CN116265364A - Group management control device and group management control method for multi-layer elevator - Google Patents

Abstract

A group management control device for multi-deck elevators, wherein a multi-deck elevator having a 1-car with a plurality of cars is controlled in a plurality of groups, and the cars for distributing service to hall calls generated in a hall are distributed. The group management control device is provided with: a preselection processing unit configured to evaluate, for each elevator, which car of each elevator is allocated to the hall call according to a predetermined rule, and to select any car for each elevator as a candidate car; an operation prediction evaluation unit that performs operation prediction evaluation processing for a case where each car is temporarily assigned to the candidate car and a case where the car is not temporarily assigned, the operation prediction evaluation processing calculating an index including a predicted value of a time until each call is responded; an assigned car determination unit that uses the calculated index to determine an elevator to which the hall call is assigned, and assigns the hall call to the candidate car of the assigned elevator.

Description

Group management control device and group management control method for multi-layer elevator

Technical Field

The embodiment of the invention relates to a group management control device and a group management control method for a multi-layer elevator.

Background

Each machine of the group management system of double-deck elevators constituting one of the multi-deck elevators has an upper car and a lower car. When a user registers a hall call in a hall, the group management system selects which one of an elevator that serves the hall call and an upper car or a lower car of the elevator, and performs "assignment processing" for directing the selected car to the hall.

In the allocation process, predictive evaluation is performed in association with the operation. In the operation prediction evaluation, it is predicted when each of the modems arrives at which floor, and predicted values such as waiting time are calculated for a newly registered call and an already registered call.

For a newly registered call, it is necessary to repeat the operation prediction evaluation at each assumption, not only depending on which car is assigned but also depending on which car is assigned to the upper car or the lower car. The case where it is assumed that a new call is assigned to a certain car before the actual assignment is called "temporary assignment".

In the conventional allocation algorithm of the double-deck elevator, the operation is predicted with respect to the case of temporarily allocating a newly registered call to the lower car of each elevator, the case of temporarily allocating a call to the upper car, and the case of not temporarily allocating a call to any car, and the group management performance index such as the waiting time for each call is evaluated. Therefore, a lot of time is required for evaluation for determining the assigned car, as compared with an assignment algorithm for a single-deck elevator having only 1 car among 1 elevators.

In the conventional allocation algorithm for double-deck elevators, there is also an algorithm modified in the following manner to shorten the processing time: when a new hall call is registered, it is first determined which car is assigned to, and then it is finally determined which of the upper car and the lower car is assigned to that car.

Disclosure of Invention

In the above-described conventional improvement method, at the stage of first determining the car, it is not determined at each car which one of the upper car and the lower car should be selected, so that a prediction evaluation of the operation when temporarily determining a new call and temporarily assigning the new call to one of the upper car and the lower car is performed, and then it is necessary to exchange the temporarily assigned car between the upper car and the lower car as needed, and to determine the final assigned car or the like.

However, in this case, if a temporary assignment is made to a car different from the car for which the operation prediction evaluation was performed, an error may occur between the content of the operation prediction and the actual estimated operation, and the group management performance may deteriorate.

The invention provides a group management control device and a group management control method for a multi-layer elevator, which can improve group performance and shorten processing time.

The group management control device for a multi-deck elevator according to the embodiment controls a plurality of multi-deck elevators having a plurality of cars in a single machine 1, and performs a process of assigning cars to be served by assigning hall calls generated in a hall. The group management control device is provided with: a preselection processing unit that, during the assignment processing, evaluates which car of each car is assigned to the hall call according to a predetermined rule, and selects any car for each car as a candidate car; an operation prediction evaluation unit that performs operation prediction evaluation processing for a case where each car is temporarily assigned to the candidate car and a case where the car is not temporarily assigned, the operation prediction evaluation processing calculating an index including a predicted value of a time until each call is responded; and an assigned car determination unit that uses the calculated index to determine an elevator to which the hall call is assigned, and assigns the hall call to the candidate car of the assigned elevator.

According to the above structure, the improvement of the group performance of the double-deck elevator and the shortening of the processing time can be simultaneously realized.

