Journal of Physics: Conference Series

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS You may also like

- Research on the Problem of Sorting
Research on Flight Schedule Optimization Based Parallel Runway Aircraft in Terminal Area
Based on Genetic Algorithm
on Different Runway Operation Modes Na Lu, Jing Zhang and Ling Zhong

- Applying Machine Learning Modeling to

Enhance Runway Throughput at A Big
To cite this article: Shuce Wang et al 2023 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 2491 012001 European Airport
G Stempfel, I De Visscher, M Ellejmi et al.

- The Effect Of Rainfall On The Detection Of

Standing Water On Runway
N Firdiyan and M S Muntini
View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 123.231.87.223 on 22/05/2023 at 15:35

STEP-2022 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2491 (2023) 012001 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2491/1/012001

Research on Flight Schedule Optimization Based on Different

Runway Operation Modes

Shuce Wang12*, Minghua Hu12, Zheng Zhao12, Jie Shu3, Xuhao Zhu12
1
College of Civil Aviation, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Nanjing 210016, China
2
National Key Laboratory of Air Traffic Flow Management, Nanjing University of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, China
3
College of Foreign Languages, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Nanjing 210016, China
*
Corresponding author’s e-mail address: shucewang@nuaa.edu.cn

Abstract. The update and iteration of the airport facilities completed in the runway operation
system raise a request for more scientific control operation restrictions. In the old, optimized
method of flight slot, no consideration was given to the runway operation strategy. As a result,
the flight slot failed to meet the operation restriction and would incur unavoidable delays. This
paper sets the research objective as the system composed of an apron, runway entrance and exit,
and parallel runway. It focuses on matching the corresponding relationship between time and
space of flights in the studied system. It establishes three flight slot optimization models to
meet the requirements of isolated operation, semi-mixed operation, and mixed operation,
respectively. On a practical level, the computer simulation software AirTOp is employed for
simulation verification in the example of Wuhan Tianhe Airport. The results show that the
delay in the isolation operation mode is reduced by about 59%, the semi-mixed operating mode
reduces delays by about 48%, and mixed operating mode delays are reduced by approximately
52%. Therefore, it proves its feasibility of effective reduction in overall delay and its ability to
provide decision support for the allocation of the flight time resource in parallel dual runway
airports.

1. Introduction
In the actual operation of the airport terminal area, the flight scheduling method without considering
the operation restrictions will lead to the runway capacity not being fully utilized, which means it is
unable to arrange as many flight plans as possible within the acceptable time of delay [1]. On the basis
of considering the overall capacity constraints of multi-runway airports, it is necessary to further
consider the operation restrictions in each runway and the multi-runway system. The runway operation
restrictions vary in different runway operation modes. Therefore, with the aim to meet the increasingly
complex control requirements brought by complex runway operation modes, there is an urgent need to
create a set of flight schedule optimization methods to satisfy different runway operation modes.
Nikolas [2] and Konstantinos [3] aimed at the minimum total flight time deviation, put forward the
constraint of 30 min instantaneous capacity and established the time optimization model framework
that met the demand of the smoothing model and network queuing model. Mengdie Wang [4] and
Yuchen Ke [5] established a dual-objective flight schedule optimization model with the minimum total

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
STEP-2022 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2491 (2023) 012001 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2491/1/012001

deviation time and the minimum number of flights exceeding the acceptable deviation time. However,
here are the following problems with the allocation and optimization of flight time slots:
1. The cut-in angle of the flight time optimization goal is just a single point of view. There is a lack
of flight time optimization methods that take into account air traffic management units, airport
operation units, and air carriers in coordination.
2. Multi-runway airports are becoming more and more flexible in runway operation mode, and the
existing optimization and allocation methods cannot meet the need for timely correction of flight time
after switching runway mode in the actual operation.
3. There is a lack of an overall consideration of runway operation limitation and capacity limitation.
If the released interval of departure aircraft from the same runway increases in actual operation, it is
relatively impossible for current researchers to give an accurate description of the situation where
runway capacity is affected.

2. Construction of model
This paper mainly studies four runway operation modes: isolated mode, isolated-related approach
mode, isolated-independent departure mode, and independent departure-related approach mode [6].

