Intelligent Elevator Control By Ordinal Structure

Fuzzy Logic Algorithm

Tan Kok Khiang, *Marzuki Khalid, and Rubiyah Yusof

Centre for Artificial Intelligence and Robotics

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
Jalan Semarak,54100 Kuala Lumpur.
(All correspondence should be sent to *)
marzuki@klred.utm.my
Tel: 03-2904892 Fax: 03-2904892

Abstract evaluated by calculating a specified fixed-evaluation

function. It has been realised that knowledge and
experiential rules of experts can be incorporated in the
With the advancement of intelligent computerised elevator system to improve performance [1-4]. However,
buildings in recent years, there has been strong demands such expert knowledge is fragmentary and fuzzy which are
for intelligent elevator control with more sophistication and difficult to organise. Furthermore, the choice of “good”
diverse functions. The design criteria of an intelligent rules and evaluation functions are too complicated in many
elevator control system would include optimising the cases. It is difficult to adequately incorporate such
movement of a group of elevators with respect to time, knowledge into products using conventional software and
energy, load, etc. In this paper, a new elevator group hardware technology.
supervisory control system based on the ordinal structure In order to overcome such problems as described
fuzzy logic algorithm is proposed. The system determines above, a new elevator control system using fuzzy logic
the optimum car to answer a hall call using the knowledge algorithm is proposed based on the ordinal structure theory
and experiential rules of experts. A software has been [5,6]. This system determines the optimum car within a
developed to simulate the traffic flow of three elevator cars group of elevators to answer a hall call using the knowledge
in a 15-floor building. The software simulates the and experiential rules of experts. Instead of using the simple
movements of the cars as found in practical elevator up and down hall call buttons, destination oriented keypads
systems. It can be verified through simulation that the new at each floor is used. This system requires the passengers
system can bring about considerable improvements in the to enter their desired floors on the keypad before they enter
average waiting time, riding time, etc. in comparison with the car. The system then assigns the passenger the
conventional methods. respective optimal car to take through information displayed
on dot matrix displays near the keypad. This new elevator
1.0 Introduction supervisory control system has several objectives which
can meet users satisfaction. It can improve not only the
Due to scarcity and high price of land in urban average waiting time, but also the riding time, load, energy
areas, more and more high rise buildings are being and so on. This paper discusses the design and operations
constructed. Buildings with thirty floors or more are now a of the proposed fuzzy logic elevator control system. The
common sight in many cities around the world. In Kuala system is evaluated and tested using an interactive graphic
Lumpur, the Petronas twin towers which are the world’s simulator that we developed, simulating the traffic
tallest buildings are nearing completion with 88-floors. With conditions of a three-elevator system in a 15-floor building.
such high rise buildings, there is a need for new techniques
in building automation. One aspect of building automation
is in the development of intelligent elevator systems. In
2.0 Elevator Group Control System
every high rise building, the task of controlling a group of
The general structure of an elevator group
elevators is necessary in order to obtain optimum
supervisory control system is illustrated as in Fig. 1. In the
performance. Two of the main criteria for optimum
elevator system, there are two types of passenger requests :
performance of elevator systems are minimising waiting time
hall calls and car calls. A hall call is registered at each hall
and riding time. Other criteria include loading with respect to
that represents only the direction to which a passenger at
the number of passengers in the elevator, safety measures,
the hall wishes to go, i.e. “up” or “down”. A car call is
and also comfortability.
registered in a car and it represents the destination of the
In a conventional elevator system, the task of
passengers in the car.
controlling a large number of elevators is numerically
 call only. By calculating of the weight of the load, the
unexpected passengers can be detected and the
supervisory system can then adjust the actual load
accordingly. Similarly, ghost passengers, i.e. passengers
GROUP Hall Call whom do not board, can be recognised based on load
CONTROLLER
States of Each
Car
weighing. The supervisory system can thus cancel such
Comman Car Position nuisance calls.
Car Calls

CAR
CONTROLLER 1
CAR
CONTROLLER 2
CAR
CONTROLLER n
3.0 Design Criteria and Constraints

