Page 1 of 1

DELAY CONVEYOR not working as expected

Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2013 8:45 pm
by bppro
Hi,

Could someone please take a look at my model and explain to me the ouflow behavior?

I was expecting to see CV to ouflow between time=0 and time=10 at a rate of 1. That is what happened. At time=10, I also thought the other components would start to outflow. But what I am observing is that all the components (different type of cars in my example) start to outflow at time=0.

I have the following syntax in my outflow variable :

DELAY CONVEYOR(sales[V], LIFETIME, 0, INIT PROFILE[V], 10, LIFETIME),

Where [V] is a subscript for five type of cars.

From this, I expected that only the cars already on the conveyor would outflow before the delay time LIFETIME(=10). The only cars already on the conveyor at the start of the simulation should be the CVs distributed according to the INIT PROFILE (a flat distribution). Their number equals 10 at the start of the simulation, as per the initial value of the stock variable 'Cars'.


Thank you very much for your time,
BP

Re: DELAY CONVEYOR not working as expected

Posted: Fri Dec 20, 2013 7:27 am
by gwr
Hi BP,

I noticed that in the conveyor equation

Code: Select all

DELAY CONVEYOR(sales[V], LIFETIME, 0, INIT PROFILE[V], 10, LIFETIME)
you have set the initial amount in the conveyor to be 10 units. Note, that this is a vector equation so you have set the total to be 10 units for each of the vehicle types in V. That is not what you probably want and you should make the initial amount in the conveyor a separate variable set to {10,0,0,...} .

Kind regards,

Guido

Re: DELAY CONVEYOR not working as expected

Posted: Fri Dec 20, 2013 9:17 am
by Administrator
All I've done here is change the equation for "Retired" to

Code: Select all

DELAY CONVEYOR(sales[v], LIFETIME, 0, INIT PROFILE[v], INITAL CARS[v], LIFETIME)
It seems to work ok now. Can you let us know if this is what you are expecting?

Re: DELAY CONVEYOR not working as expected

Posted: Fri Dec 20, 2013 1:50 pm
by bppro
Many thanks to you both!

Indeed, the model now behaves exactly how I thought it should. I realize subcripts require extra attention!

Have a good day,
BP