Drawings

Fig. 1 is a block diagram showing the configuration of a two-layer group management control system to which the group management control device according to the first embodiment is applied.

Fig. 2 is a flowchart showing the processing steps of the group management control device according to the first embodiment.

Fig. 3 is a flowchart showing the processing procedure of the group management control device according to the first embodiment.

Fig. 4A is an explanatory diagram showing operations performed by the group management control device according to the first embodiment.

Fig. 4B is an explanatory diagram showing an operation performed by the group management control device according to the first embodiment.

Fig. 5 is a flowchart showing the processing procedure of the group management control device according to the second embodiment.

Detailed Description

Hereinafter, an apparatus and a method according to an embodiment will be described with reference to the drawings.

< first embodiment >, first embodiment

Structure of the first embodiment

Fig. 1 is a block diagram showing the configuration of an elevator group management control apparatus according to a first embodiment.

The double-deck group management control system 1 of the present embodiment includes a plurality of double-deck elevators (elevator a 10A, B elevator 10B and elevator C10C) installed in an n-deck building, hall call registration devices 20-1 to 20-n installed in hall of each deck, and a group management control device 30.

The machine a 10A has an upper car 11A, a lower car 12A, and a machine a control device 13A. The machine a control device 13A outputs position information, traveling state information, door opening/closing state information, load state information, and the like of the upper car 11A and the lower car 12A as elevator information to the group management control device 30. The car a control device 13A causes the car a to respond to the call registration layer and opens the corresponding car in response to the allocation command from the group management control device 30.

The B-type and C- type elevators 10B and 10C have the same structure as the a-type elevator 10A, so detailed description thereof is omitted.

The hall call registration devices 20-1 to 20-n are provided in each hall (1 to n floors) of the elevator, and can register an UP (UP) call or a Down (DN) call according to a button operation by a user. Here, a device capable of registering a destination floor in a hall of an elevator is also included.

The group management control device 30 performs group management on the elevator a 10, A, B, 10B and C10C. The group management control device 30 includes a hall call registration unit 31, a pre-selection processing unit 32, an elevator information acquisition unit 33, a selection rule storage unit 34, a rule selection unit 35, a travel prediction evaluation unit 36, an assigned car determination unit 37, and an assignment information output unit 38.

The hall call registration unit 31 receives and registers hall call information acquired from the hall call registration devices 20-1 to 20-m.

The elevator information acquisition unit 33 acquires elevator information output from the respective elevator control devices 13A to 13C. Specifically, various pieces of information such as the current position, direction, traveling state, door state, registered call, car load, etc. of the elevator are acquired from the respective car controllers 13A to 13C, and are notified to the respective units of the group management controller 30.

The preselection processing section 32 has a usual preselection processing section 41 and a final preselection processing section 42.

The normal pre-selection processing unit 41 performs normal pre-selection processing for eliminating a car having a condition from the assigned candidates according to a predetermined rule while circulating the respective cars.

When the number of candidate cars of the car is 2 or more as a result of the normal preselection process, the final preselection process unit 42 executes a limited final preselection process so that the number of candidate cars is 1 or less according to the rule selected by the rule selecting unit 35.

The selected rule storage unit 34 stores in advance the rule of the final pre-selection process and the applicable condition of the rule. Preferably, the data is written in advance in a factory or the like before shipment. Specific examples of the selected rule are described later.

The rule selecting unit 35 selects a rule to be actually applied at present from among the rules stored in the final pre-selection process of the selected rule storing unit 34, based on the use status of the elevator, the current time, the status of the function to be applied to the group management system, and the like.

The operation prediction evaluation unit 36 calculates the time until each floor is reached and the time until each call is responded, assuming that the elevator is operated so as to stop in sequence in the temporary allocation of the registered call and the newly registered hall call, and calculates an evaluation value based on the result.

The assigned car determination unit 37 determines an assigned car using the calculated evaluation value.

The assignment information output unit 38 outputs assignment information to the elevator control devices 13A to 13C corresponding to the determined assigned car, and causes the elevator to operate in accordance with the assignment.

