Double-layer anti-boarding method, system and outbound device for elevator group control

Abstract

The application discloses a double-layer anti-misboarding method and system for elevator group control and an outgoing call device, and belongs to the technical field of elevator intelligent control. The method comprises adding a normal extinguished early warning button to an outgoing call panel; determining a terminal floor in response to a hall call, and judging whether a misboarding risk triggering condition is met, i.e. a high probability period of going to the terminal floor and a logical departure floor being a departure floor; if the condition is met, a first scheduling strategy is executed, a candidate elevator that cannot serve the terminal floor is punished by a value penalty, and a first elevator is assigned; if the first elevator still cannot serve the terminal floor, it is determined that a high-risk misboarding scene is triggered, and the early warning button sends an early warning signal; and if a passenger presses the button within a preset time, the system cancels the original assignment and starts a second scheduling strategy to reassign an elevator that can serve the terminal floor. The application reduces misboarding caused by inconsistent service floors by a double-layer closed-loop mechanism at a lower hardware cost, and takes into account scheduling efficiency and user experience.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of intelligent elevator control technology, specifically to a two-layer method, system, and external call device for preventing accidental boarding in elevator group control. Background Technology

[0002] In modern high-rise buildings, elevator group control technology is often used to improve transportation efficiency. However, the service floor range of each elevator in the group often varies. For example, some elevators can reach special floors such as basements, equipment floors, or the top floor, while others only serve standard floors. When passengers need to go to such floors that are only accessible by some elevators (i.e., terminal floors), elevators assigned based on traditional scheduling algorithms (such as the shortest waiting time algorithm) may not be able to serve the target floor, causing passengers to board the wrong elevator or be forced to transfer, affecting travel experience and transportation efficiency.

[0003] To address the aforementioned issues, several exploratory solutions have been explored in existing technologies. One type of solution involves adding a dedicated call button or destination floor selector to the external call panel, allowing passengers to actively specify their target floor, and the system then allocates available elevators accordingly. This type of solution requires significant modifications to the panel, resulting in high hardware costs, and requires passengers to be aware of the differences in service ranges among elevators in advance, increasing operational complexity. Another type of solution involves installing displays in the waiting hall to dynamically show queuing or service information for each elevator, guiding passengers to make their own selections. However, this type of solution does not fundamentally change the system's scheduling and allocation decisions, and cannot fundamentally prevent misallocation. Some solutions predict passenger flow using historical data or assign scheduling weights to different floors and different operating modes to optimize overall operational efficiency. However, the design goals of these solutions mainly focus on shortening average waiting time or adjusting service intensity, and they do not address the problem of "passenger-elevator destination mismatch" caused by inconsistent service ranges of individual elevators by constructing a dedicated identification, early warning, and closed-loop correction mechanism.

[0004] Therefore, there is a need in the field for a solution to prevent mis-boarding that requires minimal hardware modifications, can proactively consider terminal floor accessibility in the scheduling logic, and allows passengers to participate in correction with a low learning cost. Summary of the Invention

[0005] The purpose of this invention is to provide a two-layer method, system and external call device for preventing accidental boarding in elevator group control. Through a two-layer closed-loop mechanism of "system active avoidance - user one-click correction", it reduces accidental boarding caused by inconsistent service floors with lower hardware costs, while taking into account scheduling efficiency and user experience.

[0006] To achieve the above objectives, the technical solution adopted by the present invention is as follows: A two-layer elevator group control method for preventing accidental boarding includes: Step 1: In response to an outside call triggered on a certain floor, determine one or more terminal floors corresponding to the direction of the call, wherein the terminal floors are floors that can be reached only by some elevators; Step 2: Determine whether the preset conditions for triggering the risk of accidental boarding are met. If not, allocate elevators according to the preset regular scheduling strategy and end the process. Step 3: If satisfied, execute the first scheduling strategy, calculate the comprehensive evaluation value for the candidate elevators, and impose a penalty on the evaluation value of the candidate elevators that cannot serve any terminal floor, and allocate the first elevator based on the penalized comprehensive evaluation value; Step 4: Determine whether the first elevator can serve any terminal floor. If it can, the process ends. If it cannot, it is determined to be a high-risk accidental boarding scenario. The warning button, which is normally off, located on the call device on that floor, sends out a warning signal and proceeds to step 5. Step 5: If a passenger presses the warning button within the preset time and before the first elevator reaches the departure floor, the current allocation of the first elevator is cancelled, and the second scheduling strategy is activated. The comprehensive evaluation value is recalculated from the set of elevators that can serve any terminal floor, and the second elevator is allocated. The warning button is then turned off. If the passenger does not press the button within the preset time or the first elevator has already arrived at the station, the warning signal stops, and the original allocation is maintained.

