JP5230550B2 - Commissioning plan creation system - Google Patents

Description

  The present invention relates to a trial operation plan creation device that creates a trial operation plan, a trial operation plan evaluation device that evaluates the trial operation plan, and a trial operation planning system that includes these devices.

  For example, when a crane such as a deck crane is delivered, it is necessary to perform a trial operation of the crane and check the performance. The trial run of the crane is performed by attaching a crane for trial run on a cab prepared for trial run. Since applicable cabs differ depending on the crane model, multiple types of cabs are prepared depending on the crane model. Also, usually, depending on the driver's cab, it is possible to handle a plurality of types of cranes, and depending on the type of crane, it can be applied to a plurality of driver's cabs.

JP 2003-280714 A

  The crane trial operation must be performed from the completion of the crane to the delivery of the crane. However, if the test operation is performed earlier than the delivery date, the storage period until the shipment will be longer, and the storage space may be insufficient. There is sex. Therefore, it is preferable to perform the trial run on a date as close as possible to the delivery date. In addition, a rough priority is determined for the cab, and it is required to determine an efficient trial run schedule in consideration of the constraints caused by the crane model and the priority of each cab. .

  In the past, an operator made a trial operation plan based on the crane model, crane delivery date, etc., and the trial operation was carried out based on this operation plan. However, the planning of the trial run requires labor and time, and if the operation plan once created is changed, it must be re-planned, which increases the amount of work and greatly increases the amount of work for the workers. It was a heavy burden. Further, since there is no means for determining whether or not the planned operation plan is appropriate, it has not been possible to verify whether or not the planned trial operation schedule is efficient.

  Conventionally, for example, various methods and apparatuses for automatically performing scheduling have been proposed (see, for example, Patent Document 1). However, scheduling optimization differs depending on what is to be scheduled, how to determine priorities, and the like. Therefore, it is necessary to create each according to the event, and other methods cannot be applied as they are.

The present invention has been made in view of such circumstances, and can easily devise a trial operation plan that can efficiently perform a trial operation that is performed prior to delivery of a device to be inspected such as a crane. It is an object of the present invention to provide a test operation plan creation device and method.
Another object of the present invention is to provide an evaluation apparatus and method that can quantitatively evaluate a planned commissioning plan.

In order to solve the above problems, the present invention employs the following means.
In the present invention, in an area where a plurality of cabs of a device to be inspected, such as a crane, are installed, each of the devices to be inspected is attached when the device to be inspected before delivery is attached to any one of the cabs to perform a test run before delivery. Or a test operation plan creation device that creates a test operation plan that assigns the cab of the device to be inspected to be used for the test operation and the schedule of the test operation for each unit group consisting of a plurality of devices to be inspected. Storage means for storing a plurality of test operation patterns associated with the information on the vehicle and the occupation period of the driver's cab, information acquisition means for acquiring order information including the model, number of devices to be tested, and the delivery date; Unit group creating means for creating the unit group based on the order information, and any test run pattern stored in the storage means for each unit group Ri together shed provides commissioning planning apparatus comprising operation means for creating a commissioning plan with said sample operation pattern assigned.

According to such a configuration, a plurality of test operation patterns in which the cab used for the test operation and the occupation period of the cab are associated with each other are prepared in advance, and the test operation pattern is assigned to each unit group. Since the plan is created, it is possible to create a trial run plan simply by combining the trial run patterns. This makes it possible to easily create a trial run plan and reduce the planning time for a trial run plan, compared with the case where a test run plan is assigned to each device to be inspected, such as a crane. It becomes.
Examples of the apparatus to be inspected include a crane, an automatic guided vehicle, a towed cart, and the like.

  In the trial run plan creation device, the calculation means may create the trial run plan by assigning a schedule in order from a unit group whose delivery date is earlier.

  As a result, it is possible to easily create a test operation plan that ends the test operation before the delivery date of the device under test.