Processing procedure of the first embodiment

The processing steps of the first embodiment will be described with reference to flowcharts of fig. 2 and 3.

When a user operates any one of the hall call registration devices 20-1,..20-n to register a hall call (yes in step S1), the hall call is registered in the hall call registration unit 31 of the group management control device 30. Then, a process for assigning the best car is started.

Steps S2 to S6 represent the normal preselection processing performed by the normal preselection processing unit 41. First, it is determined whether or not each car is a car capable of sharing the registered call (step S2). If it is a car that cannot share the registered call (step S2: NO), the car is set as the outside of the allocation candidate (step S3). For example, the cars that cannot be allocated are removed from allocation candidates according to a rule that hall calls generated at the lowest floor cannot be allocated to the upper car, a rule that hall calls generated at the highest floor cannot be allocated to the lower car, or the like.

If it is a car capable of sharing the registered call (yes in step S2), it is then determined whether the load of the car is above a threshold value and there is no landing reservation floor until the registered call is responded (step S4). When the load of the car is equal to or greater than a threshold value and there is no landing floor until the registered call is responded (step S4: yes), the car is set as an allocation candidate (step S3). Is a process for removing a congested car from allocation candidates in order to prevent allocation to the congested car.

If the load of the car is not equal to or greater than the threshold value (not crowded) or if there is a landing floor to which the registered call is to be placed until the registered call is to be responded (step S4: NO), then, if another car of the same car can respond to the registered call and another call at the same time, it is determined whether the car can respond to the registered call and the other call at the same time (step S5). If the other car of the same car can respond to the registered call and the other call at the same time but the car cannot respond at the same time (step S5: NO), the car is set as an allocation candidate (step S3).

When the condition of step S5 is satisfied (yes in step S5), the car is set as an allocation candidate (step S6). This process is a process for facilitating temporary allocation, in which the number of stops of the elevator can be reduced, the turnover of the elevator can be increased, and the operation efficiency can be improved when the temporary allocation can be performed simultaneously with the registered call.

In this way, the normal pre-selection processing unit 41 performs the selection processing of assigning the candidate car for the purpose of accelerating the turnover of the elevator, shortening the average waiting time, and taking the elevator.

Although not shown in the flowchart, a condition may be added such as that one car of the same car can immediately respond to the registered hall call, and that the other car cannot immediately respond, such as that the car cannot immediately respond is deleted from the candidates.

In the normal pre-selection process described above, since it is not intended to reliably limit the candidate car to one of the upper car and the lower car for each car, both the upper car and the lower car may remain as the candidate cars depending on the car. Therefore, when the number of candidate cars of the selected car is 2 or more, the final pre-selection processing unit 42 performs final pre-selection processing for limiting the number of candidate cars to 1 or less.

Steps S11 to S14 in fig. 3 show an example of the final pre-selection process performed by the final pre-selection processing unit 42 to be limited to one of the upper car and the lower car.

First, in each car, it is determined whether or not both the upper car and the lower car are allocation candidates selected in step S6 (step S11).

Here, both the upper car and the lower car are subjected to processing only the number machine remaining in the allocation candidate. That is, if the call is an upper call (step S12: yes), only the upper car is set as a candidate, the lower car is set as a candidate other than the upper car (step S13), and if the call is a lower call (step S12: no), only the lower car is set as a candidate, and the upper car is set as a candidate other than the lower car (step S14). The rule is an example, and may be switched to another method according to the use condition of the elevator.

If neither the upper car nor the lower car is a candidate for allocation, the process proceeds to the next car because the final pre-selection process is not required in this car (step S11: NO).

When the final preselection processing by the final preselection processing unit 42 is completed, the operation prediction evaluation unit 36 performs operation prediction evaluation (step S15).

The operation prediction evaluation (process) is composed of an operation prediction (process) and an evaluation (process).

In the operation prediction, the time required for future operation of the elevator is predicted in accordance with registered calls and temporary assignments, and the time until each call is responded is calculated.

The operation prediction for the 1-car may be performed by taking into consideration a case where a call to be requested for allocation is not temporarily allocated to any car and a case where the call is temporarily allocated to any car of the 1-car.

