| Literature DB >> 35271192 |
Xudong Deng1, Mingke Guan1, Yunfeng Ma1, Xijie Yang1, Ting Xiang1.
Abstract
Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) are increasingly used in instant delivery scenarios. The combined delivery of vehicles and UAVs has many advantages compared to their respective separate delivery, which can greatly improve delivery efficiency. Although a few studies in the literature have explored the issue of vehicle-assisted UAV delivery, we did not find any studies on the scenario of an UAV serving several customers. This study aims to design a new vehicle-assisted UAV delivery solution that allows UAVs to serve multiple customers in a single take-off and takes energy consumption into account. A multi-UAV task allocation model and a vehicle path planning model were established to determine the task allocation of the UAVs as well as the path of UAVs and the vehicle, respectively. The model also considered the impact of changing the payload of the UAV on energy consumption, bringing the results closer to reality. Finally, a hybrid heuristic algorithm based on an improved K-means algorithm and ant colony optimization (ACO) was proposed to solve the problem, and the effectiveness of the scheme was proven by multi-scale experimental instances and comparative experiments.Entities:
Keywords: instant delivery; unmanned aerial vehicle; vehicle routing problem
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35271192 PMCID: PMC8914695 DOI: 10.3390/s22052045
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Description of vehicle-assisted UAV delivery.
Model notations.
| Notation Type | Notation Description | |
|---|---|---|
| Sets |
| The set of all customer points, where 0 is the starting point of the UAVs |
|
| The set of all UAVs | |
|
| The set of vehicle stopping points | |
|
| The set of vehicle stopping points and a distribution center | |
|
| The set of service routes for each take-off of the UAVs | |
| Parameters |
| The distribution center |
|
| The service time of a single customer | |
|
| The maximum load of vehicle | |
|
| The average speed of vehicle | |
|
| The maximum payload of the UAV | |
|
| The weight of the UAV | |
|
| The maximum flying power of UAV | |
|
| The total energy of the UAV | |
|
| The maximum flight radius of UAV under full load | |
|
| The UAV flying speed at maximum power | |
|
| The weight of the package that should be delivered to customer | |
|
| The payload when the UAV leaves the customer (or stopping point) | |
|
| The energy consumed of the UAV leaves customer (or stopping point) | |
|
| The distance of the UAV leaving customer (or stopping point) | |
|
| The flight time of the UAV leaves customer (or stopping point) | |
|
| The flight speed of the UAV leaves customer (or stopping point) | |
|
| The distance between the vehicle stopping point | |
|
| The total service time of UAV | |
|
| The waiting time of the vehicle at the stopping point | |
|
| The waiting time of vehicle at all stopping points | |
|
| The vehicle running time | |
|
| The total time to serve all customers | |
| Decision variables | Binary | |
| Binary | ||
| Binary |
Figure 2Energy-consumption process of an UAV carrying three packages for delivery.
Figure 3Process for solving vehicle-assisted UAV delivery problems.
Figure 4Improved -means process.
Figure 5Improved ACO process.
Simulation parameters and values.
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| UAV weight | |
| UAV maximum load | |
| UAV operating speed | |
| UAV maximum flight power | |
| Lift ratio | |
| Conversion efficiency of the engine | |
| The total energy of the UAV | |
| The energy loss of the UAV battery | |
| The service time of a single customer | |
| The average speed of vehicle |
Figure 6Illustration of the example of C1.
Simulation results of the example.
| Example | Size | Initial | Initial Result | Optimized | Optimized Result |
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
| C1 | 250 | 4 | 5.6458 | 1.1921 | 6.8379 | 5 | 5.5284 | 1.2324 | 6.7608 | 1.13% | 20.5089 | 203.35% |
| C2 | 234 | 4 | 5.596 | 1.1543 | 6.7503 | 6 | 5.427 | 1.2708 | 6.6978 | 0.78% | 17.234 | 157.31% |
| C3 | 218 | 3 | 4.41277 | 0.94203 | 5.3548 | 4 | 4.0158 | 1.1846 | 5.2004 | 2.88% | 14.8541 | 185.63% |
| C4 | 202 | 5 | 3.6042 | 1.1446 | 4.7488 | 5 | 3.6042 | 1.1446 | 4.7488 | 0% | 13.7586 | 189.73% |
| C5 | 186 | 4 | 3.6349 | 1.1378 | 4.7727 | 4 | 3.6349 | 1.1378 | 4.7727 | 0% | 13.0729 | 173.91% |
| C6 | 170 | 4 | 3.6242 | 1.1828 | 4.807 | 5 | 3.4944 | 1.2881 | 4.7825 | 0.51% | 12.7721 | 167.06% |
| C7 | 154 | 4 | 3.1998 | 1.1007 | 4.3005 | 4 | 3.1998 | 1.1007 | 4.3005 | 0% | 11.552 | 168.62% |
| C8 | 138 | 3 | 2.84078 | 0.92892 | 3.7697 | 4 | 2.7467 | 1.0072 | 3.7539 | 0.42% | 10.3038 | 174.48% |
| C9 | 122 | 5 | 3.6877 | 1.1703 | 4.858 | 6 | 3.3046 | 1.4208 | 4.7254 | 2.73% | 9.0531 | 91.58% |
| C10 | 106 | 5 | 2.6696 | 1.193 | 3.8626 | 5 | 2.6696 | 1.193 | 3.8626 | 0% | 7.7213 | 99.90% |
| C11 | 90 | 3 | 2.0828 | 1.245 | 3.3278 | 3 | 2.0828 | 1.245 | 3.3278 | 0% | 6.7366 | 102.43% |
| C12 | 74 | 4 | 1.9551 | 1.2605 | 3.2156 | 4 | 1.9551 | 1.2605 | 3.2156 | 0% | 5.64 | 75.39% |
| C13 | 58 | 3 | 1.6376 | 1.0418 | 2.6794 | 3 | 1.6376 | 1.0418 | 2.6794 | 0% | 4.1955 | 56.58% |
| C14 | 42 | 4 | 1.9124 | 1.1892 | 3.1016 | 4 | 1.9124 | 1.1892 | 3.1016 | 0% | 3.6304 | 17.05% |
| C15 | 20 | 2 | 1.4005 | 0.8231 | 2.2236 | 2 | 1.4005 | 0.8231 | 2.2236 | 0% | 2.9905 | 34.49% |
The optimization ratio the efficiency improvement rate .
Figure 7Efficiency of the algorithm.