Page 1 of 1
| Match i/o tools creates a mess 04/06/2024 at 07:23 #156460 | |
flappy boi
25 posts |
I'm making a June 2024 SuO timetable for wemsub (my first tt) When I use the match i/o from tools 2, it creates a mess There is only one train type (1972 stock), UID from RTT is used 38 warnings initially for trains that terminate/not used (and it made more warnings when trying to divide a 7 car train into 4 sections💀) Attached is the file that I didn't match i/o workings yet p.s. I've already fix it Post has attachments. Log in to view them. Log in to reply |
| Match i/o tools creates a mess 04/06/2024 at 17:56 #156463 | |
Peter Bennet
5419 posts |
Hi, I'm not sure what you are asking as you say you fixed it. However, the "not used" means the train either does not enter the sim or is not referred to by an earlier train. And "no onward working" is the converse. "Already used" means that two trains have the same next working. I'm not sure why you are dividing 1972 stock at all never mind into 4 bits. The various length errors mean what they say if you have a train of 114m then when divided the parts should add up to 114m and vice versa. Peter I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs! Log in to reply |
| Match i/o tools creates a mess 04/06/2024 at 18:03 #156464 | |
wellgroomed
110 posts |
If I've understood the OP correctly, I think it's a bug report with the SIM tools. The match inward/outward sometimes produces very unexpected results, such as the first inward working splitting for every subsequent departure from that location and completely ignoring the other inward workings.
Log in to reply The following user said thank you: flappy boi |
| Match i/o tools creates a mess 04/06/2024 at 20:50 #156465 | |
|
flappy boi
25 posts |
Peter Bennet in post 156463 said:Hi, I'm not sure what you are asking as you say you fixed it. 0 warnings at last as I manually linked the new working. Peter Bennet in post 156463 said: I'm not sure why you are dividing 1972 stock at all never mind into 4 bits. The tool split the train into 4, not me. This should be illegal! (you can try to use the tool on the attached wtt) I'm thinking I might've done something wrong with timetabling so that the tool doesn't work. I used the tool at S34, HROWDC and SBP only but it split the trains. It worked perfectly for LO services previously. Log in to reply |
| Match i/o tools creates a mess 04/06/2024 at 20:57 #156466 | |
|
Peter Bennet
5419 posts |
wellgroomed in post 156464 said:If I've understood the OP correctly, I think it's a bug report with the SIM tools. The match inward/outward sometimes produces very unexpected results, such as the first inward working splitting for every subsequent departure from that location and completely ignoring the other inward workings.Don't know about that but I've had another look and so far I've not noticed any false positives as it were. Certainly, a lot of the reports are due to an incoming train missing a next working and that seems to be a matter of fact. So those need to be fixed. The next issue is that, as a matter of fact, 114m trains are being split into trains that are themselves 114m which is impossible so needs to be fixed. If someone can identify a false positive then we can report it for investigation. Peter I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs! Last edited: 04/06/2024 at 21:10 by Peter Bennet Reason: Inserted quote to make it clearer what I was replying to. Log in to reply |
| Match i/o tools creates a mess 04/06/2024 at 21:07 #156467 | |
|
Peter Bennet
5419 posts |
flappy boi in post 156465 said:Peter Bennet in post 156463 said:If I look at the timetable for (say) 2I21-07 it's coded as Divide Rear 5I21-07 DR 5I01-08 Next 5I45-07, so in effect ending up with 3 trains. Are you saying that by executing the tool these DR instructions were inserted into the timetable?Hi, I'm not sure what you are asking as you say you fixed it. If so then can you provide a timetable that does not have these coded into it but which the tool reports/inserts. That can then be put up for investigation. Remember that if you don't then save the timetable any such insertions would not be saved into it. Peter I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs! Log in to reply |
| Match i/o tools creates a mess 04/06/2024 at 21:17 #156468 | |
|
flappy boi
25 posts |
Peter Bennet in post 156467 said:Ah yes exactly, the tool created those weird workings. At least I bothered to follow the instructions that tells me to backup timetable before using the tools. I'm 100% definitely not committing the crime of splitting up an LU stock Log in to reply |
| Match i/o tools creates a mess 04/06/2024 at 22:57 #156470 | |
|
Peter Bennet
5419 posts |
flappy boi in post 156468 said:Peter Bennet in post 156467 said:So you have a save from before you ran the tool from which you can recreate the phenomenon?Ah yes exactly, the tool created those weird workings. At least I bothered to follow the instructions that tells me to backup timetable before using the tools. I'm 100% definitely not committing the crime of splitting up an LU stock Peter I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs! Log in to reply |