2.1. Hypothesis
Bearing the purpose of making the problem more practical and more convenient to solve, the
following assumptions are put forward:
H1: The time slot is a specific moment of 5 min.
H2: The time allocated to each flight is EOBT (Estimated Off Block Time, estimated time of the
aircraft taxing-out parking position) or EIBT (Estimated In Block Time, estimated time of the aircraft
taxing-in parking position).
H3: The parking position and runway used by the aircraft before and after the assigned flight time
remain unchanged.
H4: Connecting flights are not considered.

2.2. Decision variable

The model focuses on two things about departure and arrival flights: the capacity-flow matching
relationship and the runway usage rules at the corresponding time nodes. Given that the mathematical
formula is more direct and visual to explain the conditions of different constraints, four groups of
decision variables are set up here.
1 arrange flight d to runway r for departure
D Cdr   (1)
0 else

1 arrange flight a to runway r for arrival

A Car   (2)
0 else

1 arrange flight d departure at t of time slot

X dt   (3)
0 else

1 arrange flight a departure at t of time slot

X at   (4)
0 else

D C dr and A C ar represent the runways assigned to each departure flight and arrival flight,
respectively, as shown in Formulas (1) and (2).
X dt and Xat indicate the time allocated to each departure flight and arrival flight, respectively, as
shown in Formulas (3) and (4).

2
STEP-2022 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2491 (2023) 012001 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2491/1/012001

2.3. Constraints
(1) For flight scheduling optimization, each departure and arrival flight must be assigned to only one
slot:

 X d  1, d  D, t  T
t

 tT
 (5)
 X t  1, a  A, t  T

t T
a

In Formula (5), T refers to the 5-min flight time slot collection. D and A refer to, respectively, the
collection of all the departure and arrival flights.
(2) Maximum acceptable deviation constraint: that is, the maximum time deviation of each flight
that the air carrier can accept:
 Td  Td  
 (6)
 Ta  Ta  
In Formula (6), Td and Ta respectively refer to EOBT (Estimated Off Block Time, estimated time
of the aircraft taxing-out parking position) and EIBT (Estimated In Block Time, estimated time of the
aircraft taxing-in parking position) after optimization. Td and Ta refer to the times for EOBT and
EIBT before optimization.  represents the acceptable maximum deviation.
(3) Runway allocation constraint: each departure and arrival flight must be allocated to only one
runway:

 D Cdr  1, d  D, r  R
 r R
 (7)

 A Car  1, a  A, r  R
r R

In Formula (7), R refers to the collection of runways.

(4) Operational capacity constraint:
 c1  59 t
   X d  D Lr , c1  0,1, 2...1380
60

 d  D t  c1

 c3  59
   X at  A L60 r , c3  0,1, 2...1380
 a A t  c3
c1  59
  t 
 t   X d   X a   Lr , c5  0,1, 2...1380
t 60

 c5  d D a A 
 c2 14 (8)

 d  X dt  D L15r , c2  0,1, 2...1425
D t  c2

 c4 14 t
   X a  A Lr , c4  0,1, 2...1425
15

 a A t  c4
c6 14 
    X dt   X at   L15r , c6  0,1, 2...1425
 t  c6  d D a A 
The number of flights using the runway at a certain time cannot exceed the runway capacity. In
Formula (8), D L60r and A L60r refer to the hourly departure capacity and arrival capacity of the runway,
respectively. D L15r and A L15r respectively, refer to the departure capacity and arrival capacity of the
runway within 15 minutes. L60r and L15r represent the hourly capacity and 15 minutes capacity of the
runway.
(5) Runway operational constraints. To facilitate the calculation of flight departure time and flight
arrival time, we have:

3
STEP-2022 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2491 (2023) 012001 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2491/1/012001


Tdr  Td  Td   Tr  D Cdr
w p



r R
(9)
T  T  T r  C
 ar a 
r R
p A ar

Constraints of isolated runway mode:

 Tdr  Td r  t0 , d  D, r  R

  w (10)
 Tar  Ta r  max( v , v ) , a  A, r  R
 a r a r

Constraints of related approach-isolated runway mode:

 Tdr  Td r  t0 d  D, r  1

T 
 Tdr  d  D, a  A, r  1
 ar var

  w (11)
 Tar  Ta r  max( , ) a  A, r  R
 va r va r
 
 Tar  Ta r   a  A, r  R
 va r 
Constraints of Independent DEP- ISO runway mode:

 T  T  t d  D, r  R
 dr d r 0
 
 Tar  Tdr  d  D, a  A, r  1 (12)
 var
  w
 Tar  Ta r  max( , ) a  A, r  1
 va r va r
Constraints of Independent DEP-Related APP runway mode:
 Tdr  Td r  t0 d  D, r  R

