Unscheduled Stops in a tour with non-used available time?

[pssdiogo]

Hello,

I'm having issues using with "planBasicTours".
I have several unscheduled orders and the tour/vehicle time window have non-used time.
In the plan result, the vehicle ends at 12:45 even having availability to work until the next day at 1:00. As result I have unscheduled stops that should be scheduled since their time window is until 17:00.

As an attempt to achieve better results, I have used the Improvement Step and also tried to adjust the Goals:
But, unfortunately the results are the same.

Under the plan result "unscheduledOrderAnalysisResults" I see the status "0 FEASIBLE" and none "Violation". So, it is suggeted to enable the improvement step but is already enabled. I'm having some difficulty to analyse what is wrong here.
I have attached some images to better describe this issue.
Thank you in advance.

Best regards
Pedro Diogo

2017-03-07 16:28:55,329;INFO;RequestTimes;27e20d32-b1a0-40bc-b880-fa2a4fa7aad9;192.168.131.81;unknown-http;50090;unknown-cluster;XTour.planBasicTours;true;;;;none;m0001;16;0;0;83317;0;2;83317;83336;ptv-Request636245008514868704;iuCodes:41;;;;;;-;-;-

[Joost]

Hello Pedro,

When orders are returned in the analysis as feasible, it usually is a sign that our algorithm was stopped because the available machine time was reached. I would advise to increase this value. It is found in the planning parameters. According to your screenshot it is now set to 2 minutes. Try to have it run without a available machine time and see if this improves the result.

Please leave some feedback how a test without available machine time goes.

With regards,
Joost

[pssdiogo]

Hello Joost

Thank you for your quick reply.
I just did it as you suggested, but I still have the same results...

What is funny is that in the request I can see the CurrentPlan.NumberOfUnscheduledOrders reducing until reach 0. But, this is than different from what is returned in the plan.result where I than have 9 orders Unscheduled (18 transp. points).

It seems to me that as a result I receive the BestPlan where I see CurrentPlan.NumberOfUnscheduledOrders = 18
Please have a look to the attached image.

Best regards
Pedro Diogo

[Joost]

Hello Pedro,

Hmm, this goes a bit deeper then I can investigate threw the forum. I would advise you to raise a ticket with your support contact. To speed things up:

Support will need the request send to xTour. If you have xTour running locally, please make a support package. Instructions on how to create a support package from a request: http://xserver.ptvgroup.com/forum/viewt ... f=43&t=474 . If you are using xServer internet, they will only need the request and the URL you are connecting to.

With regards,
Joost

[pssdiogo]

Hello Joost


Ok, I will do it. Thank you.

I was trying to follow your instructions but I don't know where to find the request needed to achieve the point "Paste your request in the upper text box, annotation 2"
Is the request available in the logs? Where can I fin it?

The support ticket should be created under the support form: http://xserver.ptvgroup.com/en-uk/servi ... port-form/
Am I correct? Thank you

Best regards
Pedro Diogo

[Joost]

Hello Pedro

You can enable request logging by editing the conf/xserver.properties and setting logRequests to true. If you then restart the xServer the request are logged into the logs/<xerver name>-server.log . You can use the form or mail them. Your support contact is support.de@xserver.ptvgroup.com .

With Regards,
Joost

[pssdiogo]

Hi Joost

Great. Thank you.

Best regards
Pedro Diogo

[Bernd Welter]

Hello guys,
Do we know the solution in the end?
Regards
Bernd

[Bernd Welter]

Hello guys,

any clue how the story ended?

I have another player who wonders why his stops remain unscheduled but are feasible.

Regards
Bernd

[MichaelSchwabl]

Hello!
I have the same situation!
What we found is, as we reduce the vehicle requirements and vehicle categories, xTour schedules more and more vehicles.
When we work without any requirement, all vehicles are scheduled, but of course this is not a solution for our usecase.

So are there any findings on that issue!