.
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 36

Thread: Interlocking Towers with AI

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    568
     

    Default

    [QUOTE=Kennilworth;1568797]Hi Peter

    Yes that is the version that I'm using. The route that I'm currently working with requires some trackmarks to be facing into the siding and the loco can see them entering the siding but can't see them when leaving it. I have had to add a trackmark pointing out of the siding which it can see when it is leaving.

    I know that when using brummfondels path setting rule in TS12 and early versions of T:ANE, the path would only show trackmarks pointing in the direction of travel so I assumed that this behaviour with Autodrive was connected with that.

    Regards

    Brian[/QUOTE

    Hi Brian

    I agree with you on brummfondels path control, they are directional but I didn't think that was the case with autodrive. I am using a single trackmark at the entrance to a loco shed that is approached from both directions and it can be seen by the AI. I also have trackmarks at other locations that can be approached from both directions without any trouble.

    Peter

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United States of America, Alabama, Wetumpka
    Posts
    591
     

    Default Purpose of "Assignment" field in path definition

    A quick question regarding the Enhanced Interlocking Towers: What is the purpose of the "Assignment" field in the individual path definitions? Options appear to be Automatic or Manual. I only use AI trains, and it was my impression that a path is activated when the ITSetPath command is reached in a schedule. Does this option affect that? I've been leaving it set at the default, which is Automatic. This field does not appear to be mentioned in the Trainz Wiki documentation.

    Many thanks,
    Lamont

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    568
     

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ldowns View Post
    A quick question regarding the Enhanced Interlocking Towers: What is the purpose of the "Assignment" field in the individual path definitions? Options appear to be Automatic or Manual. I only use AI trains, and it was my impression that a path is activated when the ITSetPath command is reached in a schedule. Does this option affect that? I've been leaving it set at the default, which is Automatic. This field does not appear to be mentioned in the Trainz Wiki documentation.

    Many thanks,
    Lamont
    Hi Lamont

    'Automatic' means that the IT looks for trains approaching 0.5kms away and then allocates the path according to the priority you have set in the IT
    'Manual' means that the approaching train sets the path it wants according to its schedule. Much more reliable when you have a lot of paths in an IT.

    I always use manual and I only use AI drivers. No wandering trains

    Peter

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United States of America, Alabama, Wetumpka
    Posts
    591
     

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peterwhite View Post
    Hi Lamont

    'Automatic' means that the IT looks for trains approaching 0.5kms away and then allocates the path according to the priority you have set in the IT
    'Manual' means that the approaching train sets the path it wants according to its schedule. Much more reliable when you have a lot of paths in an IT.

    I always use manual and I only use AI drivers. No wandering trains

    Peter

    Thank you, Peter.

    --Lamont

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United States of America
    Posts
    25
     

    Default

    Pierre

    I am continuing my experimenting with your towers and manager rules and have a question I'm not able to solve. Within the Tower Manager there is an option "set tower path assignment" to ai only. I only see this option when trainz (and tower manager) is running. Is there a way to make "ai only" the default while editing/creating a session?

    Thanks

    Harold

  6. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by harmarsox View Post
    Pierre

    I am continuing my experimenting with your towers and manager rules and have a question I'm not able to solve. Within the Tower Manager there is an option "set tower path assignment" to ai only. I only see this option when trainz (and tower manager) is running. Is there a way to make "ai only" the default while editing/creating a session?

    Thanks

    Harold
    Hi Harold.

    Each tower (either standard IT or EIT) has an option flag for path auto assignment which can either be set to none, ai only, external only, ai then external, or external then ai. This flag drives how the tower will search a path when a train approaches a signal (at 0.5 km from it) : ai designating the internal N3V routine for ai auto path assignment, external designating an external listener rule like Mission Code Management.

    The EIT Manager enables to set ou change this flag both under surveyor or in driver mode, but you should take care that external components listeners like MissionCode Manager may need some specific value for this flag and will enforce its value. So you may have set this value under surveyor using the IT Manager, but you may have another value while in driver mode due to some scripted components enforcing the value they need to work.

    For me this value is more an option available for scripted listeners rules (or other scripted components) than an option for the end user. It is available in EIT Manager but I have only use it to look at its setting and check the listeners rules have set the correct value. I have never set a specific value under surveyor.
    For your information the default value is ai then external, which means that auto path searching is first done using the internal N3V module (that finds path only for DriveTo/NavigateTo driver commands or similar - do not work for autopilot or autodrive driver command) and if no path has been down by external listener rules in the order they are listed in the session rules.