T 
 Tdr  d  D, a  A, r  R
 ar var

  w (13)
 Tar  Ta r  max( , ) a  A, r  R
 va r va r
 
 Tar  Ta r   a  A, r  R
 va r 
Formula (10) corresponds to the isolated operation mode, and the AA (arrival after arrival)
restriction and DD (departure after departure) restriction are considered. Formula (11) corresponds to
the related approach-isolated operation mode. The staggered runway separation, which depends on
parallel runways’ radar separation and wake turbulence separation, is added based on Formula (10).
Formula (12) corresponds to the independent departure-isolated operation mode, and DA (latest
departure clearance distance before flight arrival) restriction is considered. Formula (11) corresponds
to the related approach-independent departure operation mode, which needs to consider AA, DD, DA
restriction, and staggered runway separation at the same time.
In Formulas (10)~(13), Td and Ta refer to EOBT (Estimated Off Block Time, estimated time of the
aircraft taxing-out parking position) and EIBT (Estimated In Block Time, estimated time of the
aircraft taxing-in parking position), respectively. Tdw refers to delays of departure flight; Tr p is the
taxing time from apron p to runway entry of r; Tpr is the taxing time from runway exit of r to apron p;
t0 is DD separation of time;  is AA separation of distance; w is wake turbulence separation of
distance; Td r is departure flight except for Tdr ; Tar is arrival flight except for Tar ;  is the DA

4
STEP-2022 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2491 (2023) 012001 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2491/1/012001

separation of distance. var is the flight’s final approach speed on a certain runway;  is the staggered
runway separation of distance.

2.4. Objective function

The objective of the model is to minimize the cost by considering both the airport management
organization and the air carriers:
Min z   P  W (14)
 P    d Td  Td X dt   a Ta  Ta X at
 d D t T a A t T
 (15)
W   Tdw
 d D

In Formulas (14) and (15),  refers to the average cost factor of slot deviation for air carriers; P
indicates the overall slot deviation;  refers to the unit cost of delay for airport management
organization; W is the total amount of delays after optimization.

3. Computation experiments

3.1. Analysis of flight slot deviation

The maximum acceptable time deviation for each flight is 90 minutes. In order to present the time
deviation distribution in a more intuitive way, the cumulative probability of the absolute deviation of
the flight plan under each operation mode is introduced here. As shown in Figure 1, the left ordinate is
the proportion of flight adjustment sorties corresponding to the time deviation. The right ordinate is
the cumulative probability of flight adjustment sorties corresponding to the time deviation, and the
horizontal coordinate is the absolute flight deviation time.

Figure 1. Accumulative deviation distribution after optimized flight schedule

The smaller the absolute value of flight time deviation is, the less the air carrier's time deviation
loss is. Under the three operating modes, 80% of the time deviation in the isolated operating mode is
within 35min , 80% of the time deviation in the semi-mixed operating mode is within 35min , and
80% of the time deviation in the mixed operating mode is within 35min . All the flights in the three
modes can be allocated and meet the maximum time deviation constraint.

3.2. Simulation verification analysis

In this paper, we take Wuhan Tianhe International Airport as the experimental object. Three
experimental tasks are set for isolated, semi-mixed, and mixed, as shown in Table 1.

5
STEP-2022 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2491 (2023) 012001 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2491/1/012001

The constraints corresponding to the task of Isolated are in Formula (10). In this mode of operation,
the runway mode uses isolated mode throughout the day; runway 04L is used for departure, and
runway 04R is used for arrival. In the experimental task of Isolation, the flight flow was 764 flights,
382 departure flights and 382 arrival flights.
For the task of Semi-Mixed, the runway mode uses the independent departure-isolated operation
mode, which corresponds to Formula (12), from 0 to 12; 04L is used for departure, and 04R is used for
both departure and arrival. After that, runway mode shifts to the related approach-isolated operation
mode, which corresponds to Formula (11), from 12 to 24; 04R is used for departure, and 04L is used
for both departure and arrival. In the experimental task of Semi-Mixed, the flight flow, which is 830 in
total, consists of 415 flights taking off, and 415 flights arrival
For the task of Mixed, the runway mode uses the related approach-independent departure operation
mode, which corresponds to Formula (13), throughout the day; both 04 and 04R can be used for
departure and arrival. In the experimental task of Mixed, the flight flow is 898, the departure flight is
449, and the arrival flight is 449.
Table1. Experiment tasks of model verification
Runway Usage
Task Operation Time Runway Mode
04L 04R
Isolated 0000-2400 ISO DEP ARR
0000-1200 Independent DEP – ISO DEP DEP/ARR
Semi-Mixed
1200-2400 Related APP - ISO DEP/ARR ARR
Mixed 0000-2400 Independent DEP - Related APP DEP/ARR DPE/ARR
The flight flow in the experimental task is incremented according to the space-time distribution of
traffic flow at the flight time of a typical day [7]. For the parameter of the objective function, the
average cost factor of air carriers is determined to be 133.6 RMB per minute; the unit cost of delay is
determined to be 165.08 RMB per minute.
We use the operating rules and parameters of Wuhan Tianhe International Airport to solve the
model. Then, we input pre-optimized and post-optimized flight schedules into Airtop software to
compare differences in delay and flight flows. The distribution of delay and flow was drawn in Figure
2.

