I forgot to mention that, if the hard constraint is broken, it breaks all the planning to.

ID: 104[Skills: ABC 2,] -- Priority: P3   -   Fabio(8)[Skills: ABC 3,ABC 1,] ------ Broken(1)

ID: 103[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,ABC 3,ABC 4,] -- Priority: P1   -   Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------ Broken(2)

ID: 105[Skills: ABC 2,] -- Priority: P3   -   Richard(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,ABC 4,] ------ Feasible(0)

ID: 102[Skills: ABC 2,] -- Priority: P4   -   Fabio(8)[Skills: ABC 3,ABC 1,] ------ Broken(1)

ID: 101[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,ABC 4,] -- Priority: P1   -   Denny(8)[Skills: ABC 2,ABC 1,ABC 3,ABC 4,] ------ Feasible(0)

ID: 107[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 3,] -- Priority: P4   -   Richard(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,ABC 4,] ------ Broken(1)

ID: 106[Skills: ABC 1,] -- Priority: P6   -   Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------ Feasible(0)

ID: 108[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 4,] -- Priority: P5   -   Fabio(8)[Skills: ABC 3,ABC 1,] ------ Broken(1)

ID: 109[Skills: ABC 3,] -- Priority: P5   -   Denny(8)[Skills: ABC 2,ABC 1,ABC 3,ABC 4,] ------ Feasible(0)

ID: 110[Skills: ABC 1,] -- Priority: P6   -   Fabio(8)[Skills: ABC 3,ABC 1,] ------ Feasible(0)

ID: 11011[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,ABC 3,ABC 4,] -- Priority: P6   -   Fabio(8)[Skills: ABC 3,ABC 1,] ------ Broken(2)

every workorder fits if I remove ID 11011, and only 1 engineer can attend that workorder, that would be Denny that has every required skill, but if you notice here, you'll see that it breaks more than one assignment

2013/2/21 André Fróes <arfmoraes@gmail.com>

in that case, i just want to leave it unassigned or (and) add it to a list of unassigned workorders, so I can get it and resort to another set of engineers. 

2013/2/21 Geoffrey De Smet <ge0ffrey.spam@gmail.com>

Op 21-02-13 12:54, André Fróes schreef:

Sure. My sorting by worktime and skills is partially working, if I do my planning with a certain number of engineers/workorders that fits in each other, it works perfectly, If i overcome that, it breaks the planning, it keeps showing the data that shouldn't be displayed and, in consequence, breaks the optimal solution.

Example:

Engineer Andre, WT(8 hours), Skills ABC1, ABC2

Workorder 1, required WT(2), required Skills ABC2

Workorder 2, required WT(3), required Skills ABC2

Workorder 3, required WT(1), required Skills ABC1

with these 3 WO it should work perfectly, results:

ID: 104[Skills: ABC 2,]   -   Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------ Feasible(0)

ID: 105[Skills: ABC 2,]   -   Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------ Feasible(0)

ID: 106[Skills: ABC 1,]   -   Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------ Feasible(0)

Adding this workorder that exceed in time and skill

Workorder 1, required WT(5), required Skills ABC2, ABC3

this is the outcome:

ID: 104[Skills: ABC 2,]   -   Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------ Feasible(0)

ID: 105[Skills: ABC 2,]   -   Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------ Feasible(0)

ID: 107[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 3,]   -   Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------ Broken(1)

ID: 106[Skills: ABC 1,]   -   Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------ Feasible(0)

What do you want to happen with that extra workorder ID: 107[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 3,]?
- Assign it to different engineer - because there's another engineer available which has time (or it doesn't matter that engineers are overloaded)
- Leave it "unassigned" because you are doing "over-constrained planning." For 6.0, planner will support "nullable planner variables", but in 5.5, you need to emulate this behavior by creating special Engineer called Unassigned and adjusting your score constraints to not trigger when that UnassignedEngineer is involved. There's been some previous mails about this topic in this mail archive.

it shows all not excluding the workorder that is not to be assigned to engineer. I did it by simplescorecalculator:

public HardAndSoftScore calculateScore(Distributor distributor) {

int hardScore = 0;

int softScore = 0;

for (Engineer e : distributor.getEngineerList()) {

int requiredWorktime = 0;

List<Skill> requiredSkillList = new ArrayList<Skill>();

for (WorkOrder o : distributor.getWorkOrderList()) {

if (e.equals(o.getEngineer())) {

requiredWorktime += o.getRequiredWorktime();

for (SkillWorkOrder swo : o.getRequiredSkills()) {

requiredSkillList.add(swo.getSkill());

}

}

}

int engineerAvailableTime = e.getWorktime() - requiredWorktime;

if (engineerAvailableTime < 0) {

hardScore += engineerAvailableTime;

}

List<Skill> tempEngSkillList = new ArrayList<Skill>();

for (SkillEngineer se : e.getSkillEngineerList()){

tempEngSkillList.add(se.getSkill());

}

if (tempEngSkillList.containsAll(requiredSkillList)){

hardScore += 1;

}

}

return DefaultHardAndSoftScore.valueOf(hardScore, softScore);

}

that's the problem happening, after that i'll start working on priority by the tip you provided in the previous post, but i'll try by simplescorecalculator to, i'm not getting along (yet) with drools rules system (drl), it's a bit harder to use it with planner.

thanks for the help Geoffrey!

_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users