  The present invention is an evaluation device for evaluating a test run plan created by any one of the above test run plan creation devices, the positional relationship between the shipping location of the device to be inspected and the cab, the overtime amount of workers, the test run A first evaluation means for calculating a first penalty value for evaluating the trial operation plan from the viewpoint of work efficiency, using a first evaluation function including at least one of the work amounts as a parameter. Second evaluation means for calculating a second penalty value for evaluating the trial operation plan from the aspect of the delivery date, using a second evaluation function having the last date of the trial operation of the unit group in the trial operation plan and its delivery date as parameters. And a trial operation plan evaluation device comprising: a third evaluation means for calculating an evaluation value related to the trial operation plan from the first penalty value and the second penalty value. .

  Thus, since the trial run plan is evaluated from both the work efficiency side and the delivery date, the best trial run plan can be obtained from the work side and the delivery date. In particular, in the evaluation of work efficiency, the positional relationship between the shipping location of the crane and the cab, the overtime amount of workers, the amount of work when performing a trial run (for example, the number of times the device to be inspected is lowered or lowered, An evaluation function that includes at least one of the following parameters as a parameter: Confirmation test time to determine whether performance has been achieved, endurance test case, number of workers required for each test, number and type of heavy equipment required Since it is used, it becomes possible to carry out an evaluation that is more in line with the actual situation in the field. Moreover, it becomes possible to evaluate a trial run plan quantitatively by using an evaluation function.

  In the evaluation apparatus, the first evaluation means has in advance related information that associates each trial run pattern with a first penalty value, and uses the related information to determine a first penalty value for each unit group. It may be obtained.

  Thus, the first penalty value can be easily obtained by having the related information that associates the trial run pattern with the first penalty value in advance.

The present invention provides a trial operation plan creation system comprising any one of the above-described trial operation plan creation devices and any of the above-described trial operation plan evaluation devices.
In this way, by including the trial operation plan creation device and the evaluation device that evaluates the trial operation plan created by the trial operation plan creation device, it is possible to update the trial operation plan according to the evaluation result by the evaluation device. Become. Thereby, an appropriate trial run plan can be obtained efficiently.

  In the present invention, in an area where a plurality of cabs of a device to be inspected, such as a crane, are installed, each of the devices to be inspected is attached when the device to be inspected before delivery is attached to any one of the cabs to perform a test run before delivery. Alternatively, a test operation plan creation method for creating a test operation plan in which a cab of a crane used for a test operation and a schedule of the test operation are assigned to each unit group composed of a plurality of devices to be inspected. Based on the order information, when a plurality of trial operation patterns relating information and the occupancy period of the cab are determined in advance, and order information including the model, number, and delivery date of the device to be inspected for trial operation is acquired. The unit group is created, and one of the trial run patterns prepared in advance is assigned to each unit group, and the trial run pattern is assigned using the assigned trial run pattern. To provide a commissioning planning how to create a rolling plan.

  This is an evaluation method for evaluating the test run plan created by the above test run plan creation method, which is the positional relationship between the shipping location of the device to be inspected and the cab, the work overtime amount of the workers, and the work when performing the test run Using a first evaluation function including at least one of the quantities as a parameter, a first penalty value for evaluating the trial operation plan from the viewpoint of work efficiency is calculated, and the last trial operation day of the unit group in the trial operation plan And a second evaluation function having the delivery date as a parameter, a second penalty value for evaluating the trial operation plan from the delivery date side is calculated, and the first penalty value and the second penalty value are used to calculate the second penalty value. Provided is an evaluation method for a trial operation plan for calculating an evaluation value related to the trial operation plan.

Advantageous Effects of Invention According to the present invention, there is an effect that an operation plan that can efficiently perform a trial operation performed prior to delivery of a crane can be easily made.
Further, according to the present invention, there is an effect that the planned test operation plan can be quantitatively evaluated.

It is the figure which showed the hardware constitutions of the trial run plan preparation system which concerns on one Embodiment of this invention. It is a function expanded view which expanded the function of the trial run plan creation system which concerns on one Embodiment of this invention. It is the figure which showed an example of the trial run pattern. It is the figure which showed an example of the 1st penalty value of each trial run pattern. It is the flowchart which showed the process sequence implement | achieved by the trial run plan preparation system which concerns on one Embodiment of this invention. It is the flowchart which showed the process sequence implement | achieved by the trial run plan preparation system which concerns on one Embodiment of this invention. It is the flowchart which showed the process sequence implement | achieved by the trial run plan preparation system which concerns on one Embodiment of this invention. It is the figure which showed an example of the trial run plan. It is the figure which showed an example of the trial run plan. It is the figure which showed an example of the trial run plan.

