Person:
Payan, Alexia P.

Permanent Link
https://hdl.handle.net/1853/71583
Associated Organization(s)
ORCID
ArchiveSpace Name Record

Filters

2020 2
2
2
2
Reset filters

Settings
Type: Text × Author: Mavris, Dimitri N. × Author: Justin, Cedric Y. ×

Publication Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Optimal Siting of Sub-Urban Air Mobility (sUAM) Ground Architectures using Network Flow Formulation
    (Georgia Institute of Technology, 2020-06) Venkatesh, Nikhil ; Payan, Alexia P. ; Justin, Cedric Y. ; Kee, Ethan C. ; Mavris, Dimitri N.
    Air Mobility (AM) operating models have steadily made their way into public conscience over the past decade due to increased research activity pioneered by large technology corporations such as Uber and Amazon. Estimates concur that there are around 250 startup businesses with 22 major players working on such technologies with over $25 billion dollars in venture capital funding in 2017[1]. Given the meteoric rise of Air Mobility as one of the leading 21st century disruptive technologies, research effort across the spectrum of functions that can make AM concepts a reality are burgeoning - ranging from vehicle design to operations planning. More specifically, research efforts within the operations planning space deal with service route identification, ground infrastructure (such as charging stations and ports) placement and others. To this effect, the present study seeks to evaluate the feasibility and tractability of a formalized optimization method towards the siting of "vertiports" - ground infrastructure that aids the embarkation and disembarkation of AM commuters - as applied to a Sub-Urban Air Mobility (sUAM) operating model. Mixed-Integer Programming (MIP) formulations offer qualified benefits over other heuristic methods and the authors are confident of their relative performance given the proven track record of such methods in solving generalized facility location problems (GFLP). In this study, two optimization problems were considered: capacitated vertiport siting, where any vertiport considered would need to adhere to capacity constraints; and uncapacitated vertiport siting, where any vertiport considered does not have any capacity limit and can service unlimited demand. Results indicate that a network flow formulation using an MIP methodology is able to adequately place vertiports for sUAM business operations to satisfy demand flows associated with home-work commute.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Power optimized battery swap and recharge strategies for electric aircraft operations
    (Georgia Institute of Technology, 2020-06) Justin, Cedric Y. ; Payan, Alexia P. ; Briceno, Simon I. ; German, Brian J. ; Mavris, Dimitri N.
    Electric propulsion for commuter air transportation is becoming promising because of significant strides in battery specific energy and motor specific power. Energy storage and rapid battery recharge remain nonetheless challenging owing to the significant energy and power requirements of even small aircraft. By modifying algorithms developed in the field of scheduling theory, we propose power optimized and power-investment optimized strategies for electric aircraft battery swaps and recharges. Several aspects are considered: electric energy expenditures, capital expenditures, and flight schedule integrity. The first strategy optimizes the swaps and recharges to minimize the peak-power draw from the grid and to reduce electric energy expenditures. The second strategy optimizes the swaps and recharges to minimize electricity expenditures and capital expenditures associated with battery and charger procurement. In both cases, the optimization is decomposed into two simpler problems. The first is a recharge schedule feasibility analysis given a number of chargers and batteries, which is based on a network flow representation of the battery swap and recharge. The second is a recharge schedule generation given a number of chargers and batteries. Both strategies are applied to the operations of two commuter airlines and are contrasted with a benchmark non-optimized power-as-needed strategy. Promising results are obtained with up to 61% reduction in peak-power draw and up to 25% reduction in electricity costs.