Designing an Urban Air Mobility Corridor Network: A Multi-Objective Optimization Approach Using U-NSGA-III

The corridor network serves as an effective solution for the airspace structure safety design of UAM. However, current studies rarely account for the ground risk posed by the corridor operation and typically consider a single design objective with limited variables. In this paper, we address these g...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Zhiyuan Zhang, Yuan Zheng, Chenglong Li, Bo Jiang, Yichao Li
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2025-03-01
Series:Aerospace
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2226-4310/12/3/229
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The corridor network serves as an effective solution for the airspace structure safety design of UAM. However, current studies rarely account for the ground risk posed by the corridor operation and typically consider a single design objective with limited variables. In this paper, we address these gaps by considering three key factors: demand, safety, and implementation costs. The corridor network design is formulated as a multi-objective optimization problem. In practice, firstly, we define the travel time-saving rate, average population density, and total length of corridors as optimization objectives. Then, we propose a straightforward and efficient corridor network encoding scheme that supports a variable number of corridors, significantly enhancing the diversity and flexibility of corridor network designs. Finally, based on this encoding scheme, we solve the corridor network problem using the unified non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm III (U-NSGA-III). Based on a detailed analysis of the obtained Pareto front, a relatively optimal design scheme across three optimization objectives is determined. The case study conducted in Chengdu illustrates that the corridor network obtained by our method not only achieves a 37.8% reduction in ground risk and a 69.9% decrease in implementation costs, but also saves a comparable 4.7% in time relative to traditional methods.
ISSN:2226-4310