基于指标函数的舰载机机队回收调度优化研究

doi:10.12305/j.issn.1001-506X.2021.10.27

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

由于复飞逃逸、飞行故障等因素随机发生, 传统静态调度方法难以有效解决动态随机调度问题。对此，提出一种基于飞机优先序指标函数的蒙特卡罗模拟-差分进化搜索的实时调度算法。在离线模拟回收环境下，由算法完成基于随机模型的指标函数系数优化，后由该指标函数实现对机队优先序的实时评估排序，进而完成回收在线动态调度。仿真结果表明所提算法能有效解决回收调度问题。在相同机队初始输入下, 目标值呈现较好统计特性, 其期望值能够快速收敛到一定范围, 且无复飞情况下着舰时间窗目标呈显著正态性; 不同回收机队输入对指标系数最优值的散布较小, 表明指标函数评估优先序具有较好的通用性和有效性; 模拟回收调度发现, 着舰成功率的提高将显著降低机队复飞次数, 提高回收效率。

关键词: 舰载机, 回收调度, 指标函数, 蒙特卡罗模拟, 差分进化

Abstract:

Due to the random occurrence of factors such as go-around escape and flight failure, the traditional static scheduling method is difficult to effectively solve the dynamic random scheduling problem. Aiming at this problem, the real-time scheduling algorithm of the Monte Carlo simulation and differential evolution search based on an index function to complete aircraft priority evaluation is propased. In the offline simulated recovery environment, the optimal index function coefficients are searching by the algorithm based on the stochastic model, by which the real-time evaluation-sorting of the fleet landing priority is achieved, and then generates dynamic scheduling plan online.The simulation results showed the algorithm could effectively solve the problem. In same initial input of the fleet, the expectation of target value presenting good statistical characteristics could converge to a certain range quickly, and the target value of the landing time window was significantly normal without a missed approach; the distribution of the optimal values of the index coefficients among different recovery fleet inputs was small, which indicated that the index function evaluating priority had good generality and effectiveness; the simulated recovery dispatch experiment showed that the increase in the success rate of landing would significantly reduce the number of missed approach and improve recovery efficiency.

Key words: carrier-based aircraft, recovery scheduling, index function, Monte Carlo simulation, differential evolution

中图分类号:

U469.72

万兵, 韩维, 梁勇, 苏析超. 基于指标函数的舰载机机队回收调度优化研究[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2021, 43(10): 2918-2930.

Bing WAN, Wei HAN, Yong LIANG, Xichao SU. Research on optimization of carrier-based aircraft fleetrecovery scheduling based on index function[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2021, 43(10): 2918-2930.

