EDS/ETD Deployment Program: Modeling and Simulation Approach



Similar documents
Analytics That Allow You To See Beyond The Cloud. By Alex Huang, Ph.D., Head of Aviation Analytics Services, The Weather Company, an IBM Business

ASSESSING AIRPORT PASSENGER SCREENING PROCESSING SYSTEMS

HSR HOCHSCHULE FÜR TECHNIK RA PPERSW I L

AS-D1 SIMULATION: A KEY TO CALL CENTER MANAGEMENT. Rupesh Chokshi Project Manager

IST 301. Class Exercise: Simulating Business Processes

AS-D2 THE ROLE OF SIMULATION IN CALL CENTER MANAGEMENT. Dr. Roger Klungle Manager, Business Operations Analysis

PROCESS FLOW IMPROVEMENT PROPOSAL OF A BATCH MANUFACTURING SYSTEM USING ARENA SIMULATION MODELING

Airport logistics - A case study of the turnaround

Justifying Simulation. Why use simulation? Accurate Depiction of Reality. Insightful system evaluations

How To Manage A Call Center

CHAPTER 3 CALL CENTER QUEUING MODEL WITH LOGNORMAL SERVICE TIME DISTRIBUTION

Home Printed Bag Tags Changing the Customer s Journey

USING OPNET TO SIMULATE THE COMPUTER SYSTEM THAT GIVES SUPPORT TO AN ON-LINE UNIVERSITY INTRANET

STATISTICA Solutions for Financial Risk Management Management and Validated Compliance Solutions for the Banking Industry (Basel II)

PSS E. High-Performance Transmission Planning Application for the Power Industry. Answers for energy.

Group D: FAA Landing Slots. Elaine Ou Jeff Shneidman Allan Sumiyama

Chapter 5. Process design

SOLUTION BRIEF: SLCM R12.7 PERFORMANCE TEST RESULTS JANUARY, Load Test Results for Submit and Approval Phases of Request Life Cycle

Simulation Software: Practical guidelines for approaching the selection process

Optimized Airport Security Infrastructure System (OASIS)

Waiting Times Chapter 7

Performance analysis and comparison of virtualization protocols, RDP and PCoIP

Simulation of a Claims Call Center: A Success and a Failure

SIMULATION AND EVALUATION OF THE ORLANDO- ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY (OOCEA) ELECTRONIC TOLL COLLECTION PLAZAS USING TPSIM, PHASE II

RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 1701h

ASE STUDY. Performance Testing & Security Testing for Web Applications.

Better decision making under uncertain conditions using Monte Carlo Simulation

Detailed Design Report

Determining Inventory Levels in a CONWIP Controlled Job Shop

Optimal Technologies Proof of Concept Trial Report

Load DynamiX Storage Performance Validation: Fundamental to your Change Management Process

A Component-Based Design Pattern for Improving Reusability of Distributed Automation Programs

Customer Success Stories

Chapter 5 Supporting Facility and Process Flows

HMLV Manufacturing Systems Simulation Analysis Using the Database Interface

Throughput Capacity Planning and Application Saturation

Yokogawa in the Midstream Industry

Performance Testing Tools: A Comparative Analysis

Passenger screening is a critical component of aviation security systems. This paper introduces the sequential

Case Study I: A Database Service

The Transportation Security Administration Does Not Properly Manage Its Airport Screening Equipment Maintenance Program

DecisionSpace Earth Modeling Software

Quality of Service on the Internet: Evaluation of the IntServ Architecture on the Linux Operative System 1

ECE/CS 372 introduction to computer networks. Lecture 2. Midterm scheduled for Tuesday, May 7 th

Memo: August 27, To: new or prospective students entering our PhD or MS program who are interested in computer networking.

Multiphase Flow - Appendices

Liferay Portal Performance. Benchmark Study of Liferay Portal Enterprise Edition

ESTIMATION AND PLANNING TOOL FOR INDUSTRIAL CONSTRUCTION SCAFFOLDING. *C. Kumar, S. M. AbouRizk, and Y. Mohamed

The problem with waiting time

Performance White Paper

- 1 - intelligence. showing the layout, and products moving around on the screen during simulation

Module 1: Introduction to Computer System and Network Validation

the safety maker in aviation

Software Engineering Best Practices. Christian Hartshorne Field Engineer Daniel Thomas Internal Sales Engineer

Contact Center Planning Calculations and Methodologies

Lean Six Sigma Lean 201 Introduction. TECH QUALITY and PRODUCTIVITY in INDUSTRY and TECHNOLOGY

Two-Sample T-Tests Assuming Equal Variance (Enter Means)

Comparing two Queuing Network Solvers: JMT vs. PDQ

Performance Testing IBM MQSeries* Infrastructures

Veri cation and Validation of Simulation Models

How the People Counter Works. Enhanced Building Security and Improved Marketing Intelligence. 3D MLI Sensor Technology

Eastern Washington University Department of Computer Science. Questionnaire for Prospective Masters in Computer Science Students

Airport Master Plan Demand/Capacity Analysis and Facility Requirements Summary

Discrete-Event Simulation

Table of Contents. P a g e 2

Automated testing and continuous integration

A Case Study in Software Enhancements as Six Sigma Process Improvements: Simulating Productivity Savings

AN AIRCRAFT TAXI SIMULATION MODEL FOR THE UNITED PARCEL SERVICE LOUISVILLE AIR PARK. W. Swain Ottman Angela C. Ford Gregory R.