In particular, in the double-deck elevator, 3 kinds of operation predictions such as "a case where no car is temporarily assigned", "a case where a lower car is temporarily assigned", and "a case where an upper car is temporarily assigned" can be considered.

In the evaluation, an evaluation value for each operation prediction is calculated from predicted values of group performance indexes such as waiting time for each call, which are obtained as the results of the respective operation predictions. Such an evaluation value is referred to as a first evaluation value. For example, the waiting hall call assigned to the elevator and the temporarily assigned waiting hall call may be targeted, and a value obtained by summing up the squares of the predicted values of the waiting times for all the calls may be used as the first evaluation value.

In each of the number machines, only the first evaluation value of the number of times of running prediction is obtained.

Next, a second evaluation value indicating which car should be assigned is calculated. The second evaluation value is an index that can be compared between cars, and the car with the smallest value is the car that should be assigned most.

The second evaluation value is, for example, a value obtained by subtracting the first evaluation value obtained by temporarily assigning none of the cars from the first evaluation value obtained by temporarily assigning the assignment request to any of the cars.

This value is obtained by combining values obtained from the following 2 kinds of information. The first point is a predicted value of the waiting time for the call of the allocation request, which is included only in the predicted result of the time-on-occasion allocation. The shorter the predicted value, the more suitable the assigned car. Another point is the change in waiting time for the registered hall call. By temporarily allocating the allocation request, the operation schedule may be changed, and the waiting time for the registered hall call may be increased. The smaller the degree, the more suitable the assigned car.

In the above-described method, in order to calculate the second evaluation value for the specific car, it is necessary to perform the operation prediction of the car "the case of not being temporarily assigned to any car" and the operation prediction of the case of being temporarily assigned to the car to be evaluated. On the other hand, since the second evaluation value is not required for the car that becomes the candidate in the preliminary selection processing and the final preliminary selection processing, the first evaluation value in the case of temporarily assigning the second evaluation value to the car is also not required. Therefore, there is no need to make a prediction of the operation in the case of temporary allocation to cars other than candidates.

Therefore, by limiting the candidate cars to each car 1 by the final preselection process, the operation of each car can be predicted as 2 times of "no temporary assignment", "temporary assignment of candidate car".

In the case of performing the allocation process by the conventional basic method, it is necessary to perform the operation prediction for each machine 3 times in the double-deck elevator. Thus, by the proposed method, the number of operation predictions can be reduced to two thirds. In general, in a multi-deck elevator having N cars for 1 car, the number of times of travel prediction can be made to be n+1 times by limiting the number of candidate cars to 1 car for each car.

When the operation prediction evaluation unit 36 ends the operation prediction evaluation, the assigned car determination unit 37 performs a process of determining an assigned car from the candidate cars (step S16). In this process, the car with the smallest second evaluation value is determined as the assigned car.

The assignment information output unit 38 outputs the assignment car information determined by the assignment car determination unit 37 to the corresponding elevator (step S17). Specifically, the assigned car information is transmitted to any one of the elevator control devices 13A to 13C of the assigned car, and the corresponding elevator 10A to 10C is operated by the transmitted elevator control device 13A to 13C.

Fig. 4A and 4B specifically illustrate the operation of the first embodiment.

As shown in fig. 4A, the hall call is now registered from the hall call registration device 20-4 of the 4 floors. In the machine a, the lower car is located at floor 1, the upper car is located at floor 2, 3-floor car calls are registered in the lower car, and 6-floor car calls are registered in the upper car. In this state, it is possible to reliably determine which of the upper car and the lower car is allocated more efficiently.

If temporarily assigned to the upper car, the upper car can respond to a 3-floor car call at the same time as the lower car when responding at 4 floors.

However, if the lower car is temporarily assigned, the stop of the lower car responding to the 3 floors and the stop of the lower car responding to the 4 floors are separately performed, so that the time required to finish the service becomes significantly long. Therefore, in the machine a, the lower car can be selected as a candidate, and the upper car can be excluded from the candidates.

Fig. 4B shows the situation in which the number B machine and the number C machine are added to fig. 4A.

The lower car 12A of the machine a is located at floor 1, the upper car 11A is located at floor 2, and passengers are present in both the lower car 12A and the upper car 11A. In addition, a 3-floor car call is registered in the lower car, and a 6-floor car call is registered in the upper car, and UP operation is performed.

The lower car 12B of machine B is at floor 5, the upper car 11B is at floor 6, and only the lower car has passengers. In addition, a car call of 1 floor is registered in the lower car, and is in DN operation.

The lower car 12C of machine C starts at floor 1 and the upper car 11C starts at floor 2, with only the upper car 11C having many passengers. In addition, a 6-floor car call is registered in the upper car, and the UP operation is performed.

In machine a, as described above, only the upper car remains in the candidate cars in the pre-selection process.

In machine B, only the upper car remains in the candidate car by the final preselection process according to the case where 4F-UP is the UP direction.

In machine C, only the lower car remains in the candidate cars by the pre-selection process due to the congestion of the upper car. Therefore, the operation prediction is performed 2 times for each car and 6 times in total, whereby 4F-UP assigned cars can be selected.

In the allocation process of the most basic double-deck elevator group management, each car performs 3 times (no temporary allocation, temporary allocation of lower car, temporary allocation of upper car) of operation prediction, and the allocation process as a whole requires 9 predictions.

In the conventional method of determining assigned car and then determining which car is assigned to the selected car, the number of operation predictions may be the same as the proposed method. However, in the first decision stage, since the operation prediction needs to be performed by selecting one of the upper car and the lower car without sufficiently considering the selection of the upper car and the lower car, there is a possibility that the temporarily assigned car and the final temporarily assigned car are different at the time of the operation prediction. Therefore, the operation prediction performed when determining the number machine is likely to become incorrect, and the group management performance may be deteriorated.

In this way, in the first embodiment, in the pre-selection process before the execution of the allocation algorithm of the double-deck group, the number of times of the operation prediction evaluation can be reduced and the processing time can be shortened by limiting the allocation candidates to one of the upper car and the lower car before the operation prediction is performed.

In addition, since the car to be temporarily assigned is already determined in each car at the time of the operation prediction evaluation, a correct prediction result can be expected, and a decrease in group management performance can be suppressed.

< selected rule in final Pre-selection Process >)

In the final preselection process, the group management performance is determined in accordance with the elevator use condition, for example, as follows. In the following description, for example, an upper call (UP call) of 7 layers is referred to as 7F-UP, and a lower call (DN call) is referred to as 7F-DN.

< leisure time: when there is almost no demand >

Among the upper and lower cars, a car closer to the allocation request is selected, and the cars that are not selected are excluded from the candidate cars.

For example, in the machine a, when a hall call of 7F-UP is generated when the lower car stands by at 3F and the upper car stands by at 4F, the upper car approaching 7F is selected. This is because the probability of a nearer car responding quickly is higher because it is a condition that is less likely to generate other calls.

< when in normal demand >

If the call is an upper call, the upper car is selected, and if the call is a lower call, the lower car is selected, and the non-selected party is excluded from the candidate cars.

When the demand becomes large to some extent, the elevator tends to reciprocate between the lowest floor and the uppermost floor. At this time, since the upper call is mostly the upper car and the lower call is mostly the lower car, the upper call selects the upper car and the lower call selects the lower car. The method also has the effect of reducing the likelihood that a user who is a destination floor at the terminal floor of the building will need to transfer. This is because the lower car cannot reach the uppermost floor of the building in the case of assigning an upper call to the lower car, or the upper car cannot reach the lowermost floor of the building in the case of assigning a lower call to the upper car.

< crowding time >

The hall call occurring at the odd floors selects the lower car, the hall call occurring at the even floors selects the upper car, and the non-selected party is excluded from the candidate cars. The lower car serves odd floors as much as possible, the upper car serves even floors, the turnover of the car can be quickened by reducing the stop times of the car in each round of the lifting channel, and the number of people capable of being conveyed in each unit time is increased.

The group management control device 30 monitors the use condition of the elevator, and can automatically switch between leisure time, normal demand time and congestion time.

