JP3378368B2 - Operation control device for double deck elevator - Google Patents

Description

Detailed Description of the Invention

[0001]

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 1. Field of the Invention The present invention relates to an operation control device for a double-deck elevator in which two cabs are connected to each other at the top and the bottom.

[0002]

2. Description of the Related Art Conventionally, an elevator that operates by connecting two cabs to an upper side and a lower side is called a double deck elevator. This double-deck elevator generally has an upper car room (hereinafter referred to as the upper car) for even-floor landing calls and a lower car room (hereinafter referred to as the lower car) for odd-floor landing calls. It uses a driving method that allows it to be serviced (this is called double driving).

This double operation can be used in the same manner as a general elevator for passengers who go from even floors to even floors and from odd floors to odd floors.
Passengers going from the odd floor to the even floor have to use the stairs to move up and down by one floor, which is inconvenient for the user.

Therefore, such operation is applied during peak hours such as at work and during lunch, and in other time zones, operation called semi-double operation is performed. This semi-double operation means that passengers going to even floors and odd floors only on the departure standard floor are divided into upper and lower cars, respectively, and after leaving the departure standard floor, it will be optional with the upper and lower cars. It is an operation that can be stopped on the floor.

[0005] In this semi-double operation, passengers can move directly to an arbitrary floor, so that it is easy to use, but operating efficiency is lower than that of the double operation. In this way, the operation of the double-deck elevator is switched between the double operation and the semi-double operation described above every time period.

In such a situation, in order to improve the operating efficiency in the semi-double operation which occupies most of the day, when a landing call of a floor above the departure standard floor occurs, a plurality of double deck elevators Evaluate and calculate the upper and lower cars as independent units, select the best target car as the response car, and select the upper car for even floors and the lower car for odd floors as in double operation. We are trying to improve driving efficiency by controlling the allocation of hall calls without restrictions.

[0007]

However, in the above-mentioned landing call assignment control in the conventional semi-double operation, the upper and lower cars of each unit are assigned to an arbitrary floor as in the group control control of the normal single-deck elevator. The estimated arrival time, which is an index of how much response can be made, is calculated, and a predetermined evaluation calculation is performed based on the estimated arrival time to the floor to which the allocation is to be made or the floor to which the own machine is already scheduled to respond. The method is to select and select the car of the best car.

However, if attention is paid to the same unit, the upper car and the lower car have a configuration. Therefore, the estimated arrival time of the upper car is shorter than the estimated arrival time of the lower car, and the downward direction of the floor of the upward hall call. As for the floor of the hall call, the estimated arrival time of the lower car is shorter than the estimated arrival time of the upper car, so the allocation evaluation for the index of waiting time on the allocation floor is always as described above for the upward hall call. As for the upper car, since the lower car is advantageous for the downward call, the allocation tends to concentrate on one car.

On the other hand, in the departure standard floor, the car calls registered in the upper and lower cars at the destination floors are odd and even floors, so the car calls registered through the departure standard floor are
It is preferable to allocate an upper car to the even floors and a lower car to the odd floors in terms of operating efficiency.

Therefore, in the conventional system, the load on the upper and lower cars becomes worse, and moreover, the number of stops increases due to the disagreement of the stop floors by passing through the departure reference floor. There was a problem that the service was deteriorated in terms of both the comfort of passengers.

The present invention has been made in order to solve the above problems, and its purpose is, in semi-double operation, for even-numbered hall calls to give priority to the upper car to respond, and for odd-numbered hall calls. Double-deck elevator operation that lowers the number of stops by equalizing the car load factor of the upper car by giving priority to the lower car to respond and improving the operating efficiency and car comfort It is to provide a control device.

[0012]

In order to achieve the above object, the present invention constitutes an operation control device for a double deck elevator by the following means. In the invention corresponding to claim 1, when operating between floors on a plurality of floors, a plurality of double-deck elevators connecting two lower cars are controlled, and input from a hall call button provided at a hall on each floor. A group management in which a hall call signal is registered, an allocation evaluation calculation is performed for each of the above and below cars of the elevators for the hall call signal, and a car having the best allocation evaluation calculation value is made to respond to the hall call. In the operation control device of the double-deck elevator by control, the hall call of the even floor for the evaluation value of each elevator upper and lower car obtained by the allocation evaluation calculation prioritizes the evaluation of the upper car, and the odd floor The floor landing call is provided with a priority evaluation means for preferentially evaluating the lower car, and the car of the car having the best evaluation value evaluated by this priority evaluation means is selected and made to respond to the landing call.