  Hereinafter, an embodiment of a test operation plan creation system according to the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings.

For example, when a new crane is delivered or when a crane that has been maintained is delivered, it is common practice to perform a test run of the crane prior to delivery to check the performance. The test run of the crane is performed by placing the crane on a cab corresponding to the crane model in an area where a plurality of cabs are installed. Some of the cabs are limited to one type of applicable crane type, and some are applicable to multiple types of cranes. Therefore, it is necessary to appropriately allocate these cabs to a plurality of cranes scheduled for trial operation and perform trial operation efficiently.
The trial run plan creation system according to the present embodiment creates a trial run plan capable of performing a trial run efficiently during the trial run of such a crane, and quantitatively evaluates the created run plan. is there.

FIG. 1 is a diagram showing a hardware configuration of a test operation plan creation system according to an embodiment of the present invention. As shown in FIG. 1, the test run plan creation system is a computer system (computer system), and includes a CPU (Central Processing Unit) 11, a main storage device 12 such as a RAM (Random Access Memory), an auxiliary storage device 13, a keyboard. And an input device 14 such as a mouse, an output device 15 such as a display and a printer, and a communication device 16 that exchanges information by communicating with external devices.
The auxiliary storage device 13 is a computer-readable recording medium, such as a magnetic disk, a magneto-optical disk, a CD-ROM, a DVD-ROM, or a semiconductor memory. The auxiliary storage device 13 stores various programs (for example, a trial operation plan creation program, an evaluation program thereof), and the CPU 11 reads out the programs from the auxiliary storage device 13 to the main storage device 12 and executes them. Realize the process.

  FIG. 2 is a functional block diagram showing the functions provided in the trial operation plan creation system 10 in an expanded manner. As shown in FIG. 2, the test run plan creation system 10 mainly includes a test run plan creation device 21 that creates a test run plan and an evaluation device 22 that evaluates the test run plan created by the test run plan creation device 21. Have.

  The test run plan creation apparatus 21 includes a storage unit (storage unit) 211, an information acquisition unit (information acquisition unit) 212, a unit group creation unit (unit group creation unit) 213, and a calculation unit (calculation unit) 214. ing.

  The storage unit 211 stores a plurality of test operation patterns in which information on the cab used for the test operation and the occupation period of the cab are associated with each other. Details of the test run pattern will be described later. The information acquisition unit 212 is provided to acquire information related to a crane that requires a trial run, and for example, obtains order information including the type, number, and delivery date of the crane that performs the trial run. The unit group creation unit 213 creates a unit group to which a trial run pattern is assigned based on the order information acquired by the information acquisition unit 212. Specifically, the unit group creation unit 213 classifies the cranes included in the order information by model, and creates unit groups so that each unit group is composed of cranes of the same model. At this time, the maximum number of cranes constituting the unit group is set, and the unit group is created within a range not exceeding this maximum value.

  For example, when there is order information for six A models and three B models, and the maximum number of cranes constituting a unit group is four, the unit group creation unit 213 has four A models and two A models. Unit groups of 3 units and B type are created respectively. Note that the method of distribution when the number of models of one model exceeds the maximum value of the unit group (in this case, 4) is not limited to the above example, and if a unit group is created according to a predetermined procedure, Good. For example, as described above, in the case where there are six A models, if a procedure is determined in advance so as to create two unit groups of three A models, a unit group is created accordingly.

  The calculation unit 214 assigns any of the trial run patterns stored in the storage unit 211 to each unit group, and creates a trial run plan using the assigned trial run pattern.