As a method for detecting congestion, for example, an average value of time (non-response time) from the start of registration of hall call to the elimination by car response may be obtained for the past several minutes, and if the average value is smaller than a threshold value 1 (for example, 10 seconds), when the average value is judged to be free, if the average value is not smaller than the threshold value 1 and smaller than the threshold value 2, when the average value is judged to be in normal demand, if the average value is not smaller than the threshold value 2 (for example, 30 to 40 seconds), the average value is judged to be congestion.

Further, the switching may be performed according to whether or not a specific group function is executed, as in the case where the period of the function operation corresponding to congestion is regarded as congestion, such as the "on-duty operation" and the "off-duty operation".

Alternatively, the congestion time period and the week may be recorded in advance, and the switching may be performed based on the recording.

By applying the above rule, even in the worst case, the number of times of 2 times of the number of the cars can be selected for the operation prediction evaluation requiring time in the assignment process. Therefore, the worst processing time can be improved, and a group management control device which is easy to use and in which the time from call registration to the determination of assigned cars is not excessively long can be realized. Further, since the operation prediction evaluation is performed after the cars unsuitable for allocation are removed in advance by the pre-selection process, it is possible to minimize the decrease in the group management performance as compared with the case where the operation prediction evaluation is performed with the cars temporarily allocated to all the cars.

(second embodiment)

Next, a second embodiment will be described with reference to the flowchart of fig. 5. The flowchart shown in fig. 5 is a flowchart in which the processing of step S21 and step S22 is added to the flowchart in fig. 3. The configuration of the second embodiment is basically the same as that of the elevator group management control device of the first embodiment, and therefore, the description will be given with reference to fig. 1.

According to the first embodiment described above, the number of operation prediction evaluations can be reduced. However, depending on the situation, there may be a margin in the time of the allocation process due to reasons such as a small number of elevators and a small number of registered calls.

Therefore, in the second embodiment, a limit is set to the required time of the allocation process for selecting as the candidate car by the pre-selection processing section 32. When the process for the car having passed the final pre-selection process is completed and the predetermined required time has not been reached (step S21: NO), the operation prediction evaluation is additionally performed for the car temporarily allocated to the car that has passed the normal pre-selection process but has been excluded from the candidates by the final pre-selection process (step S22). This process is performed for a limited time, and as many cars as possible are estimated and evaluated for running.

For example, by setting the limit value of the required time to 10ms, when the operation prediction evaluation of the car having passed through the final pre-selection process ends at the required time of 6ms, the remaining 4ms may be used for the operation prediction evaluation process of the car having passed through the normal pre-selection process but excluded from the candidates in the final pre-selection process.

Then, the assigned car is determined for all cars for which the operation prediction evaluation is completed, and the assignment is output to the selected car.

In this method, the following results are obtained, respectively, depending on how much margin is left in the time taken for the operation prediction evaluation process after the end of the final preselection process. The more advanced the phase, the more appropriately the assigned car can be selected, so the group management performance improves.

For example, even if the processing time up to "stage 4" shown below is not reached, the time required to reach "stage 2" is not enough to bring about the situation in which the assigned car is determined by "stage 1" where good group performance cannot be expected.

Stage 1: when the operation prediction evaluation process of the car ending the final pre-selection process is not ended within the limit time

Since the minimum necessary evaluation cannot be performed, the time required for each car to respond to the allocation request is simply estimated, and the car that can respond in the shortest time is determined as the allocated car.

A simple estimation method is a method of calculating a required time from, for example, a distance from a current car position and direction to a floor and direction of an allocation request, and a type and number of calls registered on the route. In a simple method, the evaluation of the waiting time of a call is performed only for an allocation request, not for a registered call, whereby the processing time can be shortened.

Stage 2: when the operation prediction evaluation process for the car having completed the final pre-selection process is completed, but the evaluation of the car (quasi-candidate car) having passed the normal pre-selection process but not passed the final pre-selection process is not performed at all

The assigned car is determined based on the result of the predicted evaluation of the operation of the car that passed the final pre-selection process.

