Trajectory deconfliction with constraint programming

Barnier, Nicolas; Allignol, Cyril

doi:10.1017/s0269888912000227

Cited by 18 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is hypothesized that the pre-planning scheduler outperforms the baseline scheduler when the take-o↵ time estimates are perfect (hypothesis 2-1). In a previous study, Barnier and Allignol found that for aircraft deconfliction, incorporating flights prior to departure was not e↵ective with departure time uncertainties of three minutes [18]. It was therefore hypothesized that for pre-planning of pop-up flights to be e↵ective, the departure time uncertainty needs to be smaller than three minutes (hypothesis 2-2).…”

Section: B Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Effect of Popup Flights on the Extended Arrival Manager

Vanwelsenaere

Ellerbroek

Westerveld³

2018

Journal of Air Transportation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To assess the e↵ect of flights departing within the horizon of the extended arrival manager (socalled pop-up flights), fast-time simulations were performed using an arrival manager research model. This model is tailored for operations at Amsterdam Schiphol Airport and integrated in BlueSky, an open-source air tra c management simulator. Simulation results show a significantly negative impact of pop-up flights on extended arrival management, in terms of flight crew and air tra c control task load, sequence stability and delay (cost). This impact could be mitigated by pre-planning pop-up flights prior to departure, using their take-o↵ time estimates. This will, however, only be beneficial when these estimates are su ciently accurate (better than two minutes). With currently achievable accuracies, it is better to discard these estimates in the context of extended arrival management.

show abstract

Section: B Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Effect of Popup Flights on the Extended Arrival Manager

Vanwelsenaere

Ellerbroek

Westerveld³

2018

Journal of Air Transportation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For the case of a medium jet-propelled aircraft in the en-route phase, this results in validation time interval of 12 15 seconds, as it is the time that in the worst case scenario of two aircraft travelling 500 knots ground speed would take to travel the separation distance of 5 nautical miles 21 . The 4-PNV model is also used in the Terminal Manoeuvring Area (TMA), with reduced separation minima and varying manoeuvres and contrasting speeds.…”

Section: Intent Validationmentioning

confidence: 99%

4-Dimensional Trajectory Negotiation and Validation System for the Next Generation Air Traffic Management

Gardi

Ridder

Sabatini

et al. 2013

AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC) Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…t is chosen small enough to detect every significant conflict in the application. Only conflicts at the fringe of the detection volume and lasting less than t seconds could be missed, as indicated by the formula (detailed in [Barnier and Allignol, 2012]:…”

Section: Maneuversmentioning

confidence: 99%

A New Framework for Solving En Route Conflicts

Allignol

Barnier

Durand

et al. 2013

Air Traffic Control Quarterly

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The en route conflict resolution problem has been modeled in many different ways, generally depending on the tools proposed to solve it. For instance, with purely analytic mathematical solvers, models tend to be very restrictive to respect the inherent limitations of the technology. This paper introduces a new framework that separates the model from the solver so as to be able to: first, enhance the model with as many refinements as necessary to comply with operational constraints; second, compare different resolution methods on the same data, which is a crucial aspect of scientific research.To this aim, our framework generates a benchmark of conflict resolution problems built with various scenarios involving different numbers of aircraft, levels of uncertainties and numbers of maneuvers. We then compare two different optimization paradigms, Evolutionary Algorithm and Constraint Programming, which can efficiently solve difficult instances in near real time, to illustrate the usefulness of our approach.into account all these uncertainties to choose the best trajectories in terms, first, of safety and then, efficiency. These certainties probably explain why the short-term traffic resolution system still relies on human expertise and is not yet automated.Much research has been done on conflict detection and resolution and many papers present models that are so impractical that they strengthen the readers' beliefs that automating the conflict detection and resolution task is unrealistic in the near-term. For example, the approach using repulsive forces described in [Zeghal, 1993] or the B-spline approximation model of [Delahaye et al., 2010] are very interesting on a mathematical level but could hardly be implemented in an operational context. They suppose continuous heading changes, which Flight Management Systems (FMS) are unable to exploit, and do not take uncertainties into account. Pallottino's approach [Pallottino et al., 2002] using mixed integer linear programming (as [Vela et al., 2009, Alonso-Ayuso et al., 2011, Rey et al., 2012) relies on constant speed trajectories that are changed all at once. None of these approaches could deal with realistic trajectory models able to handle evolutive aircraft or trajectory uncertainties.Other approaches like [Durand et al., 1996, Granger et al., 2001 propose to solve conflicts using Evolutionary Algorithms, relying on more realistic models built upon the Base of Aircraft Data (BADA) developed and maintained by EUROCONTROL. These models introduce uncertainties on aircraft speed, climb and descent rate, thus the solver needs to compute many alternative trajectories in real time. Nevertheless, the solver is quite efficient as it can handle complete days of traffic in the European airspace. These algorithms, however, are difficult to compare with other methods because the conflict detection is embedded in the solver. This problem also occurs in Erzberger's approach [Erzberger, 1997], where most of the expertise is focused on the trajectory and maneuver model. Once more, th...

show abstract

Trajectory deconfliction with constraint programming

Cited by 18 publications

References 7 publications

Effect of Popup Flights on the Extended Arrival Manager

Effect of Popup Flights on the Extended Arrival Manager

4-Dimensional Trajectory Negotiation and Validation System for the Next Generation Air Traffic Management

A New Framework for Solving En Route Conflicts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About