Figure 2. Average delay and flow distribution before and after isolation operation optimization

It can be seen from Figure 2 that in isolation operation mode, the hourly capacity limit is 48, there
appear four over-capacity periods before optimization, and the average hourly delay is 359 s
throughout the day. From 9 to 15 in a day, the average delay is large because the flow is greater than
the capacity. Because the optimized flow meets capacity limits, the average hourly delay is largely
reduced to 149 s throughout the day, decreasing delays by about 59%.

6
STEP-2022 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2491 (2023) 012001 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2491/1/012001

Figure 3. Average delay and flow distribution before and after semi-mixed operation optimization

It can be seen from Figure 3 that under the semi-mixed operation mode, the hourly capacity limit is
52, there are 5 over-capacity periods before optimization, and the average hourly delay throughout the
day is 474 s. From 13 to 19 in a day, the average delay is large because the flow exceeds the capacity
and the mode of runway shifts from independent departure-isolated operation mode to related
approach-isolated operation mode. After optimization, the flow reaches the capacity limit, and the
flight time is reassigned after the runway operation mode is shifted, so the average hourly delay is
reduced to 246 s, and the delay is reduced by about 48%.

Figure 4. Average delay and flow distribution before and after mixed operation optimization

Figure 4 shows that under the mixed operation mode, the hourly capacity limit is 55, and the
average hourly delay throughout the day is 448 s. After the optimization, the average hourly delay is
reduced to 213 s, which reduces the delay by about 52%.

4. Conclusion
Under different runway operation modes, after setting the flight time slot as the objective of the
research and matching the corresponding relationship between time and space of flights in the research
system, and considering the cost of airports and air carriers, a flight time optimization model
conforming to the runway operation constraints was established. Based on the flight data of Wuhan
Tianhe Airport, the following conclusions are obtained:

7
STEP-2022 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2491 (2023) 012001 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2491/1/012001

(1) The optimized schedule fully meets the operating restrictions of different runway operating
modes through the reallocation of flight time.
(2) It is verified by computer simulation software that the model can effectively reduce the flight
delay level to meet the needs of air carriers.

Acknowledgments
This work is supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (No.2021YFB1600500).

References
[1] Kam K.H. Ng, C.K.M. Lee, S.Z. Zhang, K.L. Keung. The impact of heterogeneous arrival and
departure rates of flights on runway configuration optimization[J], Transportation
Letters,2020:1-12.
[2] Nikolas P, Amedeo O. On the Impact of Scheduling Limits: A Case Study at Newark Liberty
International Airport[J], Transportation Science, 2016, 50[1]:150-165.
[3] Zografos K G, Androutsopoulos K N, Madas M A ． Minding the gap: Optimizing airport
schedule displacement and acceptability[J]. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and
Practice, 2018, 114: 203-221.
[4] Wang M, Hu M, Zhao Z. Research on Flight Schedule Optimization Based on Acceptable
Adjustment Level[J]. Journal of Wuhan University of Technology (Transportation Science &
Engineering), 2019, 43(4):671-675.
[5] Ke Y, Hu M, Yang L, Zhao Z. Strategic Flight Schedule Optimization Technology for Actual
Operation[J]. Science Technology and Engineering, 2021, 21(10):4260-4265．
[6] CAAC. CCAR-98TM[S]. Beijing, Civil Aviation Administration of China, 2004.
[7] CAAC. AP-93-TM-2017-01[S]. Beijing, Civil Aviation Administration of China, 2017.