Actuator Actuator
In traditional control system design, there is
Actuator
usually only one performance criteria to be met, such as the
optimum speed, position, minimum-time, etc. Due to the
limitation of the configuration of the traditional control
algorithms, it is difficult to design a system to meet multiple
objectives. However, in fuzzy logic control systems, multiple
Elevator 1 Elevator 2 Elevator n objectives can easily be included in the design. The
structure of the fuzzy logic controller makes it possible for a
Fig. 1 A general structure of an elevator group supervisory number of important objectives to be met simultaneously. In
control system. the design of our elevator group supervisory control
system, the following objectives are considered :
• To minimise the waiting time of passengers at
In the system as given in Fig. 1, there are two types
a floor
of controllers, one is the car controller and the other is the
• To minimise the time passengers need to
group controller. A car controller controls the motion of the
spend in an elevator
individual car and transfers information about its states to
• To minimise crowding in an elevator
the group controller. The states of each individual elevator
• To minimise travelling distance of each
and hall calls from each floor are considered by the group
elevator
controller. Based on this information the group controller
determines the optimum car to answer the hall call which is
However, the objectives mentioned above have several
usually based on a single criteria, i.e., the distance of the
conflicting problems. For example, shortening of waiting
elevator from the passenger. Such elevator operation that is
time must be sacrificed to some extent for the sake of energy
based on “up and down hall buttons” and “up and down
saving and also crowding in the elevators. Thus, the group
hall lanterns” has been in used since the beginning of this
supervisory control system is required to optimise the
century. However, this type of system provides some
multiple design objectives with time and traffic flow
disadvantages such that the supervisory system of the
constraints.
elevators does not receive complete information on the
destinations of passengers before they board the car.
Similar to many practical elevator systems, the following
Consequently, car assignments are based on far less than 50
constraints were assumed in the simulation of the proposed
% of the traffic information that passengers could supply
intelligent elevator control system :
earlier to the system and therefore assignments are
i) An elevator will not reverse direction if there is
obviously poor in quality. The inherent disadvantages of
a passenger inside.
such present conventional system can be improved by
ii) The capacity of each elevator is 14 people and
using a better elevator technology which is not only
when capacity is met, it will bypass hall called
destination oriented, but also improves waiting time,
floors.
comfortabilty, and other factors.
iii) Each elevator travels at a constant speed of
Instead of using the simple up and down hall
0.5 floor per second.
buttons as in many conventional elevator systems, a
iv) Serving a floor requires 4 seconds to
keypad similar to that found on touch-tone telephones is
accomplish. During this time a person may
used. This keypad can be conveniently located in the
simply walk into or out of the elevator. To
elevator lobbies of each floor. This system requires the
serve more than 4 people, 6 seconds is
passengers to enter their desired floors on the keypad
needed.
before they enter the car. The system then immediately
v) An elevator must not bypass any car call.
assigns to the passenger the designated car through a
display on the keypad.
This system should have the capability to accept
boarding of unbooked passenger and also a group of
passengers travelling together which tend to register one
4.0 Fuzzy Logic Algorithm
where, wi and wj are the weights of rules Ri and Rj ,
respectively. µi is the truth value of Ri in the premise. Ci and
Fuzzy logic is a combination of both numerical and
Si are the central position and the area of the membership
symbolic techniques. It excels in producing exact results
function with fuzzy variable Bi, respectively. The structure
from imprecise data and is especially useful in computers
of this ordinal fuzzy model is shown in Fig. 2.
and electronic applications. Fuzzy logic differs from classical
logic in that statements are no longer black or white, true or
false, on or off. In traditional logic an object takes on a value
of either zero or one. In fuzzy logic, a statement can assume
any real value between 0 and 1, representing the degree to
which an element belongs to a given set. The human brain Input 1 A1 m
B1 m
can reason with uncertainties, vagueness and judgements. Input 2 A12 A2 m W 1m
Computers can manipulate precise valuations. Fuzzy logic is A11
B 11
B 12
B2 m W 2m

an attempt to combine these two techniques. ∑

∑ AW
Output
W 21
The fuzzy reasoning, described as “ If X is A then A21
W nm ∑
∑B W
B 21
Input n Anm
Y is B ” is said to be simple and conforms to human B nm W n2
language. However in cases where the system has multi An2 MF m
An1 B n2
inputs and multi outputs, one has to build the fuzzy B n1 MF 2
reasoning rules in multi-dimensional input and output MF 1

spaces in order to describe the behaviour of the system.

MF C A
This is difficult even for those who know the system well. It µµ
Π
B
is considered that the difficulty is caused by a mismatch S Π