Stage 3: until the limit time, the process of the car which finishes the final pre-selection process is finished, but the operation prediction evaluation process of the alignment candidate car is finished only when a part of the cars finish

The assigned car is determined based on the result of the predictive evaluation of the operation of the car and a part of the quasi-candidate cars having passed the final pre-selection process.

Stage 4: until the limit time, when all the operation prediction evaluation processes of the car and the quasi-candidate car which finish the final pre-selection process are finished

The assigned car is determined based on the result of the predictive evaluation of the operation of all cars having passed the normal preselection process, not based on the result of the final preselection process.

As described above, according to the second embodiment, when there is a margin in the time for the allocation process, the operation prediction evaluation is performed on as many cars as possible, and thus, there is an advantage that the maximum group management performance can be achieved within the limit range of the process time.

While the present invention has been described with reference to several embodiments, these embodiments are presented by way of example and are not intended to limit the scope of the invention. These novel embodiments can be implemented in various other modes, and various omissions, substitutions, and changes can be made without departing from the spirit of the invention. These embodiments and modifications thereof are included in the scope and gist of the invention, and are included in the scope equivalent to the invention described in the claims.

Claims (5)

1. A group management control device for a multi-deck elevator, which controls a plurality of multi-deck elevators having a plurality of cars in a 1-car manner, and performs an allocation process of the cars for allocating service to hall calls generated in a hall, the group management control device for a multi-deck elevator comprising:

a preselection processing unit that, during the assignment processing, evaluates which car of each car is assigned to the hall call according to a predetermined rule, and selects any car for each car as a candidate car;

an operation prediction evaluation unit that performs operation prediction evaluation processing for a case where each car is temporarily assigned to the candidate car and a case where the car is not temporarily assigned, the operation prediction evaluation processing calculating an index including a predicted value of a time until each call is responded; and

an assigned car determination unit that determines an elevator to which the hall call is assigned using the calculated index, and assigns the hall call to the assigned candidate car of the elevator.

2. The group management control device of a multi-layered elevator according to claim 1, characterized in that,

the preselection processing unit includes:

a normal pre-selection processing unit that performs normal pre-selection processing for excluding a car that satisfies a predetermined condition from allocated candidates, without limiting the candidate car of each car to 1 of the cars of each car; and

and a final pre-selection processing unit that performs final pre-selection processing for limiting the candidate car to 1 on the number of cars that are 2 or more as a result of the normal pre-selection processing.

3. The group management control device of a multi-layered elevator according to claim 2, characterized in that,

the final pre-selection processing unit performs any one of processing at leisure time, normal demand time and congestion time according to at least one of detection results of the load in the car, registration status of the call, average response time to the call, a preset time period, and implementation status of other functions provided by a group management control system including the multi-deck elevator and the group management control device.

4. The group management control device of a multi-layered elevator according to claim 2 or 3, characterized in that,

the operation prediction evaluation unit performs the operation prediction evaluation process for the case of temporarily assigning the candidate car to the destination car for the time required for the operation prediction evaluation process for the case of reaching the threshold value, when the time required for the operation prediction process does not reach the threshold value for all the cars, taking the car excluded from the candidate car in the final pre-selection process as the destination car,

the assigned car determining unit returns the quasi-candidate car for which the operation prediction evaluation process has been completed until the threshold value is reached to the candidate car, and determines a final assigned car.

5. A group management control method of a multi-deck elevator, which controls a plurality of multi-deck elevators having a plurality of cars in a 1-car manner, and performs an allocation process of the cars for allocating service to hall calls generated in a hall, the group management control method of the multi-deck elevator comprising the steps of:

when the allocation processing is carried out, each elevator is targeted, which elevator car of each elevator is allocated with the hall call according to a predetermined rule, and any elevator car is selected as a candidate elevator car according to each elevator;

for each car, performing operation prediction evaluation processing for calculating an index including a predicted value of time until each call is responded, for a case where the car is temporarily assigned to the candidate car and a case where the car is not temporarily assigned; and

and determining an elevator for assigning the hall call by using the calculated index, and assigning the hall call to the assigned candidate car of the elevator.

Images