The software beyond the climatic. Environment simulation

Distributed Services & Distributed Pro/BATCH Distributed Services & Distributed Pro/BA May 2010 Rev I

1: B asic S imu lati on Modeling

Process design. Process design. Process design. Operations strategy. Supply network design. Layout and flow Design. Operations management.

Highway Maintenance Scheduling Using Genetic Algorithm with Microscopic Traffic Simulation

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AN AUTOMATED PRODUCTION SYSTEM WITH QUEUE LENGTH DEPENDENT SERVICE RATES

Available Performance Testing Tools

Two-Sample T-Tests Allowing Unequal Variance (Enter Difference)

: ADJUSTING THE MASSIVELY OPEN ONLINE COURSES IN CLOUD COMPUTING ENVIRONMENT 9

Is Truck Queuing Productive? Study of truck & shovel operations productivity using simulation platform MineDES

Everything you need for protection scheme testing

Simulation Tools Evaluation using Theoretical Manufacturing Model

Cloud Computing Capstone Task 2 Report

CASE STUDY 3 Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) Aéroport de Montréal Vancouver International Airport

SIMULATION STUDY OF THE OPTIMAL APPOINTMENT NUMBER FOR OUTPATIENT CLINICS

CROSS INDUSTRY PegaRULES Process Commander. Bringing Insight and Streamlining Change with the PegaRULES Process Simulator

Scheduling Policies, Batch Sizes, and Manufacturing Lead Times

China Airlines Flight Schedule

INTRODUCTION TO SYNTHESYS

Application Performance Testing Basics

High Availability Storage

Data Mining Applications in Higher Education

Transcription:

EDS/ETD Deployment Program: Modeling and Simulation Approach Presentation at the TRB Annual Sunday Simulation Workshop Omni Shoreham Hotel, Washington, D.C., January 12, 2003 By: Evert Meyer, Ph.D. Mark Lunsford Principal, Leigh Fisher Associates Principal, Leigh Fisher Associates 1

Role of Modeling and Simulation Develop and test new generic screening concepts: Hybrid screening solutions, Pre-ticketing versus post-ticketing screening, Simultaneous ticketing/screening (e.g., ETD-on-a-Stick), and In-line/bag room solutions. Estimate EDS and ETD equipment requirements for each airport. Assess system performance at each airport: Queue lengths; and Average, 95th percentile, and max waiting times. Assist with selection of preferred solution for each airport. Continuous improvement (beyond December 31, 2002). 2

Use of Simulation for Terminal Planning in a New Environment Existing terminal design standards for security and baggage processing space allocation have become obsolete (e.g., FAA Terminal Planning and Design Guidelines and International Air Transport Association Airports Development Reference Manual). Need for analytical performance evaluation (e.g., queuing theory) or simulation on case-by-case basis. Security/baggage screening is a stochastic process (randomness in processing rate) resulting in overall system performance that is non-linear and may be sensitive to small changes. Processing time Demand/capacity ratio 3

Example of Nonlinear Queuing Effects and Variable Passenger Processing Times Potential risks of using manufacturers processing times and rates: Idealized laboratory rates versus real-world achievable rates often differ by a factor of 2; nd Could result in underestimating waiting times and queue lengths by a factor of 4. Potential risks of using average processing times as constants: Example: System A has a constant service time of 2 min; System B has a variable service time with an average of 2 min and a standard deviation of 1.5 min. Then, a standard rule of thumb from queuing theory predicts that, for the same demand pattern, the waiting times and queues at System B could be twice as long as those at System A. Potential combined risks: Using manufacturers rates and ignoring the variance in processing times rates could result in underestimating waiting times and queue lengths by a factor of 8 (say 5 to 10). 4

Alarm Rates and EDS Throughput A 5-point reduction in alarm rate results in about a 25% increase in EDS throughput. 300 EDS Throughput Rate (bags per hour) 250 200 150 100 50 4 Secondary screeners 3 Secondary screeners 2 Secondary screeners 1 Secondary screener 0 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 EDS Alarm Rate 5

Boeing Team Modeling and Simulation Tools EDS-SIM (LFA) Bags per Hour ZONE LEVEL DESIGN DAY BAGGAGE FLOW Zone : 8B JFK - NEW YORK(KENNEDY) NY Capaci ty 600 Req'd 565 bph 500 400 360 bph EDS 300 Capaci ty 200 100 PaxSim (Preston) 0 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Time of Day EDS throuhput Design Confidence Interval ETD throughput Expected Mean Flow Rate Airlines served : AA_INT @ 46%, IB @ 100%, LO @ 100% Avg % of Bags Avg % of Bags Total Design Screened with Screened with Day Bags EDS ETD 4,025 91.1% 8.9% ZONE 8B EDS CAPACITY Flow Model (LFA) Avg. EDS Avg. ETD Hours of Utilization Utilization Active Use in During Active During Active Design Day Hours Hours 20.7 49.3% 8.5% RECORD AutoMod (commercially available proprietary model) 6

