110 likes | 246 Views
Modular link dimensioning and cost in two-layer network. Jian Li EL736 Final Project Polytechnic University. Overview. Modular links Formulations A simulated two-layer network with different link modules. Find the minimize cost Result data and comparison Conclusion. Linear link model.
E N D
Modular link dimensioning and cost in two-layer network Jian Li EL736 Final Project Polytechnic University
Overview • Modular links • Formulations • A simulated two-layer network with different link modules. • Find the minimize cost • Result data and comparison • Conclusion
Linear link model • Various types of flow variables – continuous, binary, and integral • Link capacity equal to link load – minimal capacity • The cost of the link – the link capacity times an unit cost efficient ξe•ye
Modular links • A common feature in communication network. • North-American pulse-code modulation (PCM) system – modularity of M=24 voice circuits • European PCM system – modularity of M=30 trunks • VC-4 SDH network – modularity of 63 PCM primary groups
Formulation • Links with universal modular size • Links with multiple modular sizes • Links with incremental modules
Two-layer dimensioning with modular links • constants • hd volume of demand d, in demand volume units, DVUs • δedp = 1 if link e of upper layer belongs to path p realizing demand d; 0, otherwise M size of the link capacity module in upper layer • ξe cost of one DVU of link e of upper layer • γgeq = 1 if link g of lower layer belongs to path q realizing link e of upper layer; 0, otherwise • N size of link capacity module in lower layer • κg cost of one DVUs of link g of lower layer • variables • xdp (non-negative continuous) flow allocated to path p realizing volume of demand d • ye (non-negative integral) M-module capacity of upper layer link e • zeq (non-negative integral) flow allocated to path q realizing capacity of link e • ug (non-negative integral) N-module capacity of lower layer link g
Cont. • objective • minimize F = ∑e ξe M ye + ∑g κg N ug • constraints • ∑p xdp = hd, d= 1, 2, . . . ,D • ∑d∑p δedp xdp ≤ M ye, e= 1, 2, . . . ,E • ∑q zeq = ye, e= 1, 2, . . . ,E • M ∑e ∑q γgeq zeq ≤ N ug, g= 1, 2, . . . ,G.
Conclusion • Increases of modular size in either upper or lower layer lead the cost solutions further away from optimal • Get worse when the link capacity module, M is much larger than the flow unit