In the invention corresponding to claim 2, in the hall call of the even floor, the assigned evaluation value of the upper car is set to the assigned evaluation value of the upper floor and the lower car of each elevator obtained by the assignment evaluation calculation. It is modified so that it can be easily assigned a predetermined value, and in the case of hall calls of odd floors, it is equipped with a means for correcting the assigned evaluation value of the lower car so that it can be easily assigned a predetermined value. Select the car with the best evaluation value and make it respond to the hall call.

The invention corresponding to claim 3 is an evaluation value deviation calculating means for calculating a difference between the best allocation evaluation calculation value obtained by the allocation evaluation calculation and the allocation evaluation calculation value of another car of the same car, and the best value Means for determining whether or not the car of the assigned evaluation value of the above is coincident with the upper car for the hall calls of the even floors and the lower car for the hall calls of the odd floors, and the evaluation value deviation is calculated. If the difference between the allocation evaluation values calculated by the means is within a predetermined value, and if the determination means determines that the car with the best allocation evaluation value does not match the cage of the hall call, the other car of the same unit is used as the hall call response. And a response correction means for setting the car.

According to a fourth aspect of the invention, the even-floor landing call preferentially evaluates the upper car with respect to the evaluation values of the upper and lower cars of each elevator obtained by the allocation evaluation operation, and the odd car For floor calls, select the priority evaluation means that preferentially evaluates the lower car and the car of the car with the best evaluation value evaluated by this priority evaluation device, and the car of that car is already registered including other cars of the same car Car call, simultaneous response detection means for detecting that simultaneous response with the assigned hall call, and the operation of this simultaneous response detection means, the even floor call hall car, upper car,
The hall call on the odd floor has a priority response blocking means for blocking priority of the lower car.

[0016]

In the operation control system for a double-deck elevator according to the first aspect of the present invention, when a hall call is registered, an allocation evaluation calculation is performed for each of the upper and lower cars of each car, and for even-number floor calls. When calling the upper car or the odd-numbered floor, the lower car is prioritized and the car of the best machine is selected comprehensively to respond to the corresponding landing call, so the number of stops can be reduced and the car load can be equalized. Becomes

In the operation control device for a double-deck elevator according to the second aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation calculation, the best value is obtained by modifying the evaluation values of the upper car for even number calls and the lower car for odd number calls. Select the car of the machine,
Since the hall call response is made, it is possible to reduce the number of stoppages and equalize the car loads.

In the operation control device for a double-deck elevator according to the third aspect of the invention, after the best assigned evaluation car is selected, the difference between the car evaluation values of the same car and other cars is calculated, When the best car does not meet the conditions of the lower car, the upper car and the odd-numbered floor call responds to the hall call as another car of the same car when the difference in evaluation value is less than a predetermined value. It is possible to reduce the number of stoppages and to make the car loads even.

In the operation control device for a double-deck elevator according to the invention according to claim 4, when the car to be assigned and evaluated, including the other cars of the same car, simultaneously responds to the registered call, The priority control is blocked, the normal evaluation calculation value is evaluated as the evaluation value of the target car, and the car that is the best overall is selected to respond to the hall call, so it is clear from the elevator state such as simultaneous response Priority evaluation is not performed for special cases that are considered to be efficient, and it is possible to prevent a decrease in operating efficiency.

[0020]

Embodiments of the present invention will be described below with reference to the drawings. FIG. 1 is an overall configuration diagram showing a first embodiment of an operation control device for a double deck elevator according to the present invention. Here, it is assumed that two double deck elevators are installed in a 12-story building. .

In FIG. 1, 1A and 1B are the car control devices of the first and second cars, respectively. The car control device 1A responds to the landing call received from the group management control device 4 described later, and Well-known landing call response means 1-1 for instructing the group management control device 4 that it has responded, well-known operation control means 1-2 for controlling running and stopping of the upper and lower cars,
Well-known driving direction control means 1-3 for determining the traveling directions of the upper and lower cars, well-known door control means 1-4 for controlling the opening and closing of the doors of the upper car room and the lower car room, respectively, the upper car room and the lower car. It is composed of well-known car call registration means 1-5 which respectively control car calls in the room.

