The present invention relates to the field of determining placement of computer components in a rack. More particularly, this invention relates to the field of determining placement of computer components in a rack where the placement is determined using a computer implemented method.
Computer components are placed into racks, which are placed in computer rooms. Choice of the racks, assignment of the computer components to particular racks, and assignment of the components to particular slots in a particular rack involves weighing different objectives and considering a number of technological, ergonomic, and esthetic constraints. In the prior art, these decisions are made by human specialists. Disadvantages of this approach are that it is time consuming and may not find a near optimum solution.
What is needed is a method of automating a determination of placement of components in a rack.
The present invention is a computer implemented method of determining placement of components in a rack. In one embodiment, a rack height, a set of components to be placed in the rack, and a height are provided for each of the components. A placement of the components in the rack is determined according to constraints. The placement of the components is then evaluated according to an objective.
The constraints may comprise a rack height constraint, a single placement constraint, and a non-overlapping constraint. The rack height constraint ensures that placement of a particular component does not result in a top height of the particular component exceeding the rack height. The single placement constraint ensures that each component is placed once and only once. The non-overlapping constraint ensures that each slot in the rack is occupied by no more than a single component.
The method may further comprise providing a weight and a weight distribution for each component in the set of components. In this embodiment, the objective comprises seeking a minimum height for a center of gravity of the components.
These and other aspects of the present invention are described in more detail herein.
The present invention is described with respect to particular exemplary embodiments thereof and reference is accordingly made to the drawings in which:
The present invention is a computer implemented method for determining placement of components in a rack. Preferably, the placement of the components in the rack is performed as part of a larger computer implemented method, which begins with a large set of components that are to be placed in a plurality of racks and which determines a rack selection and a rack assignment in addition to determining the placement of the components in each of the racks. The rack selection determines which rack sizes are needed and a quantity for each of the rack sizes. The rack assignment determines which of the large set of components are to be placed in each of the racks. The rack selection and the rack assignment are the subject of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/289,662 filed on Nov. 6, 2002, and entitled, “Methods and Apparatus for Designing the Racking and Wiring Configurations for Pieces of Hardware,” which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. Alternatively, the computer implemented method of determining placement of the components in the rack is performed as a stand alone computer implemented method.
An exemplary rack is illustrated in
A preferred method according to an embodiment of the present invention is illustrated as a block diagram in
In the computer implemented method, the second and third steps, 304 and 306, preferably employ a mixed integer programming technique. The mixed integer programming technique iteratively performs the second and third steps, 304 and 306, in seeking the objective (e.g., the minimum for the center of gravity). Preferably, the mixed integer programming technique provides a heuristic solution which determines the placement of the components having a low center of gravity but not necessarily a minimum center of gravity. Alternatively, the mixed integer programming technique employs an exact solution technique which provides the minimum center of gravity. Alternatively, the mixed integer programming technique provides a satisfying solution which finds the placement of the components which provides the center of gravity that does not exceed a particular height such as half the rack height 102.
An embodiment of a computer for implementing the preferred method 300 is illustrated schematically in
In an embodiment of the present invention, computer code resides on a computer readable memory, which may be read into the computer 400 by one of the input/output devices 404. Alternatively, the computer readable memory comprises the memory 406 or the storage device 408. The computer code provides instructions for the processing unit 404 to perform a method of the present invention. The computer readable memory may be selected from a group consisting of a disk, a tape, a memory chip, or other computer readable memory.
It will be readily apparent to one skilled in the art that the constraints of the preferred method 300 may be described as hard constraints and the objective may be described as a soft constraint or as a sum of soft constraints.
A first alternative method of the present invention adds a height preference constraint to the preferred method 300. The height preference constraint provides that if first and second components are to be placed in a particular rack that the first component be placed above the second component.
A second alternative method of the present invention allows a relaxation of the constraints of the preferred method 300. For example, if it is found that all of the constraints cannot be met, the second alternative method provides a list of particular constraints which cannot be met and provides a choice to a user of which of the particular constraints should be relaxed. Upon selection of the particular constraint to be relaxed, the second alternative method determines the placement of the components in the rack.