between the description of the fuzzy reasoning and the

actual image of inference rules which humans have.
Each of the elevators in the elevator group
Fig. 2 The structure of the ordinal fuzzy model.
supervisory control system is considered as a multi-input
single output (MISO) control system. Using the
conventional fuzzy reasoning method the inference rules
have to be described in multi dimensional inputs and single 5.0 Properties Of The Elevator Fuzzy
output spaces and this is rather difficult to be configured. Control System
Thus, an ordinal structure model of fuzzy reasoning which
was proposed by Ohnishi et. al. [5,6] is used in this system.
We have developed an elevator fuzzy control
The model well coincides with the human image of fuzzy
system for the supervision and scheduling of 3 elevators
inference rules in cases when the system has many inputs
with each having a total capacity of 14 persons operating in
and many outputs. All the fuzzy inference rules are
a 15-floor building. No assumption is made on the arrival
described in one dimensional space for each of the model’s
patterns of the passengers. However, the passengers are
input and output. Co-ordination of the rules is done with
generated randomly accordingly to each floor and operation
weights attached to each rule. This model is easier in
time. During the morning peak hour, the ground floor will be
constructing or modifying fuzzy inference rules than the
more crowded than other floors. Thus, the elevator control
conventional fuzzy reasoning method as each rule is
system has to dispatch all the cars to the crowded floor
described in single dimensional space.
during peak hours and has a free car parked on the main
For an n-input one-output system, the ordinal
floor in advanced during off-peak hours, which is
structure model is described as follows :
considered as the initial stage of the system.
Ri : If X1 is A i1 then Y is Bi
In order to achieve good traffic performance, the
Rj : If X2 is A j2 then Y is Bj
elevator fuzzy control system uses six kinds of parameters
( i, j = 1, 2, ........., n)
as the control inputs and one parameter for the output.
These parameters represent the criteria or objectives to be
where, X1 and X2 are the inputs and Y is the output, Ri is the
optimised in this elevator systems which are as follows:
i-th fuzzy rule. A i1, A j 2, Bi and Bj are the fuzzy variables and
n is the number of rules.
Waiting Time :-
• Total time an elevator needed to travel from its current
Using the moment method
position to the new hall call.
n n
∑w u c S + ∑ w u c S Riding Time :-
i =1
i i i i
j =1
j j j j • Total time a passenger spent in the elevator until he
y = reached as his destination.
n n (1)
∑ w u S + ∑ w u S Loading :-
i i i j j j
i =1 j =1 • Number of passengers in an elevator.
Travelling Distance :-
Far Middle Close Middle Far
• Distance between elevator position and new hall call in 1
terms of number of floors.
Hall call Area Weight :-
• The area weight of the elevator which goes to the floor
where a new hall call is generated. 0
n
Destination Area Weight :- Hall Call Area-weight (Hall Destination)
• The area weight of the elevator which goes to the floor Destination

where the destination of the new hall call is generated. Fig. 3 Membership functions of the elevator system inputs.
Priority :-
Small Medium Big
• Output of the fuzzy controller, where the elevator with 1
highest value will be assigned.

As can be observed, it is difficult to configure six kinds of

parameters at a time using the conventional fuzzy reasoning 0
method. Thus, the ordinal structure model of fuzzy 0 0.5 1 Priority
reasoning is used. With this model, all the fuzzy inference Fig. 4 The membership function of the output of the
rules are described in one dimensional space for each input elevator system.
and output. The proposed fuzzy inference rules are shown
in Table 1 and the membership function of the inputs and 6.0 Simulation Results and Discussions
output variables are shown in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4.
To evaluate the feasibility of the proposed fuzzy
Table 1. A total of 18 fuzzy inference rules used in the
control system, a highly interactive graphic simulation
simulation.
program is written on an IBM PC compatible system. This
simulation simulates the movements of the cars as in a
Inference Rules Weights practical elevator system. The software was written in Visual
R1 : If waiting time is Short then priority is Big. 0.70 Basic 3.0 using event-driven programming techniques with
R2 : If waiting time is Medium then priority is Medium. 0.70 interactive graphical environment as shown in Fig. 5. This
R3 : If waiting time is Long then priority is Small. software has a number of facilities for easy manipulation
R4 : If riding time is Short then priority is Big.
0.70 0.40
and also analysis of the performance of the fuzzy and
R5 : If riding time is Medium then priority is Medium. 0.40
R6 : If riding time is Long then priority is Small. 0.40 conventional elevator systems. Three cases of traffic
R7 : If loading is Small then priority is Big. 0.50 patterns were experimented and the results of the
R8 : If loading is Medium then priority is Medium. simulations are given in this section.
R9 : If loading
0.60is Big then priority is Small. 0.60
R10 : If travelling distance is Close then priority is Big. 0.05
R11 : If travelling distance is Middle then priority is Medium. 0.05
R12 : If travelling distance is Far then priority is Small. 0.05
R13 : If hall call area weight is Close then priority is Big. 0.50
R14 : If hall call area weight is Middle then priority is Medium.
R15 : If hall0.50
call area weight is Far then priority is Small. 0.50
R16 : If destination area weight is Close then priority is Big. 0.40
R17 : If destination area weight is Middle then priority is Medium. 0.40
R18 : If destination area weight is Far then priority is Small.
0.40
Shor Medium Long Short Medium Lon g
1 1

0 0
Waiting Time Riding Time
Close Middle Far Small Medium Big
1 1 Fig. 5 Simulation of the intelligent elevator control system.