Modeling and Simulation Strategy Airport Types Assessment TSA Review Survey Design GROUPS A/B * Most challenging terminals Flow Model PaxSim AutoMod (as necessary) * Others Flow Model EDS-Sim PaxSim or AutoMod (as necessary) GROUP C Flow Model EDS-Sim (as necessary) GROUP D Flow Model Flow Model = High-level queuing model (concept stage; preliminary requirements) EDS-Sim = Discrete-event simulation model (design stage; final requirements) PaxSIm = Discrete-event simulation model with animation output (design stage; final requirements) AutoMod = Discrete-event simulation model with 3D animation output (design stage; final requirements) 7

Flow Model Bags per Hour ZONE LEVEL DESIGN DAY BAGGAGE FLOW 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Airlines served : AA_INT @ 46%, IB @ 100%, LO @ 100% Zone : 8B JFK - NEW YORK(KENNEDY) NY 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Time of Day EDS throuhput Design Confidence Interval Total Design Day Bags Avg % of Bags Screened with EDS Avg % of Bags Screened with ETD 4,025 91.1% 8.9% Hours of Active Use in Design Day Avg. EDS Utilization During Active Hours Avg. ETD Utilization During Active Hours 20.7 49.3% 8.5% Capaci ty Req'd 565 bph 360 bph EDS Capaci ty ETD throughput Expected Mean Flow Rate ZONE 8B EDS CAPACITY RECORD Based on fluid approximations with statistical surging. Used for quickly estimating EDS and ETD equipment requirements for a variety of protocols. Integrated with database containing: Official Airline Guide (OAG) schedules, Industry average trends/data, Airline/airport-specific data, and Data collected in field. Calibrated to the 10-min performance criteria and redundancy. Rapid set-up and application typically less than 8 h. 8

EDS-SIM Used for rapid concept evaluation and requirements for most airports where a standard solution is proposed: Modular design to implement solutions from standard set of templates; Captures unique metering/dependency effects associated with pre-ticketing or post-ticketing solutions; and Evaluates requirements based on 95-percentile, 10-min design objective. Relatively rapid set up and processing time: Group A: 3 to 5 days; Group B: 2 to 3 days; and Group C: 0.5 to 1 days. Integrated with database containing: OAG schedules, Industry average trends/data, Airline/airport-specific data, and Data collected in field. Technical details: Discrete event, simulation model; and Pre-processor, a simulation engine, and a post processor modules. 9

PaxSim Fully animated simulation program: Passengers and their luggage modeled visually as individual objects; State-of-the-art, object-oriented modeling environment; and Superior graphics capabilities. Appropriate for difficult, controversial layouts: Assist with the refinement of requirements and concept layouts as well as their visualization; Quantify and visualize the impact of congestion on passenger flows and dwell times; and Obtain buy-in for concepts with unique flow/queuing characteristics. Relatively rapid set up and processing time: Group A: 8 to 10 days; Group B: 5 to 10 days; and Group C: 4 to 8 days. Technical details: Object Oriented Model Development Environment, C/C++ Native Code, Linux Platform, Rule-based decision structure, and Free-flow grid paradigm (not node-link structure as used older technology products). 10

Data Management Data sources Schedule (OAG) Airline Data Transaction statistics Check-in Splits Load Factors % O&D Field data Detailed time and queue statistics for 60 airports including all CAT I & II Site survey data for all other airports (429+) Database Repository Relational Database Processing scripts (SQL/Delphi) Schedules August 2000 March 2003 Charter Activity Processed data for: Bags/party distribution Party size distribution Check-in splits Load Factors O&D splits Process time distributions Probability Fitted Distributions 0.2500 0.2000 0.1500 0.1000 0.0500 0.0000 0 50 100 150 Passenger process time (seconds) GAMMA NORMAL Observed 11

Major Modeling and Simulation Tasks Every airport has received some type of modeling: Flow Models: 429 airports EDS-Sim models: 127 terminals, 90 airports PaxSim models: 60 terminals, 30 airports Development of automation processes and tools necessary for airport system analysis: System-wide model to evaluate policy/machine allocation strategies; Flow model development and support for use by planners/architects to assess machine requirements; and Analysis tools in support of continuous improvement program. 12

MCO Post-Ticketing Drop-n-Go Concept 13

LAX Terminal 1 (SWA) Simultaneous Screening/Ticketing 14

MCI Simultaneous Ticketing/Screening 15

ORD T1 Animation (Original Concept) 16

ORD T1 Animation (Revised Concept) 17

ORD T1 Animation (Close-Up) 18

LAX TBIT 19