Process transition priorities - no effect?

[hans]

Question about process transition priorities. Have a look at the following case:

1. Robot has 2 input and 1 output conveyor
2. ToConveyor accepts a product any time a signal activates
3. Main point: one transport link has priority 22, other one 1.

What I assumed was that in this case, with 2 competing transitions, it would choose the one with priority 1. Instead it takes the one with priority 22 first and then picks products evenly from both conveyors. Priority has no effect here?

Related question: in a scenario like this:

1. If product is ready to TransportOut at the priority 22 conveyor first
2. Product arrives later at priority 1 conveyor
3. A signal then activates TransportIn
4. How to have the robot always prioritise the priority 1 conveyor?

[keke]

Priority is related only to transport task and not the transport in/out pairings. So transports are matched whenever possible and transport for it is queued. Priority only takes place when resource looks to transport queue and picks the top priority from there. And ToConveyor is requesting only one product at a time so in effect there’s really no transport queue to prioritize or the queue only ever has one transport in it.

Maybe the easiest way to make this is change ToConveyor process to CapacityPull process. In that process you need to select the statement and assign conveyor or many who pull products if they have capacity. What this will do is actually queue multiple transports instead of waiting one to be complete unlike normal TransportIn statement. So now you have that queue and transport priority can take effect.

-k

[hans]

@keke

CapacityPull

Thanks for the tip! Is there maybe a demo/test layout available that utilises this CapacityPull process, so I could see it in action?

[Tilma]

In the Layout Templates, there is a layout “Capacity Pull Process” with explanations

It is also used in the Layouts “AMR Thermal Spraying System” and “Automatic Order Picking System”