A third alternative method of the present invention adds a height range to the input values for a particular component. The height range imposes the condition that the particular component be placed within the height range of a minimum height and a maximum height. Examples for the height range include placement of the particular component within a top half of the rack 100, within a bottom half of the rack 100, or within a middle section of the rack 100.
A fourth alternative method of the present invention allows the height range to be relaxed for one or more components. Preferably, when the height range is relaxed a height range penalty is added to the objective. For example, the penalty may be added to the center of gravity with the relaxed height range making it less optimum than the same center of gravity without the relaxed height range. Alternatively, no penalty is applied for relaxing the height range constraint.
A fifth alternative method of the present invention adds an empty space requirement to the input values for a particular component. The empty space requirement includes an empty space requirement above the particular component, an empty space requirement below the particular component, or an empty space both above and below the particular component.
A sixth alternative method of the present invention allows relaxation of the empty space requirement of the fifth alternative method. Preferably, when the empty space requirement is relaxed for one or more components, an empty space penalty is applied to the objective. Alternatively, the empty space penalty is not applied to the objective.
A seventh alternative method of the present invention adds a contiguous placement constraint to the preferred method 300. When certain components are within the set of components to be placed in the rack, the contiguous placement constraint requires that the certain components be placed contiguously.
A first implementation according to an embodiment of the present invention includes first input values, first decision variables, first constraints, and a first objective.
Exemplary first input values are provided in Table 1.
If the vertical center of gravity is near a bottom the component, WeightDistb is near 0. If the vertical center of gravity is near a top of the component, WeightDistb is near 1. It will be apparent that these assignments of values to indicate the location of the center of gravity for components are arbitrary and that other assignments could be used.
The first decision variables may include an indicator for whether a component base (i.e., the bottom of a component) occupies a particular slot in the rack, a height of the component base in the particular slot, an indicator for whether a first component is above a second component, a center of gravity variable, variables for relaxation of upper and lower limits for height of a particular component, and variables for relaxation of empty space requirements above and below a particular component.
The indicator for whether the component base occupies the particular slot in the rack is BoxInSlotb,slε{0, 1} where bεBoxes and slε[RackHeight]. BoxInSlotb,sl is one if and only if the base of component b is in slot sl. If BoxInSlotb,sl=1, then component b occupies slots sl, . . . , sl+Heightb−1. Throughout this document, [n] denotes the set of integers between 1 and n.
The height of the component base in the particular slot is BoxAtHeightb∈[RackHeight] where bε Boxes. BoxAtHeightb is the number of the slot for the base of the component b.
The indicator for whether the first component is above the second component is Aboveb1,b2ε{0, 1} where b1,b2 E Boxes. Aboveb1,b2 is one if and only if component b1 is physically racked above component b2.
The center of gravity variable is CenterOfGravity, which is the location of the vertical center of gravity for the rack holding the components Boxes.
The variables for relaxation of upper and lower limits for the height of the particular component are RelaxBoxHeightUbb≧0 and RelaxBoxHeightLbb≧0 where bε Boxes.
The variables for relaxation of hard upper and lower limits for the height of the particular component are RelaxHardBoxHeightUbb≧0 and RelaxHardBoxHeightLbb≧0 where bε Boxes.
The variables for relaxation of the empty space requirements above and below the particular component are RelaxSpaceAboveb≧0 and RelaxSpaceBelowb≧0 where bε Boxes.
The decision variables BoxAtHeightb and BoxInSlotb,sl may be correlated by
where slε [RackHeight], for all bε Boxes.
The decision variable Aboveb1,b2 may be given by
BoxAtHeightb1+(1−Aboveb1,b2)·RackHeight≧BoxAtHeightb2
where Aboveb1,b2+Aboveb2,b1=1 for all distinct b1, b2ε Boxes and Aboveb,b=0.
The decision variables RelaxSpaceBelowb and RelaxSpaceAboveb may be limited by
RelaxSpaceBelowb≦SpaceBelowb and RelaxSpaceAboveb≦SpaceAboveb
for all bε Boxes.
The first constraints include a single placement constraint, a rack height and empty space constraint, an upper non-overlapping constraint, a lower non-overlapping constraint, and a height range constraint.
The single placement constraint may be given by
where bε Boxes. This ensures that each component b is placed once and only once.
