Emiliano

Hello, I have recently encountered an issue while simulating an airport checkpoint and thus leading to the following question: Is it possible to match member and parent priorities under certain conditions? I am trying to differentiate between those travelers (parent entity) and baggage (member entity) going though an additional screening process prior to exiting the model. Take the following image as an example. I managed to provide a priority (red status label) to those entities going through the additional screening while also providing a rule for those with a priority of 5 to exit though Sink 3 (Those with a priority of 1 should exit through Sink1 ). However, the rule seems to only apply to the parent for a reason I assume to be that the baggage is an entity initiated by a "create" step in the processes window, rather than at its own source as the parent. The current rule I have is to decide the following ModelEntity.Priority==5.0, then assigning the desired node (Input@Sink3). In the picture, although the baggage (member) has a priority of 5, the traveler (parent) has a priority of 1 and the rule only applies to the parent. How could I match the priority of the parent, only under the case in which the parent has a higher priority? (Perhaps match the greatest priority of the member and the parent to generalize) I have tried everything possible and I cannot figure it out. Any help is greatly appreciated!

Hello, I have been utilizing SIMIO for a couple of months, however I am relatively unfamiliarized with some of the features. I have recently encountered a difficulty while simulating an airport screening checkpoint. Take the attached picture as a reference. I have entities arriving from a single Source, processed initially at Server 1, and then following a series of separators and additional servers along the way. At Separator 1, the member (luggage) is separated from the parent (passenger). (Luggage is created by a "create" step in an add on process, rather than at its own Source). However, I would like to distinguish statistics between those travelers and luggage going twice through a server. For example in Server 10, I have a loop going from the output node to the input node for the re-scanning of passengers. I managed to provide a priority value to the passengers going though that created loop, and an add on process rule to send those with that priority value to Sink 3, while those without the priority value to Sink 1. I tried applying the same concept to the loop seen in Server 9. However, when the passenger picks up the luggage at the transfer node located at end of the conveyor belt, both the member and the parent exit through Sink 1, rather than Sink 3. It appears that only the member obtains the priority, but not the parent. Although I tried, I did not manage to match the priorities and thus have the combined entities exit the model as anticipated. Any thoughts on how I could match the priorities, or perhaps, any suggestions to make this possible? Any help is greatly appreciated!

Hello, I have been utilizing SIMIO for a couple of months, but I am still relatively new to some of the features and I recently encountered a difficulty that leads me to the following question. Is it possible to include an entire table in the model as a reference property in an experiment? I have a Table that controls the capacity of all servers at specific intervals within the simulation time, but I would like to include a warm up period in my simulation. The only manner I encountered to make this possible is through an experiment. The attached picture shows the Table, but there are too many parameters to reference them individually. If not possible, or perhaps an easier solution, is there a manner to include a warm up period in the simulation without having to perform an experiment? I would only like to take the model into a steady state prior to collecting statistics, but a need does not necessarily exist for me to perform an experiment.

I appreciate your help as it solved the problem! However, I have one more question. When I apply the rule for only two separators there is no issue, but when I try to apply it to multiple separators a new challenge is encountered. Take the new picture as a reference. Instead of having one server being linked to two different separators, now I have multiple servers (Server 2-7) linked to a shared transfer node that is linked to multiple separators (Separator 3-8). If I apply the same rule, when all the separators are in the active position (value of 1), all the entities are prone to use separator 3 and 4 being that it is the closest to the transfer node. This occurrence generates an outstanding entity queue as none are being routed to separators 5 -8, even though they are active. Similarly, if I provide separator 3 and 4 with an off shift rule (value of 0), the entities are prone to use separator 5 and 6, and not take separator 7 and 8 to alleviate the queue. The question is: Is there a way to apply a routing logic in the transfer node that aside from taking the path to the active separator, also distributes the entities uniformly(or take the one with the shortest route)between all available (active) separators?

I have been utilizing SIMIO for a couple of months, but I am still relatively new to some of the features. One of the problems that I have recently encountered in my simulation is entities taking a path even when the receiving node (a separator) has an off shift rule. Specifically, I determine the availability of the separators based on 5 minute intervals with a TimeIndexedRow table reference. The attached image accurately represents my dilemma while simulating an airport checkpoint. The passengers are first processed in Server 1 and subsequently proceed into the paths leading to either separator 1 or separator 2, depending on which conveyor is available (has a value of 1) to process their luggage. In a specific scenario, lets assume separator 2 has a value of 0 meaning it is in the off shift position. When I simulate only one conveyor open, the passengers sometimes either take the inactive separator path and move back to server 1 to take the other route, or move back and forth the link until the separator becomes active again. Is there a way to block the path leading to that separator, for that 5-minute interval when separator 2 has a value of 0? Perhaps this could be done with an add-on process trigger, however I have not been able to formulate one. Any help will be greatly appreciated!