[0007] Furthermore, in step 2, the triggering condition for the risk of accidental ride is a combination of conditions, including: The current time is within a high probability period for going to any terminal floor, and the floor that triggers the summoning outside the hall is the logical starting floor of any terminal floor; The logical starting layer is defined as all floors in an elevator group where at least one elevator cannot serve the terminal floor.

[0008] Furthermore, the high-probability time periods are obtained by analyzing historical in-car floor selection data, using clustering algorithms to automatically learn peak passenger flow models for each terminal floor, and dynamically updating them.

[0009] Furthermore, in step 3, the formula for calculating the comprehensive evaluation value is: ; In the formula, For the first The overall evaluation value of the elevator. The weighting coefficient for waiting time. , For the first Estimated waiting time for each elevator to respond to a call. The normalized baseline value for the set maximum latency. For the first Other scheduling costs for each elevator besides waiting time. This serves as the preset maximum normalized baseline value for other scheduling costs. The penalty value is defined as follows: .

[0010] Furthermore, in step 4, the warning signal is a visual flashing signal, and the surface of the warning button is provided with a composite mark, which consists of a general warning symbol and concise operation guidance text.

[0011] The present invention also provides an elevator group control system, applied to the above-mentioned elevator group control double-layer anti-misoperation method, comprising: a main control unit, a sub-control unit, and an external call device. Each elevator is equipped with a sub-control unit, and the external call device is installed in the waiting hall on each floor. The external call device is communicatively connected to the sub-control unit, and the sub-control unit is communicatively connected to the main control unit. The main control unit executes the double-layer anti-misoperation method.

[0012] Furthermore, the main control unit includes: The scheduling module is used to execute the scheduling strategy and process judgment in the two-layer anti-misoperation method; The time period learning module is used to analyze historical operational data to build and dynamically update high-probability time period models; The system database is used to store elevator service area information, terminal floor definitions, and system parameters.

[0013] The present invention also provides an elevator external call device, applied to the aforementioned elevator group control system, comprising: panel; The panel includes an up-call button, a down-call button, and a separate warning button. The top panel does not have an up-call button, and the bottom panel does not have a down-call button. The control circuit is used to upload the trigger signals of each button to the corresponding elevator sub-control unit; and to receive control commands from the sub-control unit to control the warning button to switch between the normal off state and the warning active state. The warning button will only respond to the passenger's pressing operation when the system determines that it is a high-risk mis-boarding scenario and activates into a warning state.

[0014] In summary, the present invention has at least one of the following beneficial technical effects: First, the hardware modification and user learning costs are low. By adding a universal warning button that is normally off to the outbound call panel, it is possible to handle multiple terminal floor scenarios with inconsistent services. There is no need to configure a dedicated button or complex input device for each special floor, which reduces the panel modification cost and the complexity of user operation.

[0015] Second, a two-tiered closed-loop mechanism combining proactive system avoidance and user-confirmed correction was constructed. The system first applies a penalty to candidate elevators that cannot serve the terminal floor during scheduling calculations to proactively avoid most risks of accidental boarding; only when penalty scheduling still cannot avoid the risk does it request user intervention via a warning button. This mechanism provides a systematic processing path from identification to resolution of accidental boarding risks without excessively interfering with passengers.

[0016] Third, it possesses adaptive and generalization capabilities. The system can automatically learn and dynamically update peak passenger flow models for each terminal floor by analyzing historical operational data, enabling risk assessment to adapt to actual passenger flow changes and reducing the workload of manual rule maintenance. This method can be generalized to scenarios with multiple terminal floors.

