industry software and tools

• Our work captures the desirable properties of a rationing algorithm

36

Incorporating Routing Preferences

• Three routes available to a flight. Air delay (e.g. extra miles flown over the shortest middle route) can be computed in advance.

• Once potential ground delays are known for each route, then cost of each route for the carrier can be computed.

Orig. Dest.

Cost =(ground + 2 air)

Additional AirMinutes

Ground DelayMinutes

FCA

10

0

20

30

60

40

10

60

0

Orig. Dest.

Cost =(ground + 2 air)

Cost =(ground + 2 air)

Additional AirMinutes

Additional AirMinutes

Ground DelayMinutes

Ground DelayMinutes

FCA

10

0

20

30

60

40

30

60

40

10

60

0

10

60

0

• All computations but the ground delays can be computed and supplied to an automation in advance.

• This way, an FAA algorithm can choose the most appropriate route for each flight, taking carrier preferences into account.

Upper route is cheapest