    Hope this helps.

    Pierre.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United Kingdom, Kent
    Posts
    130
     

    Default

    Hi there,

    I'm trying to set up my interlocking towers now the updated Bloodnok signals are out. When trying to apply mission codes to various paths in one tower it returns to a full list of paths in every tower I've set up.

    In driver, when in Mission Codes Manager, I click one of the paths in this particular tower and I get the following red error message:

    MissionCodeManager : File mcmrulehdl.gs, Line 986, ER_NullReference


    function $string@HTMLMissionCodeManagerPropertyHandler::Get MPathDetailsPageArea(), line 890
    function $string@HTMLMissionCodeManagerPropertyHandler::Get DisplayPageArea(), line 287
    function $string@HTMLMissionCodeManagerPropertyHandler::Get DescriptionHTML(), line 228
    function $void@PropertyBrowserExt::Refresh(), line 138
    function $void@MissionCodeManager::RefreshBrowerData(), line 1053

    Everything seems to be fine and it's only this tower that appears to be letting the side down.

    Any ideas?

    Thanks,
    Paul

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United Kingdom, Kent
    Posts
    130
     

    Default

    Solved it.

    Whilst it allows me to name paths with use of a forward slash, this is what caused the error. Use of '&' also caused some issues, so opted for a comma instead.

    Cheers,
    Paul

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United Kingdom, Kent
    Posts
    130
     

    Default

    Back again - this time with a problem I can't resolve... Funnily enough, the same tower. I have been able to set an External Object for one of the paths, but when I go to set another I get the following red error message in surveyor:

    InterlockingTowerEditHelper : File interlockingtoweredithelper.gs, Line 1628, ER_Timeout


    function $string[]@InterlockingTowerEditHelper::GetPropertyElementLi st(string), line 1565

    Any ideas on this one?

    Thanks,
    Paul

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    568
     

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paulper View Post
    Back again - this time with a problem I can't resolve... Funnily enough, the same tower. I have been able to set an External Object for one of the paths, but when I go to set another I get the following red error message in surveyor:

    InterlockingTowerEditHelper : File interlockingtoweredithelper.gs, Line 1628, ER_Timeout


    function $string[]@InterlockingTowerEditHelper::GetPropertyElementLi st(string), line 1565

    Any ideas on this one?

    Thanks,
    Paul
    Try shortening your path and then set your External object and then set the rest of the path'

    Peter

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United Kingdom, Kent
    Posts
    130
     

    Default

    I shortened the path then added the external object then set the rest of the path - that does indeed work.

    Then the path fails to set - although every junction and signal is set correctly, apart from the first which remains red.

    Error message is:

    "EnhancedInterlockingTowerPath : File interlockingtowerpath.gs, Line 662, ER_Timeout


    function $bool@InterlockingTowerPath::IsObjectInPathDefinit ion(MapObject,int,bool), line 661
    function $MapObject[]@InterlockingTowerEditHelper::RemoveObjectsAlready OnPath(InterlockingTowerPath,MapObject[]), line 234
    function $string[]@InterlockingTowerEditHelper::GetPropertyElementLi st(string), line 1610"

    In game messages initially say it's "tried to activate object [signal number] with result: true" with exception to the start signal - and the subsequent signals all turn green.

    Then another batch of in game messages say it's "tried to activate object [the same signal numbers] with result: false. Failed to set path object [signal number]". This probably reflects the fact that the start signal is still red. The other signals remain green.

    This section of my huge route is the first where I've used interlocking towers. I have re-done the towers on numerous occasions hoping to find something that I've done wrong, but I'm struggling. I am using Bloodnok's updated signals but don't believe this is an issue. If I replace them with the standard 'UK 4 Signal' the same errors occur.

    Hopefully someone might have an idea what's going on here!

    Thanks,
    Paul

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United States of America, CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES
    Posts
    3,995
     

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peterwhite View Post
    Hi Lamont

    'Automatic' means that the IT looks for trains approaching 0.5kms away and then allocates the path according to the priority you have set in the IT
    'Manual' means that the approaching train sets the path it wants according to its schedule. Much more reliable when you have a lot of paths in an IT.