[0017] Fourth, the scheduling logic is targeted. Unlike traditional scheduling strategies that primarily optimize response efficiency, this scheme introduces a penalty term centered on "elevator destination reachability" into the scheduling calculation. This is specifically designed to handle the problem of mis-boarding caused by inconsistent service areas, thus complementing conventional efficiency scheduling. Attached Figure Description

[0018] Figure 1 This is a structural block diagram of the elevator group control system of the present invention; Figure 2 This is a flowchart illustrating the double-layer anti-misoperation method for elevator group control according to the present invention. Figure 3 This is a sequence diagram of the interaction process between early warning triggering and user intervention. Detailed Implementation

[0019] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of this invention clearer, the invention will be further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and embodiments. It should be understood that the specific embodiments described herein are merely illustrative and not intended to limit the invention. Furthermore, the technical features involved in the various embodiments of this invention described below can be combined with each other as long as they do not conflict with each other.

[0020] like Figure 2 As shown, the present invention provides a two-layer elevator group control method for preventing accidental boarding, comprising: Step 1: In response to an outside call triggered on a certain floor, determine one or more terminal floors corresponding to the direction of the call, wherein the terminal floors are floors that can be reached only by some elevators; Step 2: Determine whether the preset conditions for triggering the risk of accidental boarding are met. If not, allocate elevators according to the preset regular scheduling strategy and end the process. Step 3: If satisfied, execute the first scheduling strategy, calculate the comprehensive evaluation value for the candidate elevators, and impose a penalty on the evaluation value of the candidate elevators that cannot serve any terminal floor, and allocate the first elevator based on the penalized comprehensive evaluation value; Step 4: Determine whether the first elevator can serve any terminal floor. If it can, the process ends. If it cannot, it is determined to be a high-risk accidental boarding scenario. The warning button, which is normally off, located on the call device on that floor, sends out a warning signal and proceeds to step 5. Step 5: If a passenger presses the warning button within the preset time and before the first elevator reaches the departure floor, the current allocation of the first elevator is cancelled, and the second scheduling strategy is activated. The comprehensive evaluation value is recalculated from the set of elevators that can serve any terminal floor, and the second elevator is allocated. The warning button is then turned off. If the passenger does not press the button within the preset time or the first elevator has already arrived at the station, the warning signal stops, and the original allocation is maintained.

[0021] In step 2, the triggering condition for the risk of accidental ride is a combination of conditions, including: The current time is within a high probability period for going to any terminal floor, and the floor that triggers the summoning outside the hall is the logical starting floor of any terminal floor; The logical starting layer is defined as all floors in an elevator group where at least one elevator cannot serve the terminal floor.

[0022] The high-probability time periods are obtained by analyzing historical in-car floor selection data, using clustering algorithms to automatically learn peak passenger flow models for each terminal floor, and dynamically updating them.

[0023] In step 3, the formula for calculating the comprehensive evaluation value is: ; In the formula, For the first The overall evaluation value of each elevator is calculated, with lower values ​​indicating higher priority. The weighting coefficient for waiting time. , For the first Estimated waiting time for each elevator to respond to a call. The normalized baseline value for the set maximum latency. For the first The scheduling costs of an elevator, excluding waiting time, include, but are not limited to, a comprehensive cost calculated from evaluation factors such as elevator passenger capacity and energy consumption. This invention provides a general indicator used in elevator dispatching to measure elevator operating costs other than waiting time. The specific calculation method can be flexibly determined according to the actual application scenario and system configuration. The specific calculation method is as follows: ; In the formula, For the first i The formula for calculating the passenger capacity cost factor of an elevator is as follows: ,in, This represents the current number of passengers in the elevator. Elevator rated passenger capacity. This factor reflects the degree of crowding in the elevator, and its value ranges from [0, 1]. The larger the value, the more crowded the elevator.

[0024] For the first i The energy consumption cost factor of an elevator is calculated using the following formula: ,in, The energy consumption expected to be generated in response to the call can be calculated based on factors such as the current direction of elevator operation, the relative distance between the target floor and the calling floor, and the current load of the elevator, or by referring to empirical values ​​obtained from actual measurements of a power meter under the same operating conditions. The maximum energy consumption baseline value preset for the system, such as the energy consumed by the elevator during its descent from the top floor to the bottom floor of a building when unloaded (the work process of the elevator in an extremely unbalanced state in this scenario), can also be obtained through theoretical calculations or empirical measurements. The calculation method is a common technology in the field, such as the method given in Chapter 13 of CIBSE Guide D: Building Transportation Systems.

[0025] , Let be the weight coefficients of each factor, satisfying + = 1, the specific value is preset by the system according to the operating strategy (for example, it can be increased during peak periods). Prioritize elevators with lighter loads; in energy-saving mode, this can increase [efficiency / capacity]. (Prioritize elevators with lower energy consumption).

[0026] The calculation methods for each of the above sub-factors are all well-known technologies in the field of elevator group control. Those skilled in the art can select and adjust them according to the actual system configuration and operational requirements. (Comprehensive cost value) After the above calculations, the result is obtained by dividing by the preset maximum normalized baseline value. Perform normalization processing to ensure / The value range is within a reasonable range. This serves as the preset maximum normalized baseline value for other scheduling costs. The penalty value is defined as follows: ; The value is determined through system simulation or historical data calibration to ensure that, in most scenarios with the risk of accidental boarding, the comprehensive evaluation value of elevators that can serve the terminal floor is less than that of elevators that cannot serve the terminal floor. For ease of understanding, this invention provides a deterministic determination method based on statistical distribution: Penalty value The purpose is to increase the overall evaluation value of elevators that are not eligible for service, thus increasing the difficulty of their allocation. Since the evaluation value of elevators eligible for service changes dynamically with their operating status, The value should be determined based on the statistical distribution characteristics of the serviceable elevator evaluation values: run N simulations (e.g., N=10,000) in the target scenario, record the comprehensive evaluation values ​​of all serviceable elevators in each call, sort them, and then select the value of the next highest-ranking elevator. percentile as .For example hour, It is the 0.95×N×Mth minimum value in all data (M is the number of elevators). The meaning is: in In proportional scenarios, the evaluation value of the serviceable elevator does not exceed .

[0027] Pick = +Engineering margin. Thus, in In certain scenarios, the evaluation value (including penalties) of unserviceable elevators is higher than that of serviceable elevators, thus suppressing them; in the remaining scenarios, a second-level early warning and correction mechanism serves as a fallback.

[0028] In step 4, the warning signal is a visual flashing signal, and the surface of the warning button is provided with a composite mark, which consists of a general warning symbol and concise operation instructions.

[0029] like Figure 1 As shown, the present invention also provides an elevator group control system, applied to the above-mentioned elevator group control double-layer anti-misoperation method, including: a main control unit, a sub-control unit and an external call device. Each elevator is equipped with a sub-control unit, and the external call device is installed in the waiting hall on each floor. The external call device is communicatively connected to the sub-control unit, and the sub-control unit is communicatively connected to the main control unit. The main control unit executes the double-layer anti-misoperation method.

[0030] In step 5, the evaluation criteria and calculation logic of the second scheduling strategy are completely consistent with those of the first scheduling strategy. The difference between the second and first scheduling strategies lies in the candidate elevator set. The scheduling strategy limits the candidate set to "elevators that can serve any terminal floor," and the penalty value... The value is always 0 (because the candidate set has excluded elevators that cannot be served).

[0031] The main control unit includes: The scheduling module is used to execute the scheduling strategy and process judgment in the two-layer anti-misoperation method; The time period learning module is used to analyze historical operational data to build and dynamically update high-probability time period models; The system database is used to store elevator service area information, terminal floor definitions, and system parameters.

[0032] The present invention also provides an elevator external call device, applied to the aforementioned elevator group control system, comprising: panel; The panel includes an up-call button, a down-call button, and a separate warning button. The top panel does not have an up-call button, and the bottom panel does not have a down-call button. The control circuit is used to upload the trigger signals of each button to the corresponding elevator sub-control unit; and to receive control commands from the sub-control unit to control the warning button to switch between the normal off state and the warning active state. The warning button only responds to the passenger's pressing operation when the system determines that it is a high-risk mis-boarding scenario and activates the warning state; that is, the warning button is normally off.

[0033] The present invention provides several specific embodiments to illustrate the above-described methods, systems, and apparatus, which are as follows: Example 1: System Architecture like Figure 1 As shown, the elevator group control system of the present invention includes a main control unit, multiple elevators (elevator 1, elevator 2, etc.) and corresponding multiple external call devices. In this embodiment, each elevator is equipped with a sub-control unit (also referred to as an elevator local controller), which is responsible for the elevator's body control, status acquisition, and communication with the corresponding external call device, and interacts with the main control unit as a slave node. The main control unit is connected to the sub-control units of each elevator through a communication network (such as Ethernet, CAN, etc.).

[0034] The external call device is the hardware interface for human-computer interaction in this system to prevent accidental boarding, and it is installed in the waiting hall on each floor. On each floor, each external call device is connected to the sub-control unit of its respective elevator.

[0035] The main control unit integrates the core functional modules for implementing the method of the present invention, mainly including: The scheduling module, acting as the executor of the anti-misoperation method, is responsible for real-time assessment of misoperation risk, execution of the penalty scheduling algorithm, early warning trigger judgment, and response to user correction operations. The main control unit, through its integrated scheduling module, not only completes the calculation of the anti-misoperation scheduling algorithm but also generates the final elevator allocation instructions and control instructions for the external call device button lights (including up, down, and warning buttons). These instructions are transmitted to each sub-control unit via the communication network through standard communication interfaces and protocols.

[0036] Time Period Learning Module: This module analyzes historical in-car floor selection data and uses clustering algorithms to automatically learn and dynamically update peak passenger flow time periods for each terminal floor, providing intelligent basis for risk assessment (see Example 3 for its detailed workflow). System database: Stores a list of service floors for each elevator in the elevator group, information on one or more predefined terminal floors, and system operating parameters (such as...). α , T max , C max (etc.) and historical operating data.

[0037] The outbound call panel features an up button, a down button, and a warning button. The warning button is normally off and its surface displays a label that serves both warning and operational guidance functions, such as a general warning symbol (e.g., an exclamation mark '!') paired with concise text like 'Correct' or 'Reassign'. This label design aims to visually convey to passengers, when the button flashes, that "the current assignment presents a situation requiring caution; if you need to reach a floor accessible only by some elevators, press this button to trigger a reassignment." The warning button only responds to pressing when the system determines it to be a high-risk mis-boarding scenario and the button is flashing.

[0038] Example 2: like Figure 2 As shown, this embodiment takes a passenger pressing the down button on the 10th floor during the morning rush hour as an example. Assuming the terminal floors include B1 and B2, the method flow is as follows: S1: Waiting hall call registration and terminal confirmation. Passenger operation is reported, the main control unit determines the terminal floor as the terminal floor set (e.g., {B1, B2}), and proceeds to S2; S2: Complex condition judgment. Main control unit judgment: 1) Is the current time (e.g., 08:00 on Monday) within a high-probability period for going to B1 or B2? (Determined based on historical data); 2) Is the 10th floor the logical starting floor of either B1 or B2? (The system determines whether there is an elevator on the 10th floor that cannot reach B1 or B2 based on the configuration.)

