Scheduling a 5 h activity in 5 days/week, with max 2 consecutive hours

Started by y, February 03, 2012, 07:24:17 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages1
User actions

y

February 03, 2012, 07:24:17 AM Last Edit: February 03, 2012, 04:58:06 PM by y
I have teacher A, teaching Math in group C, for 5 hours in a 5 days/week schedule. I use an activity split in 5: (1-1-1-1-1 weight 97%). Even in this case I always get this activity as 2-2-1 hours (3 days / week), obviously due to other constarints. This is not acceptable for my case. I want to restrict this to be either 1-1-1-1-1 or 2-1-1-1. My only option now is to use 1-1-1-1-1 100%, or, 2-1-1-1 100% for this activity. Is there a way to combine both?

I think that I need a constraint "min days per week for an activity". I could put this = 4 and that would solve my case. Is there something like this? I could not find it. Is there any plan to include this in a future version?

The only thing I can think of is: put an activity MathC-a 1-1-1-1 100%, then a MathC-b 1. This could give me a 1-1-1-1-1 or a 2-1-1-1. The only problem here is that in the case that MathC-b occurs in the same day with MathCa these are not consecutive! Any ideas?

Thank you!

Volker Dirr

#1
February 03, 2012, 06:07:38 PM
add an activity with split 5 (1-1-1-1-1), consecutive and 97%.
then check the min day constraints.
there is a 1-1-1-1-1, consecutive and 97% constraint.
keep it, but also add a second constraint with 1-1-1-1 and 100% constraint.
(so the same constraint, just only 4 subactivities and 100%.)

Liviu Lalescu

#2
February 03, 2012, 06:14:06 PM Last Edit: February 03, 2012, 06:20:28 PM by Liviu Lalescu
Or: A1, A2, A3, A4, A5 (duration 1 each). Min 1 day A1, A2, A3, A4, 100%. Min 1 day A5, A2, A3, A4, 100%. Min 1 day A1, A5, 0% (!), consecutive if same day = true.

This is better if you really don't care if it is 1+1+1+1+1 or 2+1+1+1. Volker's prefers 1+1+1+1+1 and takes longer to find 2+1+1+1.

Edit: combining Volker's and my first answer: instead of Volker's 97%, use 0%.

y

#3
February 04, 2012, 12:07:27 PM
Thank you both!
If I understand this correctly, I put a 100% constraint for 1-1-1-1 (first attachment fet1), and by putting 0% 1-1-1-1-1 (second attachment fet2), FET realises that I don't really care where the 5th activity will be placed, as long as it will be consecutive if necessary.

Great! I'm trying this now...
Print
Go Up Pages1
User actions