The car control device 1B of the second car is also constructed in the same manner as the first car. Further, the group management control device 4 responds to the well-known hall call registration means 4-1 for controlling registration of hall calls 2-1 to 2-12 provided on each floor and the hall calls 2-1 to 2-12. Allocation control means 4 for performing a waiting time-based allocation evaluation calculation depending on the states of the first and second machines
-2 and priority evaluation means 4-3 for correcting the evaluation value of a predetermined car with respect to the allocation evaluation value calculated by the allocation control means 4-2.

Further, 3AH, 3AL and 3BH, 3B
L is the upper and lower cabs of Unit 1 and Unit 2, respectively. Next, the operation of the operation control device for the double-deck elevator having such a configuration will be described with reference to FIGS.

FIG. 2 shows the allocation control means 4 of the group management control device 4.
2 and an operation of the priority evaluation means 4-3, FIG. 3 shows an example of an elevator state for explaining the operation.

The operation of the allocation control means 4-2 and the priority evaluation means 4-3 according to the present invention will be described with reference to the case of FIG.
In FIG. 3, Unit A is traveling on the 3rd and 4th floors in order to respond to the car call registered in the lower car on the 7th floor.
The car is about to leave the M1 and M2 floors by calling the car on the 12th floor.

In such a situation, when a hall call for the ninth floor is generated, the expected arrival time of the upper car or the lower car to any floor is calculated in the current state. The estimated arrival time is calculated by adding the time required to travel (travel time) from the distance between the current car position and the target floor and the time required to stop from the number of stops on the intermediate floors, and the up and down halls It is general to calculate the judgment floor on the assumption that a car call is generated at a predetermined position as a predicted car call (hereinafter referred to as a derived car call) generated by the call.

In the case of FIG. 3, the car on the A-th car is 9
Assuming that the estimated arrival time upstairs is 2 seconds per floor as the travel time and the stop time is 10 seconds, it will respond to the 9th and 8th floors after stopping the 8th and 7th floors, so (4 × 2) +10+ (2 ×
1) = 20 seconds, and the predicted unanswered time T _1AH (9U), which is the sum of the call duration and the predicted arrival time, is 20 + 0 =
It will be 20 seconds. Similarly, the predicted non-response time of the lower car of Unit A is T _1AL (9U) = 22 seconds.

Next, the estimated arrival time of the upper car of the A car assuming that the upper car of the A car of the 9th floor is allocated to the upper car of the A car is the current arrival time because there is no other hall call already allocated. It becomes 20 seconds like the state, and the predicted non-response time T _2AHH
(9U) is 20 seconds.

Next, assuming that the upper car of the ninth floor, which is the target floor, is allocated to the lower car of Unit A, the predicted unanswered time T _2ALL (9U) of the lower car is that there is no other hall call already allocated. 22 seconds.

For Unit B, the same calculation as above is performed, and the predicted non-response time T _1BH (9U) = 14 seconds for the upper car 9th floor of the current state B of the current state is lower 9th floor of the current state B Predicted unanswered time T _1BL (9U) = 16 seconds Predicted unanswered time T _2BHH (9U) = 14 seconds when the upper car of Unit B was provisionally assigned to the upper floor of the 9th floor. The predicted non-response time T _2BLL (9U) = 16 seconds when the upper floor direction is provisionally allocated.

Next, the evaluation values E _AH and E of the upper and lower cages of each unit
_AL, E _BH, the calculation of E _BL performed. In the present embodiment, with respect to the evaluation regarding the waiting time, the sum of the predicted non-response times when the cars of each car are provisionally allocated is the allocation evaluation value,
The calculation method is not limited to this.
As described in JP-A-48464, various calculation methods such as the sum of the squares of the predicted non-response times as the evaluation value and the maximum value of the predicted non-response times can be applied.