| Match i/o tools creates a mess 05/06/2024 at 00:56 #156472 | |
|
flappy boi
25 posts |
Yes
Log in to reply |
| Match i/o tools creates a mess 05/06/2024 at 07:17 #156474 | |
|
Peter Bennet
5419 posts |
Thanks, I think I've got it now. Peter I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs! Log in to reply |
| Match i/o tools creates a mess 05/06/2024 at 19:12 #156480 | |
|
Peter Bennet
5419 posts |
OK. I've managed to replicate. Peter I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs! Last edited: 05/06/2024 at 22:41 by Peter Bennet Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Match i/o tools creates a mess 07/06/2024 at 14:34 #156494 | |
|
Peter Bennet
5419 posts |
Personally, I've never used that particular tool as I find the analyser on tab 1 tells me what I need to know. However, I think I can see what it's trying to do which is to see if it can take a best guess as to how orphan trains might be linked and linking them. There's no intrinsic reason, as I see it, why that best guess should not involve joining/dividing - so it does that as part of the guessing, So, it is entirely possible that the tool is doing what it's designed to do but with what we know is flawed data. I've tried tracing through a reported train and can't immediately see why the output is what it is. Anyway, I've reported as 40966 in case there are tweaks that could be made. Peter I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs! Log in to reply |
| Match i/o tools creates a mess 07/06/2024 at 18:04 #156497 | |
|
flappy boi
25 posts |
Peter Bennet in post 156494 said:I find the analyser on tab 1 tells me what I need to know. Absolutely - I find the analyser more useful than the match i/o while I put in the next working in location list right after I clone the working and edit the UID. Peter Bennet in post 156494 said:
Thanks for reporting tho I thought it could be me doing things badly as I've put DL or UL at HRW when I remember/felt like... btw I've finished recreating the timetable (took me 6 evenings) Log in to reply |
| Match i/o tools creates a mess 07/06/2024 at 23:44 #156500 | |
|
bill_gensheet
1431 posts |
flappy boi in post 156497 said:I tend to build my timetables up from smaller service/train-type groups, so makes matching manually a lot easier - eg DMU to DMU, IC set to IC set. Also I have never tried anything with the matching tool. Log in to reply |
| Match i/o tools creates a mess 08/06/2024 at 00:21 #156501 | |
|
flappy boi
25 posts |
bill_gensheet in post 156500 said:
Does groups mean separate .wtt files for different services, e.g. 201D.wtt 202D.wtt 203.wtt so on and so on then merging them together and save altogether into a large wtt file? I've done that sort of thing but at a different scale as I made LU.wtt and LO.wtt for bakerloo services and DC lines services Log in to reply |
| Match i/o tools creates a mess 08/06/2024 at 14:52 #156506 | |
|
bill_gensheet
1431 posts |
flappy boi in post 156501 said:bill_gensheet in post 156500 said:Yes, split down as far as possible to make pairable unlinked workings clear. For Wembley sub that is about as far as you can go, and they will still be pretty big. One I am doing now (Saturday 1975 Wolverhampton) has 12 .wtt files, the weekdays had 6 more as most of the trip diagrams were self-contained too. It does mean they can be tested separately at x10 speed, rules can be sorted out at the partial level and also easier to find stock balance issues that usually mean timetable errors. I can be up to ver 0.5 before running as a combined set. Bill Log in to reply |
| Match i/o tools creates a mess 08/06/2024 at 17:36 #156509 | |
|
flappy boi
25 posts |
bill_gensheet in post 156506 said:flappy boi in post 156501 said:I'll definitely try it next time when I make another timetable.bill_gensheet in post 156500 said:Yes, split down as far as possible to make pairable unlinked workings clear. For Wembley sub that is about as far as you can go, and they will still be pretty big. One I am doing now (Saturday 1975 Wolverhampton) has 12 .wtt files, the weekdays had 6 more as most of the trip diagrams were self-contained too. However doing it with LO workings seems to be more of a hassle as I now need to figure out what will happen at Euston end for example. While LU has clear rules that says 201 will still be 201 for the entire day Log in to reply |
| Match i/o tools creates a mess 08/06/2024 at 18:13 #156510 | |
|
Peter Bennet
5419 posts |
flappy boi in post 156509 said:
Have a look at Realtimetrains which should help. Peter I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs! Log in to reply |
| Match i/o tools creates a mess 08/06/2024 at 22:34 #156512 | |
|
flappy boi
25 posts |
Peter Bennet in post 156510 said:I'm already making use of RTT to figure out the UIDs, but I lacked motivation to create more rules, so my timetable only has 32 rules for the entire day 💀 20 LU trains have no rules at all... (altho I should be revising for my GCSE chemistry instead of dealing with rules at Euston or Stratford) Log in to reply |