HK1052679A - Methode for selecting the most efficient way, including change of cabs, by a plurality of elevators groups - Google Patents

Description

The invention relates to a method for selecting the most suitable lift for a lift system having at least two groups of lifts.

In the case of a passenger, the passenger's destination is immediately assigned to the most convenient cabin. The elevator does not need to know the building's layout into floor areas, which are served by only individual elevator groups. The passenger can be provided with visual and acoustic guidance in the elevator at the same time, providing visual and acoustic guidance on the connection leading to the next destination. There is no known method of transportation, although it is not possible to choose the most accurate route to the destination, even if the elevator is equipped with a multi-fuel system.

One of the aims of the invention is to propose a method of the type described at the outset which provides a precise method for selecting the most advantageous elevator when there are journeys where the passenger must change.

This problem is solved by the characteristics of claim 1.

An advantage of the invention is that the most cost-optimal lift cabins are selected from start to finish, thus leading the passenger to the destination floor without loss of time.

The measures listed in the dependent claims allow for beneficial training and improvements in the process described in claim 1.

In one embodiment, the elevator groups each have a corresponding group control.

In a preferred embodiment, each group control has a destination call control with immediate assignment. This has the advantage that in each group of elevators the best elevator of the group can always be chosen. Early knowledge of the target plant allows the choice to be made from the elevator cabins that can serve the target plant.

In another embodiment, the group controls of all groups of lifts are linked to a central multi-group control (MGS), which has the advantage of allowing the selection of all eligible lifts to be made automatically from a central unit, especially when the zones served by several groups of lifts overlap.

In another embodiment, several routes are available from the starting floor to reach the target floor, with the most advantageous route being determined. This has the advantage that the problem arising in elevator groups, namely multiple possible routes with transitions, can be solved. The most optimal and fastest route is thus chosen from start to finish.

All the features described are applicable not only in the combination indicated, but also in other combinations or in isolation, without leaving the scope of the invention.

The following diagrams illustrate various embodiments of the invention and are described in more detail in the following description: Fig. 1 a representation of four destination call group controls linked together with a multi-group control,Fig. 2 to Fig. 5 flowcharts showing a procedure for selecting the most advantageous trip.

Figures 1 to 5 are self-explanatory with the following legend: DBDatabase, Multi-group configurationFWFavorite route / cheapest route / best routeGR-PCGroup control calculatorGR1,2,3,4Group control 1, 2, 3, 4MG-PCMulti-group control calculatorMGSCentral multi-group controlU1, U2, U3Stock plant 1, 2, 3W1, ...WnWegW1T1Weg 1 sub-distance 1WnTnWeg n sub-distance n

The passenger enters the destination at one of the multi-group terminals in the lobby or on any floor. A central multi-group control system (MGS) compares the desired journey with its own database or journey array to determine whether the desired destination can be reached only by one route, also called route.

If the only way to reach the target floor is by changing one or more times, the choice of route is not a problem.

If there are several routes - for example, journey 1: High Rise Shuttle with one group and then after changing the journey down with elevator of another group or journey 2: Low Rise Shuttle with one group and after changing the journey up with elevator of another group - the most likely shortest route to the destination is first chosen on the basis of the statistical values and the current traffic situation.

If one of the sub-trajectories can be completed by several groups of elevators, a multi-group control (such as patent EP 0 891 291 B1) is used to determine the first elevator to be used.

This is used to evaluate the first elevator to be used and to communicate it to the passenger on the terminal display.

During the journey, the MGS central multi-group control tracks the elevator journey in time with respect to the arrival at the switching station.

Once the next best elevator is selected, the passenger can be informed in the cabin. On a cabin information system or other display, the next elevator to be used is indicated at each destination floor, which can only be reached by changing.

This instruction may also be combined for several target floors and/or connecting lifts.

Some advantages of this solution are given below:

The central multi-group control MGS selects the optimal route from the starting to the final floor, divides the selected route into individual sub-trains, i.e. groups of elevators, which only choose the best elevator at the most optimal moment, based on the precisely defined remaining time in the previously used elevator, the exit time, the approach distance between the two successive elevators used, the arrival time of the elevator to be used to the transition floor and all other factors used in a known multi-group control (such as according to patent EP 0 891 291 B1) to determine the best elevator.

The passenger shall be informed visually and audibly at the earliest possible moment of the next connection.