Here, first, the test run pattern will be specifically described.
A plurality of test operation patterns are prepared for each number of cranes constituting the unit group and for each model. In other words, each trial run pattern is associated with the number and model of cranes constituting the unit group, and at least one trial run pattern is prepared as one corresponding to the same number and the same model, and the storage unit 211. Stored in

FIG. 3 shows an example of a test run pattern. This test run pattern is, for example, a test run pattern in the case where the unit group is composed of four A-type cranes, and a total of six test run patterns are prepared.
Specifically, the test run pattern 1 is a pattern that continuously occupies the driver's cabs from A to D for 6 days, and the test run pattern 2 is a pattern that occupies the A and B driver's cabs continuously for 7 days. Test run pattern 3 is a pattern in which A, B, E, and F cabs are occupied continuously for 5 days.

  Test run pattern 4 is a pattern that occupies the A and B cabs for five consecutive days and occupies the E and F cabs for four consecutive days from the second day of the A and B cabs. The test operation pattern 5 is a pattern that occupies the A and B cabs continuously for 5 days and occupies the E and F cabs for 3 days continuously from the third day of the A and B cabs. The test run pattern 6 is a pattern in which the A and B cabs are occupied continuously for 4 days, and the E and F cabs are continuously occupied for 4 days from the fourth day of the A and B cabs.

  In the present embodiment, a basic test operation pattern is set as the test operation pattern 1, and test operation patterns 2 to 6 are prepared as modifications thereof. In this way, by preparing not only the basic test operation pattern, in other words, the most preferable test operation pattern but also a plurality of variations, for example, if the test operation plan is performed only with the test operation pattern 1, it will not be in time for the delivery date. In such a case, by combining other test operation patterns, it is possible to create a test operation plan capable of performing the test operation within the delivery date.

When the calculation unit 214 receives unit group information from the unit group creation unit 213, the calculation unit 214 selects a trial operation pattern corresponding to the number and model of cranes constituting each unit group from the storage unit 211, and selects the selected trial operation pattern. Create a commissioning plan using
The trial run plan is created by assigning a schedule for each selected trial run pattern based on the delivery date of each unit group. For example, the calculation unit 214 assigns schedules in order from the operation pattern corresponding to the unit group whose delivery date is earlier. As a result, it is possible to create a test run plan that always performs a test run before the delivery date.

When a trial run plan is created by the trial run plan creation device 21 having the above-described configuration, this trial run plan is transferred to the evaluation device 22, and the evaluation device 22 evaluates the trial run plan.
The evaluation device 22 includes a first evaluation unit 221, a second evaluation unit 222, and a third evaluation unit 223.

  The first evaluation unit 221 uses the evaluation function including at least one of the positional relationship between the crane shipping location and the cab, the overtime amount of the workers, and the number of times the crane is raised and lowered to the cab as a test run. A first penalty value for evaluating the plan from the viewpoint of work efficiency is calculated.

  For example, taking the test run pattern shown in FIG. 3 as an example, the test run pattern 1 occupies four cabs for six consecutive days, while the test run pattern 2 occupies two cabs. Occupies for 7 consecutive days. Since the content of the trial run is the same for each crane, in the trial run pattern 2, considering that the trial run is completed in two cabs and in 7 days, the trial run pattern 2 It can be said that the amount of work per day is larger and the burden on workers is greater.

Furthermore, in the test operation pattern 2, since only two cabs are used for four cranes, crane lifting / lowering work occurs, and personnel, equipment, and time are required for the crane lifting / lowering work. Thus, the trial run pattern 2 seems to be more efficient at first glance, but the trial run pattern 1 is superior in view of work efficiency. As described above, in evaluating the trial operation plan, not only the occupancy period of the cab is evaluated, but inconvenient aspects that occur when trying to implement each trial operation pattern, in other words, work efficiency is considered. This makes it possible to perform an evaluation that is more in line with the actual situation in the field.
In addition, it has shown that work efficiency is so bad that a 1st penalty value is high.