    I always use manual and I only use AI drivers. No wandering trains

    Peter
    Maybe the default should be 'manual' if it works better? Pierre, are you listening?

    Mick

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    806
     

    Default

    @paulper

    Check that your start signal does not form part of another path in the same IT. As long as it is used only as a start signal for any / all paths, that is OK. However, you cannot have a path that overlaps a start signal. E.g. (junctions omitted for clarity; all paths in the forward direction):

    Path A

    Sig 1.....Sig 2..... Sig 3

    Path B

    Sig 1.....Sig 4

    Path C

    Sig 5.....Sig 6......Sig 1.....Sig 7


    Paths A and B both use Sig 1 as the starting signal, which is allowed.
    Path C has Sig 1 embedded in the path. This is not allowed if Sig 1 is used as a starting signal elsewhere.

    I have fallen foul of that one in the past.

    Other thoughts...
    Do you get the same error if you do not try to set an external object? If not, perhaps there is an alternative way to realize your objective. For instance, if you are trying to protect a diamond crossing, you could try using the exclusive sets option within EIT.

    Regarding the specific ER-Timeout message you are seeing, Pierre (pguy) would be best placed to answer.

    John
    Last edited by Vostrail; March 21st, 2017 at 11:00 PM. Reason: Formatting issues

  14. #29

    Default

    Hi.

    EIT relies on standard N3V IT edition capabilities for editing paths and InterlockingTowerEditHelper is the N3V component library called for doing this edition. Very difficult to have any advice about a script timeout in some standard N3V interlocking tower script without looking in details to the tower and path configuration.

    But from my experience, just a few suggestions :

    - first try your path without any external objects definition. Does it work ? If it works without the external object and it does not work with the external object, the problem comes from the external object.

    - external objects that are junctions work fine for me.
    - external objects that are signals does not always work fine from my experience. In particular, an entry signal can nether be used as an external object in any other path : this may lead to some target state conflicts that are not correctly managed by standard ITs. EITs should support external objects being entry signal in some other paths and towers, but ... sorry I think this has not been already tested, so may work or there may be some remaining bugs in such configuration ...

    Paul, if you do not find ... you can send me a cdp with your route, session, and also dependencies not available on DLS so that I can try to reload your route and session, download DLS dependencies and have a look at your problem. if you want I have a look, just send me a PM and I will send you back my email address.

    Regards.
    Pierre.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United Kingdom, Kent
    Posts
    130
     

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vostrail View Post
    @paulper

    Check that your start signal does not form part of another path in the same IT. As long as it is used only as a start signal for any / all paths, that is OK. However, you cannot have a path that overlaps a start signal. E.g. (junctions omitted for clarity; all paths in the forward direction):

    Path A

    Sig 1.....Sig 2..... Sig 3

    Path B

    Sig 1.....Sig 4

    Path C

    Sig 5.....Sig 6......Sig 1.....Sig 7


    Paths A and B both use Sig 1 as the starting signal, which is allowed.
    Path C has Sig 1 embedded in the path. This is not allowed if Sig 1 is used as a starting signal elsewhere.

    I have fallen foul of that one in the past.

    Other thoughts...
    Do you get the same error if you do not try to set an external object? If not, perhaps there is an alternative way to realize your objective. For instance, if you are trying to protect a diamond crossing, you could try using the exclusive sets option within EIT.

    Regarding the specific ER-Timeout message you are seeing, Pierre (pguy) would be best placed to answer.

    John
    Thanks John.

    Although I was convinced I didn't have a start signal that formed a non-starting signal within another path, I started from scratch anyway and set up one tower instead of several. No start signal overlapped. Unfortunately, I'm still getting the same issue. I have one path coming from a station to the east (Dartford) and another path coming from a station to the west (Crayford). They form part of a loop line and the paths merge at Crayford Spur Junction. I can activate and run trains along the path from Crayford and the signal on the west side before the merge changes to green. However, the signal on the east line before the merge holds red and I cannot get that part of the path from Dartford to work (it says the train has activated and entered the path but evidently not all of it!). There are no ingame error messages for this issue, but the same error message flash up when in surveyor and trying to add an external object. I'm convinced that whatever is meant by this error is the issue.

    Protecting diamond crossings will come later I think!

    Any thoughts?

    Thanks,
    Paul

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •