1. Home
  2. Library
  3. Data

Upcoming Games

(UTC times)

Full list
Add a game

Upcoming Events

No events to display

Who's Online

Beerlao, geswedey, jc92, GeoffM, doublea999, drew, flabberdacks (7 users seen recently)

Match i/o tools creates a mess

You are here: Home > Forum > General > Timetabling > Match i/o tools creates a mess

Page 1 of 1

Match i/o tools creates a mess 04/06/2024 at 07:23 #156460
flappy boi
Avatar
23 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
Avatar
5374 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
Avatar
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
Avatar
23 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
Avatar
5374 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
Avatar
5374 posts 		flappy boi in post 156465 said:
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.
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?

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
Avatar
23 posts 		Peter Bennet in post 156467 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?
Peter
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
Avatar
5374 posts 		flappy boi in post 156468 said:
Peter Bennet in post 156467 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?
Peter
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
So you have a save from before you ran the tool from which you can recreate the phenomenon?

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
Avatar
23 posts 		Yes
Log in to reply
Match i/o tools creates a mess 05/06/2024 at 07:17 #156474
Peter Bennet
Avatar
5374 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
Avatar
5374 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
Avatar
5374 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
Avatar
23 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:

I've reported as 40966 in case there are tweaks that could be made.

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
Avatar
1343 posts 		flappy boi in post 156497 said:

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.
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)
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
Avatar
23 posts 		bill_gensheet in post 156500 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.

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
Avatar
1343 posts 		flappy boi in post 156501 said:
bill_gensheet in post 156500 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.

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
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
Avatar
23 posts 		bill_gensheet in post 156506 said:
flappy boi in post 156501 said:
bill_gensheet in post 156500 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.

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
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
I'll definitely try it next time when I make another timetable.
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
Avatar
5374 posts 		flappy boi in post 156509 said:


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.

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
Avatar
23 posts 		Peter Bennet in post 156510 said:

Have a look at Realtimetrains which should help.
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
Back