I have tried to point the operator back to the dispatcher but it just go in loop between processor.
What is the proper way to set proper processor work hand off from shift 1 to shift 2 and then shift 2 back to shift 1?
Passing the task sequences back to the dispatcher is a good approach. However, a task sequence that is passed back to the dispatcher will be added to the end of its task sequence queue. Currently all sequences have the same priority, so they get passed out in a 'Round Robin' fashion. Since the operators are moving at only 2ft/hour (which I find quite odd, are these values really correct?), they always never reach the processor in time to continue the task sequence.
If you instead pass the task sequence back in the down function of the time tables, you can at the same time increase its priority, so it will be dispatched ahead of other pending tasks that have not been started yet.
It might also be better to split of the breaks into a separate time table, so they do not cause the task sequence to be returned. In the attached model I removed the breaks from the shift time tables for now, to get a clearer view of how the logic operates.
12 People are following this question.