图/表 15

图1

图2

图3

图4

图5

表1

图6

图7

图8

表2

表3

表4

图9

图10

图11

参考文献 39

1	姜龙光. 国外航母航空保障系统[M]. 北京: 国防工业出版社, 2016.
	JIANG L G . Foreign aircraft carrier aviation support system[M]. Beijing: National Defense Industry Press, 2016.
2	DASTIDAR R G, FRAZZOLI E. A queueing network based approach to distributed aircraft carrier deck scheduling[C]//Proc. of the AIAA Infotech at Aerospace Conference, 2011.
3	RYAN J C. Evaluating safety protocols for manned unmanned environments through agent based simulation[D]. Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2014.
4	RYAN J C , BANERJEE A G , CUMMINGS M L , et al. Comparing the performance of expert user heuristics and an integer linear program in aircraft carrier deck operations[J]. IEEE Trans.on Cybernetics, 2014, 44 (6): 761- 773. doi: 10.1109/TCYB.2013.2271694
5	RYAN J C , CUMMINGS M L . A systems analysis of the introduction of unmanned aircraft into aircraft carrier operations[J]. IEEE Trans.on Hum-Mach Systems, 2016, 46 (2): 209- 220. doi: 10.1109/THMS.2014.2376355
6	刘翱, 刘克. 舰载机保障作业调度问题研究进展[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 2017, 37 (1): 49- 60.
	LIU A , LIU K . Advances in carrier-based aircraft deck operation scheduling[J]. Systems Engineering Theory & Practice, 2017, 37 (1): 49- 60.
7	WANG X W , LIU J . A review on carrier aircraft dispatch path planning and control on deck[J]. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2020, 33 (12): 3039- 3057. doi: 10.1016/j.cja.2020.06.020
8	苏析超, 韩维, 萧卫, 等. 基于Memetic算法的舰载机舰面一站式保障调度[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2016, 38 (10): 2303- 2309. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-506X.2016.10.12
	SU X C , HAN W , XIAO W , et al. Pit-stop support scheduling on deck of carrier plane based on Memetic algorithm[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2016, 38 (10): 2303- 2309. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-506X.2016.10.12
9	CAO Y , RATHINAM S , SUN D F . Greedy-heuristic-aided mixed-integer linear programming approach for arrival scheduling[J]. Journal of Aerospace Information Systems, 2013, 10 (7): 323- 336. doi: 10.2514/1.I010030
10	ZHANG J F , ZHAO P . A new metaheuristic approach for aircraft landing problem[J]. Transactions of Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2020, 37 (2): 197- 208.
11	ZHANG J F , ZHAO P , ZHANG Y , et al. Criteria selection and multi-objective optimization of aircraft landing problem[J]. Journal of Air Transport Management, 2020, 82, 101734. doi: 10.1016/j.jairtraman.2019.101734
12	ZHANG J F , ZHENG Z , GE T . Sequencing approach of arrival aircrafts based on composite dispatching rules[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2017, 17 (3): 141- 150.
13	刘洪, 杨红雨, 刘宇, 等. 基于单一移动平台的飞机进近排序模型研究[J]. 四川大学学报, 2014, 51 (6): 1149- 1155. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0490-6756.2014.06.009
	LIU H , YANG H Y , LIU Y , et al. Study of approach aircraft sequencing model based on single mobile landing platform[J]. Journal of Sichuan University, 2014, 51 (6): 1149- 1155. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0490-6756.2014.06.009
14	WU Y , SUN L G , QU X J . A sequencing model for a team of aircraft landing on the carrier[J]. Aerospace Science and Technology, 2016, 54, 72- 87. doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2016.04.007
15	CUI J P, WU Y, SU X C, et al. A task allocation model for a team of aircraft launching on the carrier[J]. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2018(2018): 7920806/2018/7920806.
16	KWASIBORSKA A . Sequencing landing aircraft process to minimize schedule length[J]. Transportation Research Procedia, 2017, 28, 111- 116. doi: 10.1016/j.trpro.2017.12.175
17	SHI W , JIANG S , LIANG X , et al. A heuristic algorithm for solving the aircraft landing scheduling problem with a landing sequence division[J]. IEICE Trans.on Fundamentals of Electronics, Communications and Computer Sciences, 2019, E102.A (8): 966- 973. doi: 10.1587/transfun.E102.A.966
18	LIEDER A , BRISKORN D , STOLLETZ R . A dynamic programming approach for the aircraft landing problem with aircraft classes[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2015, 243 (1): 61- 69. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2014.11.027
19	GHONIEM A , FARHADI F . A column generation approach for aircraft sequencing problems: a computational study[J]. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 2015, 66 (10): 1717- 1729. doi: 10.1057/jors.2014.131
20	SU X C , HAN W . A proactive robust scheduling method for aircraft carrier flight deck operations with stochastic durations[J]. Complexity, 2018, (2018): 6932985.
21	刘继新, 江灏, 董欣放, 等. 基于空中交通密度的进场航班动态协同排序方法[J]. 航空学报, 2020, 41 (7): 323717.
	LIU J X , JIANG H , DONG X F , et al. Dynamic collaborative sequencing method for arrival flights based on air traffic density[J]. Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica, 2020, 41 (7): 323717.
22	BENNELL J A , MESGARPOUR M , POTTS C N . Dynamic scheduling of aircraft landings[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2017, 258 (1): 315- 327. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2016.08.015
23	FURINI F , KIDD M P , PERSIANI C A , et al. Improved rolling horizon approaches to the aircraft sequencing problem[J]. Journal of Scheduling, 2015, 18, 435- 447. doi: 10.1007/s10951-014-0415-8
24	ERDOGAN S A , DENTON B . Dynamic appointment scheduling of a stochastic server with uncertain demand[J]. Journal on Computing, 2013, 25 (1): 116- 132.
25	CASTAING J. Scheduling under uncertainty: applications to aviation, healthcare and aerospace[D]. Michigan: University of Michigan, 2017.
26	ERDOGAN S A , GOSE A , DENTON B . On-line appointment sequencing and scheduling[J]. IIE Transactions, 2015, 47, 1267- 1286. doi: 10.1080/0740817X.2015.1011355
27	STORN R . Designing nonstandard filters with differential evolution[J]. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 2005, 22 (1): 103- 106. doi: 10.1109/MSP.2005.1407721
28	LI Y Z , WANG S H . Differential evolution algorithm with elite archive and mutation strategies collaboration[J]. Artificial Intelligence Review, 2020, 53 (3): 4005- 4050. doi: 10.1007/s10462-019-09786-5
29	CARLO M D , VASILE M , MINISCI E . Adaptive multi-population inflationary differential evolution[J]. Soft Computing, 2020, 24 (6): 3861- 3891.
30	甄子洋, 王新华, 江驹, 等. 舰载机自动着舰引导与控制研究进展[J]. 航空学报, 2017, 38 (2): 020435.
	ZHEN Z Y , WANG X H , JIANG J , et al. Research progress in guidance and control of automatic carrier landing of carrier-based aircraft[J]. Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica, 2017, 38 (2): 020435.
31	PINEDO M L . Scheduling theory, algorithms, and systems[M]. 5th ed. Heidelberg/New York: Springer Science & Business Media, 2016.
32	CCAR-93-R5. 民用航空空中交通管理规则[S]. 北京: 中国民用航空局, 2018.
39	CCAR-93-R5. Civil aviation air traffic management rules[S]. Beijing: Civil Aviation Administration of China, 2018.

飞机编号	ETA₀/min(相对t₀)	Oil₀-预计最终剩余油量
1	18.36	0.31
2	24.48	0.30
3	37.67	0.13
4	40.86	0.14
5	21.70	0.31
6	19.82	0.28
7	20.95	0.22
8	26.50	0.20
9	18.44	0.25
10	23.23	0.28
11	18.38	0.30
12	38.86	0.15
13	30.59	0.20
14	20.04	0.24

状态	频次		目标均值
状态	次数	占比	总目标	时间窗/mm	总等待/mm	总余油/%
无复飞情况	68	0.23	26.30	29.56	57.00	2.79
1次复飞	91	0.30	29.73	30.81	65.94	2.73
2次复飞	86	0.28	35.25	33.15	79.83	2.64
3次复飞	34	0.11	37.01	32.80	85.99	2.59
4次复飞	14	0.05	42.56	33.47	102.65	2.48
5次复飞	5	0.02	51.42	38.94	122.18	2.35
6次复飞	2	0.01	50.11	34.21	125.54	2.33

参数	无复飞	1架飞机复飞	2架飞机复飞	3架飞机复飞
总目标Z	16.08	26.49	29.27	37.55
Z₁	24.55	27.96	35.28	33.47
Z₂	32.35	60.14	57.35	86.67
Z₃	2.98	2.79	2.82	2.61
着舰顺序(含复飞)	-	1-9-7-11-6-5-9-2-10-14-8-3-12-13-4	1-9-7-11-14-2-10-6-5-8-2-3-13-12-4-4	1-9-7-11-14-1-10-6-5-2-8-5-12-3-13-4-13
成功着舰顺序	1-9-7-11-14-2-8-6-10-5-13-3-12-4	1-7-11-6-5-9-2-10-14-8-3-12-13-4	1-9-7-11-14-10-6-5-8-2-3-13-12-4	9-7-11-14-1-10-6-2-8-5-12-3-4-13
盘旋圈数	0-0-0-1-1-0-0-2-2-3-1-0-0-1	0-0-1-1-1-1-1-2-3-2-0-0-4-2	0-0-0-1-1-1-2-2-1-1-0-3-1-3	0-0-1-1-1-1-2-2-2-3-0-2-3-6
复飞飞机	-	9	2、4	1、2、13
复飞次数	-	1	2	3
总盘旋圈数	11	18	16	24

状态	频次		目标均值
状态	次数	占比	总目标	时间窗/min	总等待/min	总余油
无复飞情况	155	0.52	25.95	29.43	56.09	2.79%
1次复飞	99	0.33	29.72	30.55	66.33	2.73%
2次复飞	32	0.11	33.91	31.56	78.09	2.65%
3次复飞	11	0.04	37.52	33.11	87.13	2.59%
4次复飞	2	0.01	39.41	36.11	88.37	2.58%

[1]	张勇, 李常久, 苏析超, 崔荣伟. 基于HTLBO算法的舰载机机群机库维修任务调度[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2022, 44(9): 2858-2868.
[2]	谭目来, 丁达理, 谢磊, 丁维, 吕丞辉. 基于模糊专家系统与IDE算法的UCAV逃逸机动决策[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2022, 44(6): 1984-1993.
[3]	邓嘉宁, 吴宇, 许舒婷, 苟进展. 基于模糊贝叶斯-ANP舰载机出动回收综合评估[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2022, 44(11): 3423-3432.
[4]	韩维, 崔凯凯, 刘洁, 王昕炜, 张勇. 基于自校正MPC的舰载机着舰控制技术[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2022, 44(1): 250-261.
[5]	陈云翔, 饶益, 蔡忠义, 王泽洲. 基于改进相似性的装备部件剩余寿命预测及经济性储备策略[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2021, 43(9): 2688-2696.
[6]	曾斌, 陈媛媛, 李厚朴. 考虑保障装备可用度的舰载机作业调度优化[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2021, 43(7): 1856-1865.
[7]	崔荣伟, 韩维, 苏析超, 王立国, 刘玉杰. 舰载机甲板机务勤务保障作业调度与资源配置集成优化[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2021, 43(7): 1884-1893.
[8]	吴文海, 郭晓峰, 周思羽, 高丽. 基于随机邻域策略和广义反向学习的自适应差分进化算法[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2021, 43(7): 1928-1942.
[9]	吴文海, 郭晓峰, 周思羽, 高丽. 改进差分进化算法求解武器目标分配问题[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2021, 43(4): 1012-1021.
[10]	万兵, 韩维, 梁勇, 郭放. 舰载机出动离场调度优化算法[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2021, 43(12): 3624-3634.
[11]	岳奎志, 赵建忠, 程亮亮, 郁大照. 舰载机着舰航线侧方计时建模与分析[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2020, 42(6): 1332-1337.
[12]	吴文海, 郭晓峰, 周思羽. 基于NURBS和GOBL-ACDE的航迹规划算法[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2020, 42(5): 1073-1082.
[13]	袁培龙, 韩维, 苏析超, 高少辉. 不确定环境下舰载机保障预反应式动态调度优化[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2019, 41(6): 1265-1277.
[14]	李世豪, 丁勇, 高振龙. 基于直觉模糊博弈的无人机空战机动决策[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2019, 41(5): 1063-1070.
[15]	王亚东, 石全, 张芳, 尤志锋, 夏伟. 基于动态进化算法的多阶段备件供应优化决策[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2019, 41(11): 2514-2523.