question

Kadircan T avatar image
0 Likes"
Kadircan T asked Kadircan T commented

Doing a Job in Certain Periods

go_to_bag_process.fsmHi,

I want to perform the Go to Bag operation in the image I shared, on an operator basis, every 5 cycles, I do not want the operator to perform the Go to Bag operation every cycle. How can I make this change?

go-to-bag.pngThank you.

FlexSim 22.2.2
decidebatching
go-to-bag.png (373.1 KiB)
go-to-bag-process.fsm (127.1 KiB)
5 |100000

Up to 12 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 23.8 MiB each and 47.7 MiB total.

1 Answer

Felix Möhlmann avatar image
0 Likes"
Felix Möhlmann answered Kadircan T commented

I would suggest to define a "counter" label on the operator. This gets incremented a token runs through the subflow. If it reaches 5, the token is send to the "Empty Bag" travel activity and the label is reset to 0.

1675844350589.pnggo-to-bag-process_1.fsm

Currently that subflow is executed once for each item in the queue. Is this correct?


· 9
5 |100000

Up to 12 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 23.8 MiB each and 47.7 MiB total.

Kadircan T avatar image Kadircan T commented ·

Hello, thank you very much for your support. But as you can see in the image I shared, the tokens are split into two different processes and this causes the operator to loop in the 3D model. In the sub-flow, 1 token is divided into many tokens, representing each of the packages in any chute. Therefore, all of the split tokens have to move together.error.png

0 Likes 0 ·
error.png (584.3 KiB)
Felix Möhlmann avatar image Felix Möhlmann Kadircan T commented ·

That is what my question was aimed at. Running through all activites once per item seems like a bad way to model this. Since moving the batch from the queue to the conveyor is a single process, it would be better to coordinate it through a single token.

Only the loading and unloading should be done in a subflow.

1675848699795.png

Furthermore:

- Why do the queues have tens of copies of the same state profile attached to them?

1675848771903.png

- Why do the operators have non-existant tokens as subnodes?

1675848847766.png

0 Likes 0 ·
1675848699795.png (54.9 KiB)
1675848771903.png (57.3 KiB)
1675848847766.png (31.6 KiB)
Kadircan T avatar image Kadircan T Felix Möhlmann commented ·

Thank you very much for your help, you have helped me a lot!

The reason why there are so many state profiles could be because of this code that I used to create these profiles automatically for each chute, it could be that I run the model multiple times and it keeps duplicating them.

0 Likes 0 ·
Show more comments
Kadircan T avatar image Kadircan T commented ·

Hello, in the first subflow process, you pulled the packets that fell into the chute from the list, but I need to use these packets again for the 2nd subflow process. For this I put push to list event in the first subflow but it didn't work. At the same time, the operator should not start carrying packets falling into other chutes before finishing with packets in one chute. How can I solve this problem?second-subflow.png

0 Likes 0 ·
second-subflow.png (651.5 KiB)
Felix Möhlmann avatar image Felix Möhlmann Kadircan T commented ·

You don't need the list for the unloading. At that point the items are loaded by the operator and can thus be accessed as its subnodes.

1675962101972.png

The operator shouldn't mix tasks, since the process flow keeps it acquired until the first task is done. If it does I would need to look at the model to see what might be going wrong.

0 Likes 0 ·
1675962101972.png (24.1 KiB)
Kadircan T avatar image Kadircan T Felix Möhlmann commented ·

flexsim_model.fsm.zipHi, I shared the model with you now. What I want to do in the last stage of the flow is that the operator drops all the boxes he carries on the conveyor at once and completes the flow and takes care of the other chutes. But now when it passes to the 2nd subflow event, the value of the labels named item is the same and they are all named as the 23rd box.labels.png

0 Likes 0 ·
labels.png (88.8 KiB)
Show more comments