There is an instantaneous allocation, i.e. the passenger is assigned a cabin immediately after the destination call.

The passenger does not need to wear a navigation device.

Figure 1 shows as an example four group controls GR1, GR2, GR3. GR4, which have four group control computers GR1-PC, GR2-PC, GR3-PC, GR4-PC respectively. The group controls GR1, GR2, GR3. GR4 are combined via the group control computers GR1-PC, GR2-PC, GR3-PC, GR4-PC into a central multi-group control MGS, which has a DB database and a MG-PC multi-group control computer.

The following is a detailed description of the flow diagrams from Figures 2 to 5, with the flow diagrams shown in this example for simplicity only up to the third sub-section:

The passenger shall enter a new destination call from departure platform S to destination platform Z.

The central multi-group control MGS compares the desired path with its own database or a path array DB to determine whether the desired target floor can be reached by one or more paths W1,... Wn.

The following shall be considered:

If there are several routes from the starting platform S to the target platform Z, then the first path W1 is divided into sub-routes W1T1, W1T2, ..., W1Tn, where n is an integer. The further paths W2, ..., Wn are also divided into sub-routes W2T1, W2T2, ..., W2Tn and WnT1, WnT2, ..., WnTn respectively. The lift operating costs of the respective sub-routes W1T1, W1T2, ..., W1Tn; W2T1, W2T2, ..., W2Tn and WnT1, WnT2, ..., WnTn are then requested from the group supervisors responsible for the respective group GR1, GR2, ..., GR2.the first sub-range is not on the preferred route FW, the order is cancelled. The first sub-range S-U1 from the starting platform S to the first switching platform U1 is then run. Once it is confirmed that no more stops are possible, the multi-group control computer MG-PC is informed that the next destination is the switching platform U1. In the same way, the elevator assignment is then made to the selected elevator group, which will complete the second sub-range from the first switching platform U1 to the target platform U1-Z or to the second switching platform U2 U1-U2. The target platform Z is reached at the end of the second part, then the second part of the route U1-Z will be reached and the passenger will be reached.If the target section Z is not at the end of the second section, the second section U1-U2 is taken and the same procedure as before is applied to the other sections to reach the target section Z. In this example the procedure up to the third section has been shown; the other sections can of course be followed.

The following shall be considered:

If only one route W1 exists from the starting platform S to the destination platform Z and a changeover is necessary, then this route W1 is broken down into sub-routes W1T1,...,W1Tn and, in the same way as above, the lift allocation is initiated for the first sub-routine from the starting platform S to the first changeover platform U1. Once the first sub-routine is completed, the same procedure is applied for the remaining sub-routings as in case A) from the starting platform U1. If no changeover is necessary, a normal journey from the starting platform S to the destination platform Z is initiated.

Claims (8)

1. The procedure for selecting the most suitable lift for a lift system with at least two groups of lifts (GR) whereby a route (W1) with a changeover (U1, U2, U3) is available from a starting floor (S) to reach a target floor (Z) and divided into several sub-routes (W1T1,..., W1Tn) and each sub-routine (W1T1,..., W1Tn) is assigned a lift to one of the groups of lifts (GR).
2. The method described in claim 1, whereby the lift groups (GR) each have a group control (GR1, GR2, GR3, GR4).
3. The method described in claim 2, whereby each group control (GR1, GR2, GR3, GR4) has a target call control with immediate assignment.
4. The method described in claim 2 or 3 whereby the group controls (GR1, GR2, GR3, GR4) of all groups of lifts (GR) are connected to a central multi-group control (MGS).
5. The method according to one of the previous claims, whereby a further route (Wn) is available to reach the target floor (Z) and divided into further sub-streets (WnT1,..., WnTn).
6. The method according to claim 5 whereby the operating costs of the sub-tracks (W1T1,..., W1Tn) of the road (W1) and the operating costs of the further sub-tracks (WnT1,..., WnTn) of the further road (Wn) are queried from the corresponding group control (GR1, GR2, GR3, GR4).
7. The method described in claim 6 compares the required operating costs of the route (W1) and the route (Wn) by means of the central multi-group control (MGS) to determine the most advantageous route (FW).
8. The method described in claim 7, whereby each of the sub-routes (W1T1,..., W1Tn) or the subsequent sub-routes (WnT1,..., WnTn) of the most advantageous route (FW) is assigned a lift to one of the lift groups (GR).