[0032] on top of each Unit, the evaluation value of the lower car is, A Unit on whether your evaluation value _{E AH = T 2AHH (9U)} = 20 seconds A Unit of the lower car evaluation value _{E AL = T 2ALL (9U)} = 22 Second car evaluation value E _BH = T _2BHH (9U) = 14 seconds for car No. B and bottom car evaluation value E _BL = T _2BLL (9U) = 16 seconds for car No. B

Next, the priority evaluation means performs priority evaluation of the upper car for the even floor calls and the lower car for the odd floor calls. Since the 9th floor, which is the call generation floor, is an odd floor, a predetermined value calculation is performed for the evaluation value of the lower car of all cars.

In the present embodiment, assuming that 3 is subtracted as a fixed value, the lower car evaluation value E _AL of the car No. A is E _AL = 22-3 = 19 The lower car evaluation value E _{BL of the} No. B car with respect to the calculated evaluation value. = 16-3 = 13, and finally, the lower car of the B-th car is selected as the car with the smallest evaluation value, and outputs the hall call response allocation command to the car control device 1B.

According to the method of this embodiment, the lower car of the B-th car is selected, but if the evaluation value is not corrected by the priority evaluation means, the car of the smallest evaluation-value car becomes the upper car of the B-th car, and the response is obtained. The basket will be different.

Therefore, according to the present embodiment, it can be said that priority is given to the upper car for the even floor calls and the lower car for the odd floor calls. As described above, according to the present embodiment, in the semi-double operation, the even number floor hall call can give priority to the upper car, and the odd number hall hall call can give priority to the lower car. Car load can be equalized.

FIG. 4 is an overall configuration diagram of an operation control device for a double-deck elevator showing a second embodiment of the present invention.
The same parts as those in FIG.

In the second embodiment, it is assumed that two double deck elevators are installed in a 12-story building. In FIG. 4, the group management control device 4 comprises a hall call registration means 4-1, an allocation control means 4-2, an evaluation value deviation calculation means 4-4 and a response car correction means 4-5. -1, and the allocation control means 4-2 is the same as that of FIG. 1, and therefore its explanation is omitted here.

The evaluation value deviation calculation means 4-4 is a means for calculating the difference between the evaluation values of the upper and lower cars of the best car with respect to the allocation evaluation value calculated by the allocation control means 4-2. The response car correction means 4-5 is a means for changing the response planned car according to the difference between the evaluation values.

Next, the operation of the second embodiment will be described with reference to the operation flowchart of FIG. 5, taking the case of FIG. 3 as an example.
FIG. 5 is a flowchart showing the operations of the allocation control means 4-2, the evaluation value deviation calculation means 4-4 and the response car correction means 4-5 of the group management control device 4.

According to the example shown in FIG. 3, when a 9th floor upward hall call is generated, the allocation control means 4-2 performs an evaluation based on the predicted unanswered time for each car. Since the evaluation calculation is the same as that of FIG. 2 described above, the detailed description thereof will be omitted here, and the result will be as follows.

Upper car evaluation value of Unit A E _AH = T _2AHH (9U) = 20 seconds Lower car evaluation value of Unit A E _AL = T _2ALL (9U) = 22 seconds Upper car evaluation value of Unit B E _BH = T _2BHH (9U) = 14 seconds Lower car evaluation value of Unit B E _BL = T _2BLL (9U) = 16 seconds From the above, the upper car of Unit B is selected as the minimum evaluation car and the selected car is an even floor It is determined whether or not the hall call of the above and the hall call of the odd floors are the same for the upper car and the lower car.

In this case, the odd-numbered floors are placed on top of each other, so that they do not coincide with each other.
According to -4, the difference between the upper and lower cars of Unit B is calculated. Evaluation value deviation = E _BH −E _BL = 2 seconds Next, the response car correction means 4-5 determines whether or not the evaluation value deviation is a predetermined value. In this embodiment, the predetermined value is 20% of the minimum evaluation value, and the predetermined value is 14 × 0.2 =
2.8 seconds.

Since it is within the predetermined value due to the evaluation value deviation, the lower car of the B car of the same car of the same car is corrected and selected as the response car. Then, the allocation command regarding the response of the upward call on the ninth floor is output to the car control device 1B of the car No. B.

According to the method according to the present embodiment, the priority car in the same car as the car with the minimum evaluation value, that is, the upper car in the case of even floors, and the lower car in the case of odd floors are preferentially modified as response cars. Therefore, it is possible to reduce the number of stoppages and equalize the car load.

FIG. 6 is an overall configuration diagram of an operation control device for a double-deck elevator showing a third embodiment of the present invention.
The same parts as those in FIG.

In the third embodiment, it is assumed that two double deck elevators are installed in a 12-story building. In FIG. 6, the group management control device 4 is composed of a hall call registration means 4-1, an allocation control means 4-2, a priority evaluation means 4-3, a simultaneous response detection means 4-6 and a priority response blocking means 4-7. , Hall call registration means 4
-1, the allocation control means 4-2 and the priority evaluation means 4-3 are the same as those in FIG. 1, and therefore their explanations are omitted here.

The above-mentioned simultaneous response detecting means 4-6 confirms that the expected response car selected by the allocation control means 4-2 is in the position including the target floor, and that the lower car is the simultaneous response due to the registered call. Detecting means, priority response blocking means 4
-7 is a means for prohibiting the priority evaluation when a simultaneous response is detected by the simultaneous response detecting means 4-6.

Next, the operation of the third embodiment will be described with reference to the operation flowchart of FIG. 7, taking the case of FIG. 8 as an example.
FIG. 7 is a flowchart showing the operations of the allocation control means 4-2, the priority evaluation means 4-3, the simultaneous response detection means 4-6 and the priority response blocking means 4-7 of the group management control device 4.

When a 9th floor upward hall call is generated as in the case shown in FIG. 8, the allocation control means 4-2 performs an evaluation based on the predicted non-response time for each car, and the results are as follows. become that way.

Upper car evaluation value of machine A E _AH = 10 seconds Lower car evaluation value of machine A _EAL = 22 seconds Upper car evaluation value of machine B E _BH = 14 seconds Lower car evaluation value of machine B E _BL = 16 Second From the above, the car with the No. A car is selected as the car with the smallest evaluation.

Next, the simultaneous response detecting means 4-6 determines whether or not the upper and lower cars are in simultaneous response. In this case, since Unit A has a lower car basket on the 8th floor,
When the upper car is made to respond to the 9th floor, the upper car and the lower car respond simultaneously by stopping once, so the priority response blocking means 4-7 causes the priority evaluation means 4-3 to make the even floors the upper car and the odd floors The priority is given to the lower car, the upper car of the A car is selected as the response car, and the allocation command is output to the car control device 1A of the A car.

According to the method according to the present embodiment, in a special case such as simultaneous response, which is considered to be obviously efficient from the viewpoint of the state of the elevator, priority evaluation is not performed, and thus it is possible to prevent a decrease in operating efficiency. it can.

In the third embodiment, the priority evaluation means 4-
Although a method of subtracting a predetermined value has been shown as 3, the present invention is not limited to the above as long as it has a main purpose.
The predetermined value may be changed according to the traffic demand and the elevator state. Also, regarding the means for correcting the response car when the evaluation difference of the minimum evaluation value car is less than or equal to the predetermined value, even if the predetermined value is changed by comparing fixed values, traffic demand, or elevator state. Good.

Regarding the simultaneous response detecting means 4-6, the matching with the car call registration of one car is shown as an example. However, the upper and lower car responses by the hall call, the car call and the hall call by one car. May be a response that matches. Furthermore, in the first to third embodiments, two machine numbers are described, but it goes without saying that the same can be applied to the case of three or more machines.

[0056]

As described above, according to the operation control system for a double-deck elevator according to the present invention, priority is given to the upper car for hall calls on even floors and the lower car for hall calls on odd floors. The number of stops can be reduced, and the car load ratios of the upper and lower cars can be equalized.

In addition, in the case where the operation efficiency is obviously improved like the upper and lower car simultaneous response, the priority response of the car can be prevented, so that the operation control is not adversely affected and the operation efficiency is improved. Can be made.

[Brief description of drawings]

FIG. 1 is an overall configuration diagram showing a first embodiment of an operation control device for a double-deck elevator according to the present invention.

FIG. 2 is a flowchart for explaining the operation of the embodiment.

FIG. 3 is a state diagram of an elevator for explaining an example of operation of the same embodiment.

FIG. 4 is an overall configuration diagram showing a second embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 5 is a flowchart for explaining the operation of the embodiment.

FIG. 6 is an overall configuration diagram showing a third embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 7 is a flowchart for explaining the operation of the embodiment.

FIG. 8 is a state diagram of the elevator for explaining an operation example of the same embodiment.

[Explanation of symbols]

1A, 1B ... Car control device, 1-1 ... Hall call response means, 1-2 ... Operation control means, 1-3 ... Driving direction control means, 1-4 ... Door control means, 1-5 …… Car call registration means, 2-1 to 2-12 …… Hall call buttons, 3AH, 3
BH ... upper car, 3AL, 3BL ... lower car, 4 ... group management control device, 4-1 ... hall call registration means, 4-2 ...
... Allocation control means, 4-3 ... Priority evaluation means, 4-4 ...
Evaluation value deviation calculation means, 4-5 ... Response cage correction means, 4
-6 ... Simultaneous response detection means, 4-7 ... Priority response blocking means.

Claims (4)

(57) [Claims] 1. A hall call signal input from a hall call button provided at a hall on each floor, which controls a plurality of double-deck elevators that operate between floors on multiple floors and that connects two lower cars. A double deck by group management control that registers and performs an allocation evaluation calculation for each car above and below each elevator for the hall call signal and makes the car with the best allocation evaluation calculation value respond to the hall call In the elevator operation control device, on each elevator obtained by the allocation evaluation calculation,
With respect to the evaluation value of each lower car, the even-floor landing call is given priority evaluation for the upper car, and the odd-floor landing call is provided with priority evaluation means for preferentially evaluating the lower car, and is evaluated by this priority evaluation means. An operation control device for a double-deck elevator, characterized in that a car having the best evaluation value is selected and the car is made to respond to the hall call. 2. A hall call signal input from a hall call button provided at a hall on each floor, which controls a plurality of double-deck elevators that operate between floors on multiple floors and that connects two lower cars. A double deck by group management control that registers and performs an allocation evaluation calculation for each car above and below each elevator for the hall call signal and makes the car with the best allocation evaluation calculation value respond to the hall call In the elevator operation control device, each elevator obtained by the allocation evaluation calculation, in the hall call of the even floor with respect to the evaluation value of each lower car, the allocation evaluation value of the upper car easily assigned a predetermined value Of the double-deck elevator, which is equipped with a means for correcting the allocation evaluation value of the lower car to make it easier to allocate a predetermined value in the case of landing calls on odd floors. Rolling control device. 3. A hall call signal input from a hall call button provided at a hall on each floor, which controls a plurality of double-deck elevators connecting two lower cars while operating between floors on a plurality of floors. A double deck by group management control that registers and performs an allocation evaluation calculation for each car above and below each elevator for the hall call signal and makes the car with the best allocation evaluation calculation value respond to the hall call In the elevator operation control device, an evaluation value deviation calculation means for calculating a difference between the best allocation evaluation calculation value obtained by the allocation evaluation calculation and the allocation evaluation calculation value of the other car of the same car, and the best allocation evaluation value. Is calculated by the evaluation value deviation calculating means and a means for determining whether or not the car matches the upper car for even-floor hall calls and the lower car for odd-floor hall calls. If the difference between the assigned evaluation values is within a predetermined value, and if the car with the best assigned evaluation value is judged to be inconsistent with the car for the hall call by the judging means, the other car of the same car is answered as the car for the hall call. An operation control device for a double-deck elevator, comprising: a correction means. 4. A hall call signal input from a hall call button provided at a hall on each floor, which controls a plurality of double-deck elevators that operate between floors on multiple floors and that connects two lower cars. A double deck by group management control that registers and performs an allocation evaluation calculation for each car above and below each elevator for the hall call signal and makes the car with the best allocation evaluation calculation value respond to the hall call In the elevator operation control device, on each elevator obtained by the allocation evaluation calculation,
With respect to the evaluation value of each lower car, the even-floor landing call was evaluated by the priority evaluation means that preferentially evaluates the upper car, and the odd-numbered floor landing call was evaluated by the priority evaluation means and the lower car. Simultaneous response detection means that selects the car of the car with the best evaluation value and detects that the car of that car will respond simultaneously with registered car calls and assigned hall calls including other cars of the same car. Operation of the double-deck elevator, characterized in that the response detection means is provided with priority response blocking means for preventing priority calls to the upper car for hall calls on even floors and lower car for hall calls on odd floors. Control device.