  Moreover, as an index for evaluating the work efficiency, in addition to the above-mentioned operator's burden and the number of times the crane is raised and lowered, the positional relationship between the shipping location of the crane and the cab is cited. For example, the driver's cabs are distributed in the area where the test operation is performed, but if a test operation is performed using the operator's cab close to the crane shipping location, the crane can be easily transported after the test operation, and the work efficiency Are better. In this way, the time and cost required for transportation vary depending on the shipping location and the cab, so the position of the cab is added to the evaluation index to evaluate the test plan more accurately in terms of work efficiency. can do.

In addition, the first penalty value is a value determined from the positional relationship between the crane shipping location and the cab, the overtime amount of workers, the number of times the crane is raised and lowered to the cab, etc. It is a value that can be derived if it is used and how long the cab is occupied. That is, since these pieces of information are specified from the trial run pattern, it can be said that the first penalty value is a value uniquely determined for each trial run pattern. Therefore, in the present embodiment, the first penalty value is calculated in advance using an evaluation function for all the trial run patterns stored in the storage unit 211, and the first penalty value and the trial run pattern are associated with each other. Information is held and the first penalty value is obtained from this related information.
FIG. 4 shows an example of the first penalty value of each trial run pattern shown in FIG. Thus, the first penalty value can be easily obtained as long as the trial run pattern is known.

The second evaluation unit 223 calculates a second penalty value for evaluating the trial operation plan from the aspect of the delivery date, using the second evaluation function having the last date of the trial operation of the unit group in the trial operation plan and the delivery date as parameters. .
For example, if the period from the last day of the test run to the delivery date becomes long, the storage period of the crane becomes long, which is not preferable. For this reason, the second evaluation unit 223 calculates the second penalty value using an evaluation function such that the evaluation becomes lower as the period from the last day of the test run to the delivery date becomes longer. Specifically, it is assumed that a second penalty value of 200 is added every time the last day of the test run is one day away from the delivery date. For example, if the delivery date and the last day of the test run are 6 days apart, 200 × 6 = 1200 and the second penalty value = 1200.

  The third evaluation unit 223 calculates an evaluation value related to the trial run plan from the first penalty value calculated by the first evaluation unit 221 and the second penalty value calculated by the second evaluation unit 222. Specifically, the evaluation value is calculated by adding the first penalty value and the second penalty value. Since this evaluation value is obtained by adding a penalty value, it can be determined that the lower the evaluation value, the better the test operation plan. In the present embodiment, the added value of the first penalty value and the second penalty value is used as the evaluation value. However, the evaluation value calculation method is not limited to this example. For example, the weighting coefficient can be changed according to the penalty value to be emphasized.

Moreover, the 3rd evaluation part 223 notifies the trial run plan change with respect to the trial run plan preparation apparatus 21 according to the calculated evaluation value. In the trial run plan creation device 21 that has received this notification, the trial run plan is updated by changing the trial run pattern assigned to the unit group in the computing unit 214, and the evaluation device 22 evaluates the trial run plan after the update. Done.
It should be noted that it is possible to arbitrarily determine by design what kind of evaluation value is obtained to end the test run plan update. For example, when an evaluation value equal to or lower than a predetermined value is obtained, the trial operation plan from which the evaluation value is obtained may be regarded as the best and the update may be terminated, or stored in the storage unit 211. The update may be terminated when a test operation plan including a combination of all corresponding test operation patterns is created, and the test operation plan having the highest evaluation value may be identified as the best test operation plan.

Next, a procedure until a suitable trial run plan is created by the trial run plan creation system according to the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIGS.
Further, in the following description, as a specific example, order information x indicating that “deliver eight A-type cranes by April 30” and “four A-type cranes on April 25th”. A description will be given assuming that order information y having the content “deliver by” is acquired.

  First, when such order information x, y is input to the information acquisition unit 212, the order information x, y is output to the unit group creation unit 213. The unit group creation unit 213 creates a unit group based on the order information x and y. For example, when the maximum number of cranes constituting a unit group is 4, two unit groups α and β are created for order information x, and one unit group γ is created for order information y. The generated three unit groups α, β, and γ are output to the calculation unit 214.