[0039] If both conditions are met, proceed to S3; otherwise, the process ends. S3: Execute the first scheduling strategy, i.e., the penalty scheduling strategy. The main control unit calculates a comprehensive evaluation value for each elevator. The specific calculation method is as described above and will not be repeated here. Set the system parameters: T max = 300 seconds, C max = 1 (assuming) C i (already normalized) α = 0.6, P 0 = 0.15. For elevators that cannot serve any terminal floor, P i = 0.15; For elevators that can be served, P i = 0. Assume elevator 1 (cannot reach B1 / B2, i.e.) i =1) It has just finished responding to the previous task and is currently docked on the 9th floor. Its estimated waiting time is... t 1 is very short, 15 seconds, other costs C 1 = 0.1; Currently, all elevators capable of serving floors B1 or B2 are in operation and located far apart, with the optimal elevator 2 having the estimated waiting time... t 2 = 100 seconds, other costs C 2 = 0.1. Therefore, the calculation yields: J 1 = 0.6 * (15 / 300) + (1-0.6) * (0.1 / 1) + 0.15 = 0.6*0.05 + 0.4*0.1 +0.15 = 0.03 + 0.04 + 0.15 = 0.22; J 2 = 0.6 * (100 / 300) + (1-0.6) * (0.1 / 1) + 0 = 0.6*0.333 + 0.4*0.1 ≈0.20 + 0.04 = 0.24; System priority selection J The elevator with the smallest value is therefore assigned elevator 1 as the first elevator. J 1 = 0.22 < J2=0.24), and the down button on the 10th floor is lit. This allocation result shows that under the penalty scheduling strategy, although a penalty is imposed on elevators that cannot serve the terminal floor, the system may still allocate a response call in special cases where the physical waiting time is extremely short. This reflects the design of the dual-layer closed-loop mechanism of this invention: the first layer of scheduling takes "destination reachability" as the key evaluation dimension and actively avoids most risks; when avoidance fails due to efficiency balance or other reasons, a specific allocation result is generated, providing conditions for triggering the second-layer user correction mechanism. Subsequently, the process proceeds to S4; Here, the waiting time weighting coefficient needs to be adjusted. α The value of is explained, reflecting the system's preference for trade-offs between passenger waiting time and other scheduling costs. α The specific value should be determined by taking into account the following factors: If the passenger flow level is low, then α A smaller value (such as 0.3~0.4) can be selected, at which point the pressure of passenger waiting time is relatively small, and the system can give more consideration to long-term operating cost factors such as energy consumption; If the passenger flow level is off-peak, then α A moderate value (e.g., 0.5~0.7) can be chosen, at which point a balance needs to be struck between passenger experience and operational efficiency. Example 2 uses... α = 0.6 corresponds to a typical off-peak scenario (such as the morning period after the morning rush hour); If the passenger flow level is during peak hours, then α A larger value (such as 0.8~0.9) should be selected, as this significantly increases passenger waiting time, and the system should prioritize shortening the waiting time.

[0040] In addition, the system analyzes historical operational data through a time-period learning module to identify passenger flow patterns in different time periods and on different dates. For each identified pattern (such as morning peak, off-peak, etc.), the system presets corresponding... α Value. When real-time running data matches a certain pattern, the value corresponding to that pattern is automatically called. α value; For ease of understanding, the present invention provides Embodiment 2. α The specific scenario for the value of 0.6 is as follows: Time period: Off-peak hours on weekday mornings (such as the non-peak hours after 10:00 AM on Mondays, or the early morning rush hour when passenger flow has not yet reached its peak). Passenger flow: Moderate level; the 10th floor downstairs call represents regular passenger flow on a non-main entrance floor. Building type: Typical office building In this scenario, the system needs to strike a balance between passenger waiting time (weight 0.6) and other scheduling costs (weight 0.4, including elevator load, energy consumption, etc.). αA value of 0.6 indicates that the system considers waiting time slightly more important than other factors, but does not completely ignore other scheduling costs. This value has been verified by a large amount of actual operational data and can achieve good overall scheduling results in this scenario.

[0041] It should be noted that, α = 0.6 is merely an example value for a typical embodiment and is not a fixed value. Those skilled in the art should determine a suitable value based on the specific application scenario, referring to the above-mentioned influencing factors and adjustment mechanisms. α Values.

[0042] S4: Result Check and Warning Trigger. The main control unit checks and finds that the assigned elevator 1 cannot serve any floor in {B1, B2}. Since this result was generated under the penalty scheduling strategy, the system judges it as a high-risk mis-boarding scenario, triggers a warning, controls the warning button on the 10th floor call device to start flashing (visual warning), and starts a timer (e.g., set to 10 seconds), then proceeds to S5.

[0043] S5: User Response and System Correction. The passenger sees the warning button flashing. At this point, two scenarios exist: Scenario 1 (Passenger needs to go to B1 / B2): If a passenger needs to go to B1 or B2, they press the flashing warning button. If elevator 1 has not yet reached the departure floor, the main control unit receives a trigger signal and immediately cancels the current service assignment for elevator 1, activates the second scheduling strategy (recalculating and selecting the best elevator from the elevator pool that can serve B1 or B2), forcibly reassigns a second elevator that can serve either of the aforementioned terminal floors (e.g., recalculating and assigning elevator 2), and immediately extinguishes the warning button, ending the process. Scenario 2 (Passengers do not need to go to the terminal floor): If passengers do not need to go to floor B1 or B2, they can ignore this warning. The warning button will automatically turn off after the preset timer expires, or when elevator 1 arrives at the 10th floor and opens the door, ending the process. like Figure 3 As shown in the diagram, the interaction process of early warning triggering and user intervention in this embodiment is presented in the form of a sequence diagram.

[0044] Example 3: Explanation of the time-segment learning module; The time-segment learning module provides the system with adaptive criteria for determining "high-probability time periods." This module analyzes historical in-car floor selection records to identify the temporal distribution patterns of passenger flow to each terminal floor.

[0045] The module uses unsupervised machine learning methods to automatically divide different passenger flow patterns (such as weekdays and weekends) from historical data and extract the peak periods of passenger flow to specific terminal floors under each pattern, thereby dynamically building and updating the "high probability period" model.

[0046] The generated model is directly used for risk condition assessment in the scheduling logic. The system can periodically retrain the model with new data to ensure it is synchronized with actual passenger flow changes.

[0047] Example 4: To further illustrate the beneficial effects of the present invention, consider a scenario similar to Example 2 (morning rush hour, elevator 10th floor downhill, terminal floors B1 / B2). If a traditional scheduling optimization scheme is used, which only sets weight factors for specific departure floors (such as the entrance floor), it may only increase the service intensity of the entrance floor during high-probability periods. However, for downhill calls from non-entrance floors like the 10th floor, it lacks a risk identification and scheduling adjustment mechanism based on the reachability of potential destinations (B1 / B2). Therefore, even during peak hours, the system may still simply assign elevator 1, which cannot serve B1 / B2, to passengers on the 10th floor based on the shortest waiting time, leading to accidental boarding without any warning or correction path provided to the passengers. In contrast, the present invention, by penalizing scheduling to prioritize suppressing elevators that cannot serve the terminal, and providing closed-loop correction through a warning button after suppression fails, helps reduce the probability of accidental boarding and improves the user experience.

[0048] Embodiments of the present invention may be provided as methods, systems, or computer program products. Therefore, the present invention may take the form of a completely hardware embodiment, a completely software embodiment, or an embodiment combining software and hardware aspects. Furthermore, the present invention may take the form of a computer program product embodied on one or more computer-usable storage media (including, but not limited to, disk storage, CD-ROM, optical storage, etc.) containing computer-usable program code.

[0049] This invention is described with reference to flowchart illustrations and / or block diagrams of methods, apparatus (systems), and computer program products according to embodiments of the invention. It will be understood that each block of the flowchart illustrations and / or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks in the flowchart illustrations and / or block diagrams, can be implemented by computer program instructions. These computer program instructions can be provided to a processor of a general-purpose computer, special-purpose computer, embedded processor, or other programmable data processing apparatus to produce a machine, such that the instructions, which execute via the processor of the computer or other programmable data processing apparatus, generate instructions for implementing the flowchart illustrations and / or block diagrams. Figure 1 One or more processes and / or boxes Figure 1 A device that provides the functions specified in one or more boxes.

[0050] These computer program instructions may also be stored in a computer-readable storage medium that can direct a computer or other programmable data processing device to function in a particular manner, such that the instructions stored in the computer-readable storage medium produce an article of manufacture including instruction means, which are implemented in a process Figure 1 One or more processes and / or boxes Figure 1 The function specified in one or more boxes.

[0051] These computer program instructions may also be loaded onto a computer or other programmable data processing equipment to cause a series of operational steps to be performed on the computer or other programmable equipment to produce a computer-implemented process, thereby providing instructions that execute on the computer or other programmable equipment for implementing the process. Figure 1 One or more processes and / or boxes Figure 1 The steps of the function specified in one or more boxes.

[0052] Contents not described in detail in this specification are prior art known to those skilled in the art. It is hereby indicated that the above description is intended to help those skilled in the art understand this invention, but does not limit the scope of protection of this invention. Any equivalent substitutions, modifications, improvements, or simplifications of the above descriptions that do not depart from the essential content of this invention fall within the scope of protection of this invention.

