UGDIE PROJECT MEETING Athens September WP6 – Assessment and Evaluation  Evaluation Results  Deliverable D 13 (first release issued and delivered on 17/09/04)

UGDIE PROJECT MEETING Athens September WP6 – Evaluation Results (D13) The Deliverable has been structured as a self standing document The final release (to be issued within 30/09/04) shall include updated information derived from Deliverable D11.2 Verification Report: Test sites description Verification assessment Users feedback

UGDIE PROJECT MEETING Athens September WP6 – Evaluation Results (D13) Part I – general overview of project objectives and assessment approach:  Introduction (origin, objectives and approach of the F-MAN research project)  Users needs and functional requirements specification (how we achieved the requirements specification)  Description of application (summary description of F-MAN architecture, tools and prototype)  Verification and validation approach (summary description of verification sites and related activities)  Phases of development (actual vs. planned timing of project activities)  Assessment objectives (what validation activities focused on)  Validation methods and groups involved in validation  Categories of assessment (functional verification, performance evaluation, potential impacts, users acceptance)  Links among assessment objectives and validation methods (which validation method is relevant to each assessment objective)

UGDIE PROJECT MEETING Athens September WP6 – Evaluation Results (D13) Part II – Results reporting:  Functional Verification:  Functional requirements fulfilment assessment (summary from D11.2 checklists)  Functional tests (summary from D11.2)  Field tests (test sites description and conclusions from D11.2)  Performance Evaluation  Simulation Objectives and limits  Simulator specification  Simulator Implementation  Simulation Scenarios  Simulation Results  Costs-benefits considerations (impacts on daily wagon productivity)  Feedback from Users inside and outside the Consortium

UGDIE PROJECT MEETING Athens September D13 – Performance evaluation  Compared models: Traditional vs. F-MAN Pool management approach  Simulated scenarios  National / Balanced / International traffic composition  Heavy / Relaxed orders frequency  Undersized / Sufficient / Oversized fleet  Performance indicators  Fleet productivity computed on a time basis  Fleet productivity computed on a mileage basis  Percentage of satisfied wagon requests  Percentage of satisfied orders  Wagons cycle time  Daily wagon productivity

UGDIE PROJECT MEETING Athens September D13 – Performance evaluation Some conclusions Example: Heavy traffic, undersized fleet:  F-MAN enhances the exploitation of the fleet, as the loaded mileage (payload) is increased of about 37% in the worst case  F-MAN improves the productivity of the fleet, as the increase of loaded mileage is achieved with a striking reduction of empty mileage with respect to the Traditional management  F-MAN reduces by more than 25% the mean time between successive missions of wagons  Benefits of the F-MAN Pool management approach are remarkable also in scenarios characterised by a majority of domestic traffic (National)  Percentage increase of the daily wagon productivity may range from approximately 40 % up to 80% and more

UGDIE PROJECT MEETING Athens September D13 – Performance evaluation Some conclusions ETA accuracy impact:  Heavy traffic - sufficient fleet: When the accuracy of ETA decreases (simulated through an increase of T wu ), the performances decrease as well, since the number of rejected orders and undelivered wagons increase, while the loaded mileage decreases.  Relaxed traffic – oversized fleet: The decrease of ETA accuracy determines an increase of empty mileage, which is anyway negligible if compared with the loaded mileage, and then also as far as its effects on fleet productivity are concerned.

UGDIE PROJECT MEETING Athens September D13 – Feedback from users inside and outside the consortium