Method of planning train movement using a three step optimization engine

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 7680750
  • Patent Number
    7,680,750
  • Date Filed
    Thursday, June 29, 2006
    18 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, March 16, 2010
    14 years ago
Abstract
A method of scheduling network resources in a first domain by transforming the problem to a second domain, solving the problem and transforming back to the first domain.
Description
RELATED APPLICATIONS

The present application is related to the commonly owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/415,273 entitled “Method of Planning Train Movement Using A Front End Cost Function”, Filed May 2, 2006, which is hereby incorporated herein by reference.


BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to the scheduling of movement of plural units through a complex movement defining system, and in the embodiment disclosed, to the scheduling of the movement of freight trains over a railroad system using a three step optimization engine.


Systems and methods for scheduling the movement of trains over a rail network have been described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,154,735, 5,794,172, and 5,623,413, the disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by reference.


As disclosed in the referenced patents and applications, the complete disclosure of which is hereby incorporated herein by reference, railroads consist of three primary components (1) a rail infrastructure, including track, switches, a communications system and a control system; (2) rolling stock, including locomotives and cars; and, (3) personnel (or crew) that operate and maintain the railway. Generally, each of these components are employed by the use of a high level schedule which assigns people, locomotives, and cars to the various sections of track and allows them to move over that track in a manner that avoids collisions and permits the railway system to deliver goods to various destinations.


As disclosed in the referenced patents and applications, a precision control system includes the use of an optimizing scheduler that will schedule all aspects of the rail system, taking into account the laws of physics, the policies of the railroad, the work rules of the personnel, the actual contractual terms of the contracts to the various customers and any boundary conditions or constraints which govern the possible solution or schedule such as passenger traffic, hours of operation of some of the facilities, track maintenance, work rules, etc. The combination of boundary conditions together with a figure of merit for each activity will result in a schedule which maximizes some figure of merit such as overall system cost.


As disclosed in the referenced patents and applications, and upon determining a schedule, a movement plan may be created using the very fine grain structure necessary to actually control the movement of the train. Such fine grain structure may include assignment of personnel by name, as well as the assignment of specific locomotives by number, and may include the determination of the precise time or distance over time for the movement of the trains across the rail network and all the details of train handling, power levels, curves, grades, track topography, wind and weather conditions. This movement plan may be used to guide the manual dispatching of trains and controlling of track forces, or may be provided to the locomotives so that it can be implemented by the engineer or automatically by switchable actuation on the locomotive.


The planning system is hierarchical in nature in which the problem is abstracted to a relatively high level for the initial optimization process, and then the resulting course solution is mapped to a less abstract lower level for further optimization. Statistical processing is used at all levels to minimize the total computational load, making the overall process computationally feasible to implement. An expert system is used as a manager over these processes, and the expert system is also the tool by which various boundary conditions and constraints for the solution set are established. The use of an expert system in this capacity permits the user to supply the rules to be placed in the solution process.


Currently, railroad operations are scheduled to meet various optimization criteria. Optimization of network resources is, in general an NP-complete problem. In most problems of meaningful size and dimension, such as scheduling the movement of trains over a rail network, this means that an exhaustive solution to ensure achievement of optimality is beyond present and near-term realizable computational capabilities.


The current disclosure provides a near optimal scheduling of resources by finding a transform of the problem to a domain that allows the original scheduling problem to be viewed in such a way that the most important variables are first identified, and a solution is found based on these identified variables. The solution thus produced is transformed back into the original problem domain. This method allows the near optimal solution to be generated using realizable computational capabilities.


These and many other objects and advantages of the present invention will be readily apparent to one skilled in the art to which the invention pertains from a perusal of the claims, the appended drawings, and the following detailed description of the embodiments.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS


FIG. 1 is a simplified pictorial representation of one embodiment of the present disclosure.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION

A “consist” is a one or more power units combined with a set of cars.



FIG. 1 illustrates consists 1001 through 100N positioned to enter the rail network 110. Factors of influence 130 represent the constraints associated with the planned movement of the consists 1 through N over the rail network. The factors of influence may include weather conditions, crew information, rail traffic information and rail track information. Each consist has an associated launch time TL1 through TLN. Virtual consists 1201 through 120N represent the actual consist having been routed through the network 110 in a near optimal manner taking into account the factors of influence 130. Each virtual consist 1201 through 120N has an associated arrival or meet time TM1 through TMN.


In one embodiment, solving for the near optimal solution of the network resources problem may be accomplished by first transforming the problem to another domain by use of a suitable transform. For example, a database may be created through modeling or collecting statistics from observing and measuring the performance of many time based scenarios as illustrated in FIG. 1. The information from the database may be used to perform a sensitivity analysis of a posited suboptimal solution. The results of this analysis may be used to Pareto the variables or dimensions of the transform space to identify the most important variables, or the variables having the greatest impact on the solution. A solution within that space can then be determined and then transformed back into the original time-based space.