Fig. 6 shows the condition of the 3 elevators for

the first case. In this figure the arrow represents the
0 0
Travelling distance No. of passengers direction of each elevator. The black circle indicates where
the car call was initiated for the respective elevators. The
black triangle represents a hall call which will be served by
Far Middle Close Middle Far the elevator. Finally, a new hall call and its destination
1
generated on the floor are marked by the white triangle and

0
n
New Hall Call Area-weight (Hall Call)
white circle, respectively. For example, in the same figure, it
can be observed that elevator 1 is currently located on the In the third simulation, a hall call is assigned to elevator 1 at
3rd floor and is moving upwards. It has two car calls on the the 7th floor and the rest of the conditions are the same as
8th and 9th floors. A new hall call is then initiated on the 5th the previous case. For this case, elevator 2 has been
floor where its destination is the 14th floor, however no assigned to answer the new hall call instead of elevator 1
elevator is assigned yet to it. even through elevator 1 already has a car call to the 14th
15
floor (see Fig. 7). As we know, elevator 1 will stop three
14 times before it arrives at the 14th floor, thus it is not
economical to use this elevator. On the other hand, elevator
2 will move non stop to the 14th floor after picking up the
9 new passenger. Here, it means that the riding time of the
8
7
passengers is shorter if they travel using elevator 2
compared to elevator 1.

5
4 7.0 Conclusion
3
2
1 In this paper, a fuzzy control algorithm for elevator
group control has been proposed and evaluated. This new
Elevator Elevator Elevator
elevator supervisory control system was developed to
Fig. 6 Initial condition of case 1 simulation. improve multiple control objectives. The performance of the
Using the conventional elevator system which is
proposed elevator system is simulated through an
distance oriented, the elevator closest to the new hall call
interactive graphic simulator that have been developed. It
would, thus, be assigned which in this case is elevator 1.
was observed that as compared to conventional system, the
However, the proposed fuzzy system assigned this hall call
proposed elevator system performed better in terms of
to the elevator 2. As we find from the initial conditions in
minimising waiting time, travelling time as well as
Fig. 6, elevator 2 has a car call on the 14th floor. It means that
comfortability in terms of loading. The ordinal structure
elevator 2 will serve that floor instead of elevator 1. Thus,
model of fuzzy logic algorithm provides a simple mechanism
the destination area weight parameter of elevator 2 will
for the configuration of rules than conventional fuzzy
contribute a higher priority in the evaluation function as
algorithm.
given by inference rule no.16 in Table 1. In terms of
travelling distance, there is a reduction as compared to the
conventional system since elevator 1 will finally stop at the References
9th floor and not at the 14th floor. Due to this performance, [1] B. K. Chang, S. Kyounga and L. K. Hyung, “A Fuzzy
another advantage can be obtained in terms of energy Approach to Elevator Group Control System”, IEEE
saved. Trans. On System, Man and Cybernetic, Vol. 25 No.4,
In the second simulation, all conditions are the pp 985-990, 1993.
same as case 1 except that elevator 1 has three car calls, at [2] K. Igarashi, S. Take and T. Ishikawa, “Supervisory
8th, 9th and 14th floor. If a new hall call happens at the 5th floor Control for Elevator Group with Fuzzy Expert System”,
and its destination is the 14th floor, elevator 1 will thus be Proceeding of the IEEE International Conference on
selected as the candidate for this assignment. This is Industrial Technology, pp133-137, 1990.
because the waiting time of elevator 1 is the shortest and [3] M. Ho and B. Robertson, “Elevator Group Supervisory
thus contributes a “high” priority to the evaluation Control Using Fuzzy Logic”, Canadian Conference on
function. In this case, the destination area weight parameter Electrical and Computer Engineering, Vol. 2, pp 825-828,
gives the same effect to both elevators 1 and 2. 1994.
15 [4] S. Tsuji, M. Amano and S. Hikita, “Application of the
14 Expert System to Elevator Group Supervisory Control”,
The Fifth Conference on Artificial Intelligent
Application, pp 287-294, 1991.
9
[5] Y. Naitoh, T. Furuhashi and Y. Uchikawa, “A Variable
8
7 Ordinal Structure Model for Fuzzy Reasoning and Its
Application to Decision Problem of Working Order”,
International Conference On Industrial Electronic,
5
4 Control and Instrumentation, Vol. 2, pp 1539-1543, 1991.
3 [6] T.Ohnishi, “Fuzzy Reasoning by Ordinal Structure
2 Model of Control Rule”, Journal of Japan Society for
1
Fuzzy Theory and Systems , Vol.2, No. 4, pp 125-132,
Elevator Elevator Elevator 1990.
Fig. 7 Initial condition of case 3 simulation.