/
L12. L12.

L12. - PowerPoint Presentation

karlyn-bohler
karlyn-bohler . @karlyn-bohler
Follow
371 views
Uploaded On 2016-02-20

L12. - PPT Presentation

Network optimization problems D Moltchanov TUT Spring 2008 D Moltchanov TUT Spring 2014 Network dimensioning problems NDP network model The general uncapacitated NDP problem Minimize cost of ID: 224898

link ndp cost path ndp link path cost paths capacity demand links constraints flows problem flow capacitated routing bifurcated

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "L12." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

L12. Network optimization problems

D. Moltchanov, TUT, Spring 2008

D.

Moltchanov

, TUT, Spring 2014Slide2

Network dimensioning problemsSlide3

NDP: network model

The general uncapacitated NDP problemMinimize cost of routingGiven demand volumes, network topology and cost of routingHow much capacity we need over the links?

Example we consider

V

= 4 nodes

E

= 5 links

D = 3 bidirectional demandsLink rates ce are unknowns!Demands: hd=15, hd=20, hd=10Demands d: Pd paths, p = 1,2,…,Pdsets of path for demand dflow variablesSlide4

NDP: specifying paths and flows

Demand d = 1, first pathpath consists of two links 2 and 4the set of path for d=1one flow possible: Are there other paths?Sure, there

are

We just excluded them!

What is the reason for exclusions

Quite arbitrary, length, external requirements, anything…

In this

case: don’t want path longer than 1 hop for this demandGiven topology it is up to us to decide which paths to allow!Slide5

NDP: specifying paths and flows

Demand d = 2, two pathsset of paths for d = 2: flow variables:other paths are disallowed by us!Demand d = 3: two paths

set of paths for

d

= 3:

flow

variables:

other paths are disallowed by us!Slide6

NDP: example

Let the vectors of flows for demands bethe vector of all allocations isFlows of a demand must satisfy this demand, thus,these are demand constraintsIn our particular case we haveSlide7

NDP: example

Second set of constraintslinks are not exceeded by flowscalled capacity constraintsNote the followingLHS: link loads due to flows

We need to know relationship between links and paths

Can be formally specified by link-path

incidence coefficientsSlide8

NDP: example

Link-path incidence relation tableprovides indication which flows appears in LHSwhether path p of demand d uses link e

?

Example: d=1 path entries are set to 1

Example: d=3 path entries are set to 1Slide9

NDP: example

Why we introduced ?The link load on link e is given byNow the capacity constraints arewhich is a compact form of

we will also define a vector Slide10

NDP: example

We are interested in minimizing the capacity costwhere is cost of a capacity unit on link eThe whole problemMinimize

Subject to Slide11

NDP: example

Equivalent to this extended oneMinimizeSubject toDemand constraints: Capacity constraints:

Non-negativity constraints: Slide12

NDP: example

Compare with three nodes exampleMinimize (routing cost)subject to flow constraintsand link constraints difference

and positivity

constraintsSlide13

NDP: example

Compare with three nodes exampleThree nodes exampleDemands were givenLink capacities were givenWe minimized the total routing costThat is called “capacitated design

problem”

Current four nodes example

Demands are given

Link capacities are

unknown

Link unit costs are givenMinimizing capacity cost required to route demandsThis is called “uncapacitated design problem”Both problems are of linear programming (LP) type. Why?Slide14

NDP: solution

Note the followingWhen variables are continuous we have equalitiesWhat are the reasons?why should we pay for unused capacity?that is link load by flows should equal the capacity of this linkSlide15

NDP: solution

Consider a solutionJust an instance ofFirst: Then: viaThe link rate vectortotal costIs this optimal? No…

Path for

d

=2 carrying

Expensive as

Another path is with cost

Cost path is found in general usingSlide16

NDP: solution

What to do?Move all the flow from to That is, set Savings per unit: Overall savings:Other observationsFlow is optimal (only one path!)Flows are optimal

Why? paths are of the same cost:

Any split of is optimal!

Infinitely many optimal solutions: Slide17

NDP: short path allocation rule

Remember we had multiple paths?Demand d=1:Demand d=2:

Demand

d

=3:

1

1

1

2

3

Uncapacitated

NDP

only!Slide18

NDP: modification 1

Why not to add for d=1?Should be better for the cost!Recall costsModifications to constraints and objective functionDemand constraintsSlide19

NDP: modification 1

Capacity constraintsSlide20

NDP: modification 1

Objective function remains the sameSolution to this modified problemWe already havePaths have costsOur rule: allocate all to Can we? Why not? We are dealing with uncapacitated problem!

Savings: per unit overall

Optimal solution

w

ith Slide21

NDP: non-bifurcated flows

We may request non-bifurcated solutionSplitting of flows are not allowedOne flow for one demandAKA: unplittable or single path NDPFor our settingsAlready only one path allowed for d=1: For

d

=2: one out of two allowed

For

d

=3: one out of two allowed

May not be uniqueBifurcated solutionNon-bifurcated ones: Slide22

NDP: modular links

We assumed links of any rates! Is this realistic? No!Modular links needs to be used… e.g. T1/E1/STM-1 etc.Let’s assume 1 LCU = M DVUWhat are the implications?Allocation may not obey the shortest path allocation rule One can see it using huge values of MOptimal link capacity is not the same as optimal link loadSo far we used these terms interchangeablyOptimal link capacity optimal link load

Bifurcated solutions are “more optimal” in general

Splitting is good when

M

is moderate with respect to demands

For huge

M non-bifurcated solutions are often obviousNon-bifurcated with modular links is a complex problem!Slide23

NDP: modular links

Let M = 35, 1 LCU = 35 DVU Recall One module at e = 1One more at e = 5Non-modular Modular

1

1

1

2

3

35

35Slide24

NDP: capacitated problem

Uncapacitated design problemWe are given a network, demands, paths, link costsLink rates are what we need to findSuch that the cost is minimizedCapacitated design problemWe are given a network, demands, pathsLink rates are given (links are installed already)Flow allocation is what we need to findSuch that routing cost are minimized

Important difference between these two

No link costs in capacitated problem

Cost of using a link could be given (called

routing cost

)

As a special case: cost of routing for all links may have cost 1Slide25

NDP: capacitated problem

Given demand constraintsAnd capacity constraints

Minimize

w

here is the cost of routing over link

eSlide26

NDP: capacitated problem

Letting in our exampleCapacities routing costsAnd allowing one more path for d=1, There is bifurcated solutionwith paths

No non-bifurcated solutions…

This is often the case

30

5

10

5

10Slide27

NDP: capacitated vs. uncapacitated

Uncapacitatedminimize subject toCapacitatedminimize subject to

Solution: LP solvers, e.g.

Mathlab

, CPLEX, Maple, etc.

Related Contents


Next Show more