For example, with respect to planning the movement of trains, the solution may be considered in the time space domain. However, because of the complexity of the problem it may be desirable to transform the problem into another domain, such as the cost domain. An analysis of the historical costs associated with the movement of trains through the network can be used to identify the relative costs associated with the planning of the network resources in the cost domain. A near-optimal solution that satisfies the most important variables in the cost domain may then be determined. The solution may then be transformed back to the time-space domain to provide a near-optimal solution. The cost domain is but one example of a suitable domain. Any other domain have a variable which can be evaluated can be used.


In one embodiment, the rail network 110 may be cast as a large binary matrix whose entries represent decisions at spatial points at specific times, e.g., switches, for sequencing a multi-quantity flow through the rail network. Solving for switch positions (binary) and decision times in order to affect a near optimal solution is achievable in many ways. For example, the states may first be considered to be continuous variables and not binary. Using continuous variables may allow for a more optimal solution. However, even though the solution will be facilitated through the use of continuous variables, the solution will in general not be admissible until the continuous variables of the solution are quantized to binary values. Methods for solution of the continuous variable case and its reduction to binary values may be gained through linear algebra techniques followed by a neural network, or hill climbing routines such as simulated annealing, or by representing the sequency decisions in a Fourier or a wavelet framework.


In one embodiment, it may be desirable to transform the problem to several different domains and pick the domain that presents the easiest problem to resolve. For example, in a second domain it may be determined that five variables are relatively important to the solution, while in a third domain, only two variables are relatively important to the solution. Solving the problem in the third domain would be desirable over the second domain because it should be easier to solve a problem having fewer variables of importance.


In another embodiment, a near optimal solution may be approached by the simultaneous propagation of the actual consists and the virtual consists into the network. For example, actual consists are move forward into the network at respective launch times and virtual consists are moved backwards into the network beginning at respective arrival times. In this embodiment, a divide and conquer approach is used to guide the near optimal solution by the objective of having the actual consists meet their respective virtual consists. Although the consists are being shifted in the time-space domain, at any point in which a scheduling problem is encountered, the problem can be transformed to another domain, an optimal solution determined, and then transformed back to the time space domain for a near optimal solution.


The steps of identifying the most important variable and practicing the embodiments of the near optimal solution for planning the movement of the trains can be implemented using computer usable medium having a computer readable code executed by special purpose or general purpose computers.


Identifying the most important variable by measuring and evaluating the historical performance can include resources on the line-of road tracks, in the rail yard, or resources located on industry lead tracks extending from a rail yard to an industry customer premise. Thus the traditional notion of only scheduling mainline resources can be extended by the current embodiment to include scheduling go resources to the end customer pick-up/drop-off point via the railroad.


While embodiments of the present invention have been described, it is understood that the embodiments described are illustrative only and the scope of the invention is to be defined solely by the appended claims when accorded a full range of equivalence, many variations and modifications naturally occurring to those of skill in the art from a perusal hereof.