The calculation unit 214 assigns a trial run pattern to each unit group α, β, γ, and creates a trial run plan using the trial run pattern (step SA1 in FIG. 5).
Specifically, among the test operation patterns corresponding to the type and number of cranes constituting each unit group, a reference test operation pattern is assigned to each unit group. As a result, among the trial operation patterns (see FIG. 3) associated with the four A models, the reference trial operation pattern 1 is assigned to each unit group α, β, γ.

  Subsequently, a trial run plan is created by assigning delivery dates to schedules in order from the previous unit group. FIG. 8 shows the trial operation plan created in this way. In FIG. 8, the horizontal axis represents the date, and the vertical axis represents the cab number. As shown in FIG. 8, the test run pattern of the unit group α whose delivery date is earlier is set in the schedule so that the final date of the test run matches the delivery date (April 30th). The trial run patterns of groups β and γ are set in the schedule table. As for the unit groups α and β, since the delivery date is April 30 and the same day, the unit group β may be assigned first. When the delivery date is the same, the order in which the schedule is formed is arbitrarily determined, and the procedure only needs to be described and stored as a program.

The trial operation plan shown in FIG. 8 created by the calculation unit 214 is sent to the evaluation device 22, and the evaluation value is obtained in the evaluation device 22 (step SA2 in FIG. 5).
Specifically, the first penalty unit 221 acquires the first penalty value. Specifically, the first penalty value 0 for the trial run pattern 1 is acquired from FIG. 4, and the first penalty value 0 is output to the third evaluation unit 223.

  Further, the second evaluation unit 222 calculates a second penalty value for the trial operation plan. Specifically, the last test run day for the unit group α is April 30, which is the same as the delivery date. Therefore, the second penalty value for the unit group α is zero. The last test run day for the unit group β is April 24, and the delivery date is April 30. Therefore, it is open for 6 days from the last day of the test run to the delivery date, and the second penalty value is 200 × 6 = 1200. The trial run end date for the unit group γ is April 18 and the delivery date is April 25. Therefore, it is opened for seven days from the last day of the test run to the delivery date, and the second penalty value is 200 × 7 = 1400. Therefore, the second penalty value for the trial operation plan is 1200 + 1400 = 2600, and this value is output to the third evaluation unit 223.

In the third evaluation unit 223, an evaluation value (0 + 2600 = 2600) is calculated by adding the first penalty value calculated by the first evaluation unit 221 and the second penalty value calculated by the second evaluation unit. .
When the evaluation value is calculated in this way, the current evaluation value is set to the best evaluation value (step SA3 in FIG. 5), and then the third evaluation unit 223 performs a test run on the test run plan creation device 21. A plan update notification is output.

  When the test run plan creation device 21 receives a test run plan update notification, the test run plan creation device 21 inputs the notification to the calculation unit 214. Upon receiving the update notification, the calculation unit 214 sets the unit group with the latest trial run end date as the update target unit group Gm (step SA4 in FIG. 6). As a result, the unit group α is set as the update target unit group Gm. Subsequently, the trial run pattern assigned to the update target unit group Gm is changed to the next trial run pattern (step SA5 in FIG. 6). As a result, the test run pattern 1 assigned to the unit group α is changed to the test run pattern 2, and as a result, the test run plan shown in FIG. 8 is updated as shown in FIG.

  The updated trial run plan is sent to the evaluation device 22, and this evaluation value is calculated (step SA6 in FIG. 6). The evaluation value of the trial operation plan according to FIG. 9 is the first penalty value 360 + the second penalty value 3000 = 3360. Subsequently, it is determined whether or not the current evaluation value is smaller than the best evaluation value. Since the current evaluation value 3360 is larger than the best evaluation value 2600, it is determined as “NO” in step SA7, and in subsequent step SA8, it is determined whether or not all the test operation patterns have been assigned to the update target unit group Gm.

  As a result, since only the test operation patterns 1 and 2 are assigned to the unit group α that is the update target unit group Gm, “NO” is determined in step SA8, and the process returns to step SA5 to update the test operation plan. . As a result, the trial run pattern 3 is assigned to the unit group α, the trial run plan shown in FIG. 9 is updated as shown in FIG. 10, and the updated trial run plan is sent to the evaluation device 22 for evaluation. A value is calculated (step SA6 in FIG. 6). The evaluation value of the trial operation plan according to FIG. 10 is the first penalty value 300 + the second penalty value 1200 = 1500. As a result, in step SA7, it is determined that the current evaluation value is smaller than the best evaluation value. In subsequent step SA9, the current evaluation value is set to the best evaluation value.

  In this way, when an evaluation value lower than the best evaluation value is obtained, the update target unit group Gm is updated. That is, for the unit group α that has been set as the update target unit group Gm so far, the trial run pattern 3 is considered to be the best, and a search for a suitable trial run pattern for the unit group β is performed. In this way, when the evaluation value smaller than the best evaluation value is obtained, the update of the test operation pattern for the next unit group is started, so that all the test operation patterns for all the unit groups are compared. The processing can be reduced.

  Specifically, as a step subsequent to step SA9, it is determined in step SA10 whether or not all unit groups have been set in the update target unit group Gm. Here, only the unit group α is updated. Since it is not set to a group, it is determined as “NO”, and the next unit group is set to Gm. As a result, the unit group β is set as the update target unit group.

  As for the unit group β, the test run pattern is changed as described above, and the test run plan is updated. When it is determined in step SA7 in FIG. 6 that the evaluation value of the updated trial operation plan is smaller than the best evaluation value, in step SA9, the best evaluation value is updated to the value, and then step SA11. The next unit group γ is set to the update target unit group Gm. In the unit group β, even when all the trial run patterns 1 to 6 are employed, if an evaluation value smaller than the best evaluation value is not obtained (“NO” in step SA7, “YES” in step SA8). ) Without updating the best evaluation value, the next unit group γ is set as the update target unit group Gm in step SA11.

  Similarly, for the unit group γ, the trial run pattern is changed, the trial run plan is updated, and the best evaluation value is updated according to the state of the evaluation value. When all the test run patterns for the unit group γ are completed, it is determined in step SA10 that all unit group settings are completed, and the process proceeds to step SA12 in FIG. In step SA12, it is determined whether or not all allocation orders have been completed. For example, in the above-described step SA1, a test run plan is created by assigning delivery dates to schedules in order from the previous unit group. Specifically, the trial operation patterns are assigned to the schedules in the order of the unit groups α, β, and γ, but a more preferable trial operation plan may be created by changing the assignment order. Therefore, in this step SA12, it is determined whether or not all combinations of the order of allocation to the schedule of the trial run pattern assigned to the unit group have been tried. As a result, since only the order of the unit groups α, β, and γ has been tried yet, it is determined as “NO”, and the allocation order is changed in step SA13. Thereby, for example, the order of the unit groups β, α, γ is set. In this order, the above-described processing from step SA4 to step SA12 is executed. If it is determined in step SA12 that all combinations of the allocation order have been completed, the process proceeds to step SA14, and the operation plan having the evaluation value finally set to the best evaluation value is regarded as the best trial operation plan. Is output, and this processing ends.

  As described above, according to the trial operation planning system according to the present embodiment, a plurality of trial operation patterns in which the cab used for the trial operation and the occupation period of the cab are associated with each other are stored in the storage unit in advance. Since a trial run plan is created by assigning this trial run pattern to each unit group, it is possible to create a trial run plan simply by combining the trial run patterns. As a result, it is possible to easily create a trial operation plan as compared with a case where a cab is assigned to each crane and a trial operation plan is performed, and it is possible to shorten the planning time for the trial operation plan.

  Further, in the evaluation apparatus, the trial run plan is evaluated from both the work efficiency side and the delivery date, so that the best trial run plan can be obtained from the work side and the delivery date. In particular, in evaluating work efficiency, an evaluation function including at least one of the positional relationship between the crane shipping location and the cab, the overtime amount of workers, and the number of times the crane is raised and lowered to the cab is used as a parameter. Therefore, it is possible to make an evaluation that is more in line with the actual situation at the site. Further, the trial operation plan can be quantitatively evaluated by using the evaluation function.

