Can I maintain coordinated TE movement through sideways travel?

Question

question

Michael O'Connell asked Jul 20 2016 at 6:55 PM Sam Stubbs edited Jul 21 2016 at 3:27 PM

Can I maintain coordinated TE movement through sideways travel?

I have an AGV system that will need multiple AGVs to move a single tool. That movement will be both inline and sideways/crabbing.

I have used coordinated task sequence in flow logic of the queue in the attached model and the 2 AGVs pickup item as expected. However, as they travel to the combiner, they need to travel sideways. When they do, the AGVs travel sideways on the path separately.

How can I have them coordinate their sideways moves? Should I move the second AGV into the first? Ideas?

Thanks.

multiple-agvs-generic.fsm

Software Version:

FlexSim 16.1.0

agv coordinated movement

multiple-agvs-generic.fsm (2.3 MiB)

______

Cookie preferences

Your privacy is important to us and so is an optimal experience. To help us customize information and build applications, we collect data about your use of this site.

May we collect and use your data?

Learn more about the Third Party Services we use and our Privacy Statement.

Strictly necessary – required for our site to work and to provide services to you

These cookies allow us to record your preferences or login information, respond to your requests or fulfill items in your shopping cart.

YES

Improve your experience – allows us to show you what is relevant to you

These cookies enable us to provide enhanced functionality and personalization. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose services we use to deliver information and experiences tailored to you. If you do not allow these cookies, some or all of these services may not be available for you.

YES

NO

Customize your advertising – permits us to offer targeted advertising to you

These cookies collect data about you based on your activities and interests in order to show you relevant ads and to track effectiveness. By collecting this data, the ads you see will be more tailored to your interests. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.

YES

NO

Are you sure you want a less customized experience?

We can access your data only if you select "yes" for the categories on the previous screen. This lets us tailor our marketing so that it's more relevant for you. You can change your settings at any time by visiting our privacy statement

Your experience. Your choice.

We care about your privacy. The data we collect helps us understand how you use our products, what information you might be interested in, and what we can improve to make your engagement with Autodesk more rewarding.

May we collect and use your data to tailor your experience?

Explore the benefits of a customized experience by managing your privacy settings for this site or visit our Privacy Statement to learn more about your options.

Answer 1 · 2016-07-20T19:24:15Z

Sam Stubbs answered Jul 20 2016 at 7:24 PM Sam Stubbs edited Jul 21 2016 at 3:27 PM

If the two task executers are always going to be moving in unison together, then yes, visually it might be simpler to just place the one task executer inside of the first and have them move and be treated as one object.

taskexecuter.gif (659.5 KiB)

· 3

Joerg Vogel commented · Jul 21 2016 at 4:33 AM

What Sam did is an operation in the coordinated tasksequence - moving objects into one another. It becomes a bit tricky to split them again at a single network node because they will be placed at the same point and not in a line. Maybe it is an activity of several tasks to achieve this when the leading taskexecuter travels over a network node and he loose the joint taskexecuters then. The problem is that Flexsim is time based and not location based. You have to compute distances into events of time. When everything works well in processes that approach is fine. But if a breakdown event occurs then the method of splitting up has to cope with this breakdown situation, too. That is the tricky part.

1 ·

Michael O'Connell commented · Jul 20 2016 at 7:43 PM

They will only be moving in unison when picking up a tool that requires multiple agvs. Some tools need 2 agvs, others 1, and still others 3.

Can I create the kind of movement you're showing only after all arrive for tool pickup and then disassociate after tool unload? So, maybe, coordinated task sequence to get the number required; then moving one into the other; then travel and unload; and then move the one back out?

0 ·

Sam Stubbs ♦ Michael O'Connell commented · Jul 21 2016 at 3:26 PM

Okay, so I've created an example model doing what I think you're talking about. I actually ended up using Process Flow combined with a little bit of custom code. Essentially the Process Flow Gives you a little more direct control over the Task Executers so that you can isolate their specific tasks more simply I feel.

It acquires the Task Executers as a resource (I combined the two task exectuers into a group called "AGVs" and connected that to a resource within the process flow.) Then I made the model produce two types of items to illustrate what you described: where Item Type 1 (red) only requires one AGV, and Item Type 2 (green) requires both AGVs.

The Process Flow will create an item and then decide based on its Item Type whether it will acquire 1 or both AGVs. When both are required. I have them both go to the pick up location, then I place the second AGV within the first, for the visual of moving together. (In order to avoid the issue that Jorg Vogel is talking about, we had to write a custom code that calls the reassignnetnode() command, so that the second AGV won't return to the point he was removed. And instead reassign him to the netnode at the destination.) After dropping off the item carried, AGV 2 is moved back into the model and set at the location of AGV 1.

I've attached the model below, feel free to pick it apart and use what you need.

taskexecuterexample.fsm

0 ·

taskexecuterexample.fsm (26.4 KiB)

question