Claims
  • 1. A method of scheduling the use of a plurality of resources in a rail network in a first-time space domain having predetermined constraints, comprising: (a) transforming the network resources scheduling problem to a second domain by relaxing some of the predetermined constraints;(b) measuring the historical performance of the scheduled network resources;(c) performing a sensitivity analysis of the measured historical performance to identify the relative importance of a variable affecting the performance; and(d) solving the scheduling problem as a function of the identified relative importance; and(e) transforming the solved transformed network resources scheduling problem back to the first time-space domain.
  • 2. The method of scheduling of claim 1, wherein the second domain is one of a cost domain and a time domain.
  • 3. A method of scheduling the use of a plurality of resources in a rail network in a first domain having a set of predetermined constraints, comprising: (a) transforming the network resources scheduling problem to a plurality of domains by relaxing the set of predetermined constraints;(b) for each of the plurality of domains: (i) measuring the historical performance of the scheduled network resources;(ii) performing a sensitivity analysis of the measured historical performance to determine the relative importance of a variable affecting the performance;(iii) identifying the most important variables using a predetermined criteria;(c) selecting the domain having the fewest number of identified important variables;(d) solving the transformed network resources problem in the selected domain; and(e) transforming the solved transformed network resources scheduling problem back to the first domain.
  • 4. The method of claim 3 wherein the step of measuring the historical performance of network resources includes resources located within a rail yard.
  • 5. The method of claim 3 wherein the step of measuring the historical performance of network resources include resources located on industry lead tracks extending form a rail yard to an industry customer premise.
  • 6. A system for scheduling the use of a plurality of resources in a rail network in a first time-space domain having a predetermined set of constraints, comprising: a database containing measurements of a historical performance of scheduled network resources;a processor programmed to:(i) transform the network resources scheduling problem to a second domain by relaxing the predetermined set of constraints;(ii) access the database to perform a sensitivity analysis of the measured historical performance to identify the relative importance of a variable affecting the performance;(iii) solve the scheduling problem as a function of the identified relative importance;(iv) transform the solved transformed network resources scheduling problem back to the first time-space domain.
  • 7. The system of claim 6, wherein the second domain is one of a cost domain and a time domain.
US Referenced Citations (76)
Number Name Date Kind
3575594 Elcan Apr 1971 A
3734433 Metzner May 1973 A
3794834 Auer, Jr. et al. Feb 1974 A
3839964 Gayot Oct 1974 A
3895584 Paddison Jul 1975 A
3944986 Staples Mar 1976 A
4099707 Anderson Jul 1978 A
4122523 Morse et al. Oct 1978 A
4361300 Rush Nov 1982 A
4361301 Rush Nov 1982 A
4610206 Kubala et al. Sep 1986 A
4669047 Chucta May 1987 A
4791871 Mowll Dec 1988 A
4843575 Crane Jun 1989 A
4883245 Erickson, Jr. Nov 1989 A
4926343 Tsuruta et al. May 1990 A
4937743 Rassman et al. Jun 1990 A
5038290 Minami Aug 1991 A
5063506 Brockwell et al. Nov 1991 A
5177684 Harker et al. Jan 1993 A
5222192 Shafer Jun 1993 A
5229948 Wei et al. Jul 1993 A
5237497 Sitarski Aug 1993 A
5265006 Asthana et al. Nov 1993 A
5289563 Nomoto et al. Feb 1994 A
5311438 Sellers et al. May 1994 A
5331545 Yajima et al. Jul 1994 A
5332180 Peterson et al. Jul 1994 A
5335180 Takahashi et al. Aug 1994 A
5365516 Jandrell Nov 1994 A
5390880 Fukawa et al. Feb 1995 A
5420883 Swensen et al. May 1995 A
5437422 Newman Aug 1995 A
5463552 Wilson et al. Oct 1995 A
5467268 Sisley et al. Nov 1995 A
5487516 Murata et al. Jan 1996 A
5541848 McCormack et al. Jul 1996 A
5623413 Matheson et al. Apr 1997 A
5745735 Cohn et al. Apr 1998 A
5794172 Matheson et al. Aug 1998 A
5823481 Gottschlich Oct 1998 A
5825660 Cagan et al. Oct 1998 A
5828979 Polivka et al. Oct 1998 A
5850617 Libby Dec 1998 A
6032905 Haynie Mar 2000 A
6115700 Ferkinhoff et al. Sep 2000 A
6125311 Lo Sep 2000 A
6144901 Nickles et al. Nov 2000 A
6154735 Crone Nov 2000 A
6250590 Hofestadt et al. Jun 2001 B1
6351697 Baker Feb 2002 B1
6377877 Doner Apr 2002 B1
6393362 Burns May 2002 B1
6405186 Fabre et al. Jun 2002 B1
6459965 Polivka et al. Oct 2002 B1
6587764 Nickles et al. Jul 2003 B2
6637703 Matheson et al. Oct 2003 B2
6654682 Kane et al. Nov 2003 B2
6766228 Chirescu Jul 2004 B2
6789005 Hawthorne Sep 2004 B2
6799097 Villarreal Antelo Sep 2004 B2
6799100 Burns Sep 2004 B2
6853889 Cole Feb 2005 B2
6856865 Hawthorne Feb 2005 B2
7006796 Hofmann et al. Feb 2006 B1
7159219 Chen et al. Jan 2007 B2
20030105561 Nickles et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030183729 Root et al. Oct 2003 A1
20040010432 Matheson et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040034556 Matheson et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040093196 Hawthorne et al. May 2004 A1
20040093245 Matheson et al. May 2004 A1
20040267415 Lacote et al. Dec 2004 A1
20050107890 Minkowitz et al. May 2005 A1
20050192720 Christie et al. Sep 2005 A1
20060074544 Morariu et al. Apr 2006 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (15)
Number Date Country
2057039 Dec 1990 CA
2066739 Feb 1992 CA
2046984 Jun 1992 CA
2112302 Jun 1994 CA
2158355 Oct 1994 CA
0108363 May 1984 EP
0193207 Sep 1986 EP
0341826 Nov 1989 EP
0554983 Aug 1993 EP
2692542 Dec 1993 FR
1321053 Jun 1973 GB
1321054 Jun 1973 GB
3213459 Sep 1991 JP
WO 9003622 Apr 1990 WO
WO 9315946 Aug 1991 WO
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20080005050 A1 Jan 2008 US