In the present embodiment, when an evaluation value smaller than the best evaluation value is obtained for each unit group, the final test operation plan is obtained by changing the unit group to be updated. The update method and the update determination method are not limited to the above example. For example, it is possible to create a trial run plan composed of combinations of all possible trial run patterns, and adopt a trial run plan having the smallest evaluation value among them.
Further, in this embodiment, in step SA12, it is determined whether or not all the allocation orders have been completed. Instead, for example, it is determined in advance whether or not a predetermined number of times has been calculated. Whether or not to continue the processing may be determined depending on whether or not the processing time has elapsed.

10 Test run planning system 11 CPU
12 main storage device 13 auxiliary storage device 14 input device 15 output device 16 communication device 21 trial operation plan creation device 22 evaluation device 211 storage unit 212 information acquisition unit 213 unit group creation unit 214 calculation unit 221 first evaluation unit 222 second evaluation unit 223 Third Evaluation Department

Claims (7)

In an area where a plurality of cabs for a device to be inspected, such as a crane, are installed, when a test device before delivery is attached to any one of the cabs, For each unit group consisting of inspection devices, a test operation plan creation device that creates a test operation plan in which the cab of the inspected device used for the test operation and the schedule of the test operation are assigned,
Storage means for storing a plurality of test operation patterns in which the information on the cab used for the test operation and the occupation period of the cab are associated;
Information acquisition means for acquiring order information including the model, number, and delivery date of the device to be inspected for trial operation;
Unit group creating means for creating the unit group based on the order information;
Assigning any test run pattern stored in the storage means to each unit group, and calculating means for creating a test run plan using the assigned test run pattern;
A commissioning plan creation device comprising:   The trial operation plan creation device according to claim 1, wherein the calculation means creates the trial operation plan by allocating a schedule in order from a unit group whose delivery date is earlier. An evaluation device for evaluating a test operation plan created by the test operation plan creation device according to claim 1,
Using the first evaluation function including as a parameter at least one of the positional relationship between the shipping location of the device to be inspected and the cab, the overtime amount of the worker, and the work amount when performing the trial run, the trial run plan is determined. First evaluation means for calculating a first penalty value for evaluation from the viewpoint of work efficiency;
Second evaluation means for calculating a second penalty value for evaluating the trial operation plan from the aspect of the delivery date, using a second evaluation function having the last date of the trial operation of the unit group in the trial operation plan and its delivery date as parameters. When,
A trial operation plan evaluation device comprising: third evaluation means for calculating an evaluation value related to the trial operation plan from the first penalty value and the second penalty value.   The said 1st evaluation means has previously the relevant information which linked | related the said trial run pattern and the 1st penalty value, The 1st penalty value of each said unit group is obtained using this relevant information. Equipment for evaluating the commissioning plan described. The test operation plan creation device according to claim 1 or 2,
A test operation plan creation system comprising the test operation plan evaluation device according to claim 3 or 4. In an area where a plurality of cabs for a device to be inspected, such as a crane, are installed, when a test device before delivery is attached to any one of the cabs, A test operation plan creation method for creating a test operation plan in which a cab of a crane used for a test operation and a schedule of the test operation are assigned for each unit group composed of inspection devices,
A plurality of test operation patterns relating the cab information used for the test operation and the occupation period of the cab are determined in advance,
When obtaining order information including the model, number, and delivery date of the device to be inspected for trial operation, create the unit group based on the order information,
A test operation plan creation method for assigning any one of the test operation patterns prepared in advance to each of the unit groups and creating a test operation plan using the assigned test operation pattern. An evaluation method for evaluating a trial run plan created by the trial run plan creation method according to claim 6,
Using the first evaluation function including as a parameter at least one of the positional relationship between the shipping location of the device to be inspected and the cab, the overtime amount of the worker, and the work amount when performing the trial run, the trial run plan is determined. Calculate the first penalty value to evaluate from the work efficiency side,
A second penalty value for evaluating the trial operation plan from the aspect of delivery date is calculated using a second evaluation function having the last date of trial operation of the unit group in the trial operation plan and its delivery date as parameters.
A test operation plan evaluation method for calculating an evaluation value related to the test operation plan from the first penalty value and the second penalty value.

Images