Claims

1. A two-layer anti-misoperation method for elevator group control, characterized in that, include: Step 1: In response to an outside call triggered on a certain floor, determine one or more terminal floors corresponding to the direction of the call, wherein the terminal floors are floors that can be reached only by some elevators; Step 2: Determine whether the preset conditions for triggering the risk of accidental boarding are met. If not, allocate elevators according to the preset regular scheduling strategy and end the process. Step 3: If satisfied, execute the first scheduling strategy, calculate the comprehensive evaluation value for the candidate elevators, and impose a penalty on the evaluation value of the candidate elevators that cannot serve any terminal floor, and allocate the first elevator based on the penalized comprehensive evaluation value; Step 4: Determine whether the first elevator can serve any terminal floor. If it can, the process ends. If it cannot, it is determined to be a high-risk accidental boarding scenario. The warning button, which is normally off, located on the call device on that floor, sends out a warning signal and proceeds to step 5. Step 5: If a passenger presses the warning button within the preset time and before the first elevator reaches the departure floor, the current allocation of the first elevator is cancelled, and the second scheduling strategy is activated. The comprehensive evaluation value is recalculated from the set of elevators that can serve any terminal floor, and the second elevator is allocated. The warning button is then turned off. If the passenger does not press the button within the preset time or the first elevator has already arrived at the station, the warning signal stops, and the original allocation is maintained.

2. The method for preventing accidental boarding in a double-layer elevator group control system according to claim 1, characterized in that, In step 2, the triggering condition for the risk of accidental ride is a combination of conditions, including: The current time is within a high probability period for going to any terminal floor, and the floor that triggers the summoning outside the hall is the logical starting floor of any terminal floor; The logical starting layer is defined as all floors in an elevator group where at least one elevator cannot serve the terminal floor.

3. The method for preventing accidental boarding in a double-layer elevator group control system according to claim 2, characterized in that, The high-probability time periods are obtained by analyzing historical in-car floor selection data, using clustering algorithms to automatically learn peak passenger flow models for each terminal floor, and dynamically updating them.

4. The method for preventing accidental boarding in a double-layer elevator group control system according to claim 1, characterized in that, In step 3, the formula for calculating the comprehensive evaluation value is: ； In the formula, For the first The overall evaluation value of the elevator. As a weighting factor for waiting time, , For the first Estimated waiting time for each elevator to respond to a call. The normalized baseline value for the set maximum latency. For the first Other scheduling costs for each elevator besides waiting time. This serves as the preset maximum normalized baseline value for other scheduling costs. The penalty value is defined as follows: 。 5. The method for preventing accidental boarding in a double-layer elevator group control system according to claim 1, characterized in that, In step 4, the warning signal is a visual flashing signal, and the surface of the warning button is provided with a composite mark, which consists of a general warning symbol and concise operation instructions.

6. An elevator group control system, applied to the double-layer anti-misoperation method of elevator group control according to any one of claims 1-5, characterized in that, include: The elevator is equipped with a main control unit, sub-control units, and external call devices. Each elevator is equipped with a sub-control unit, and the external call devices are installed in the waiting halls on each floor. The external call devices are communicatively connected to the sub-control units, and the sub-control units are communicatively connected to the main control unit. The main control unit executes the double-layer anti-misoperation method.

7. The elevator group control system according to claim 6, characterized in that, The main control unit includes: The scheduling module is used to execute the scheduling strategy and process judgment in the two-layer anti-misoperation method; The time period learning module is used to analyze historical operational data to build and dynamically update high-probability time period models; The system database is used to store elevator service area information, terminal floor definitions, and system parameters.

8. An elevator external call device, applied to the elevator group control system according to any one of claims 6 or 7, characterized in that, include: panel; The panel includes an up-call button, a down-call button, and a separate warning button. The top panel does not have an up-call button, and the bottom panel does not have a down-call button. The control circuit is used to upload the trigger signals of each button to the corresponding elevator sub-control unit; and to receive control commands from the sub-control unit to control the warning button to switch between the normal off state and the warning active state. The warning button will only respond to the passenger's pressing operation when the system determines that it is a high-risk mis-boarding scenario and activates into a warning state.

Images