The rack height and empty space constraint may be given by
SpaceBelowb−RelaxSpaceBelowb+1≦BoxAtHeightb≦RackHeight−Heightb−(SpaceAboveb−RelaxSpaceBelowb)
for all b ε Boxes. This ensures that the top height of component b does not exceed the height of the rack and incorporates the empty space requirements above and below the component b while allowing for relaxation of the empty space requirements.
The upper non-overlapping constraint may be given by
BoxAtHeightb2+2·RackHeight·(1−Aboveb2,b1)≧BoxAtHeightb1+Heightb1+SpaceAboveb1−RelaxSpaceAboveb1
for all distinct b1, b2 ε Boxes, which ensures that the height of component b1 plus the empty space above the component b1 does not overlap the base of component b2. This is trivially satisfied except when b2 is above b1, in which case the slot assigned to component b2 must exceed the slot assigned to component b1 plus the number of free slots allocated above component b1.
The lower non-overlapping constraint may be given by
BoxAtHeightb1+2·RackHeight·(1−Aboveb1,b2)≧BoxAtHeightb2+Heightb2+SpaceBelowb1−RelaxSpaceBelowb1
for all distinct b1, b2 ε Boxes, which ensures that neither the base of the component b1 nor the space below the component b1 overlaps a top of the component b2. This is trivially satisfied except when b1 is above b2, in which case the slot assigned to component b1 must exceed the slot assigned to component b2 plus the number of free slots allocated below the component b1. In the exemplary upper and lower non-lapping constraints given above, the constant 2 may be replaced with any larger constant.
The height range constraints may be given by
HtLbb−RelaxBoxHeightLbb≦BoxAtHeightb≦HtUbb+RelaxBoxHeightUbb
and
HtLbHardb−RelaxHardBoxHeightLbb≦BoxAtHeightb≦HtUbHardb+RelaxHardBoxHeightUbb
for all b ε Boxes
The first objective is to minimize the center of gravity which may be given by
where b ε Boxes, and
and where the constants 105, 106, 107 are exemplary and, thus, may be replaced with other constants.
A second implementation according to an embodiment of the present invention may include second input values, a second decision variable, second constraints, and a second objective. For notation purposes in the second implementation, b indicates a component and s indicates a slot in the rack where a top slot in the rack is numbered s=1 and a bottom slot in the rack is numbered s=number of slots in the rack, though different values may be assigned to indicate the position of a slot (e.g., the slots may instead be numbered from bottom-to-top). In the second implementation, components are divided into component sets Bk according to component height k. The second implementation differs from the first implementation in two ways. First, it use it uses fewer input values. Second, it avoids using the variable BoxAtHeightb, an integer variable, and instead uses a location variable, which is a binary variable.
The second input values are given in Table 2.
The second decision variable comprises the location variable, which may be given by Xk(b, s)ε{0,1}, where Xk(b, s)=1 if component b occupies slot s and Xk(b, s)=0 otherwise. If a base of the component b occupies the slot s, the location variable Xk(b, s)=1 for slots s, s−1, . . . , s−k+1.
The second constraints may include not allowing a top of height of a component to extend above the rack, ensuring that each component is placed once and only once, and ensuring that a slot is occupied by no more than a single component.
The constraint of not allowing a top of height of a component to extend above the rack may be given by
X2(b, 1)=0 for all bεB2
X3(b, 1)=X3(b, 2)=0 for all bεB3
. . . .
Xk(b, 1)=Xk(b, 2)= . . . =X(b, k−1)=0 for all bεBk.
The constraint of ensuring that each component is placed once and only once may be given by
The constraint of ensuring that a slot is occupied by no more than a single component is provided by slot. For the first slot, the constraint may be given by
For the second slot, the constraint may be given by
For the third slot, the constraint may be given by
For the sth slot, the constraint may be given by
The second objective is to minimize the center of gravity C which may be given by
A third implementation adds height constraints to the second implementation. The third implementation includes third input values, third decision variables, and the height constraints.
The additional input values are given in Table 3.
The third decision variables include RelaxHtUbb and RelaxHtLbb, which are relaxation variables for the soft upper and lower placement heights, HtUbb and HtLbb, respectively.
The height constraints include soft height constraints and hard height constraints. The soft height constraints are given by Xk(b, s)=0 for s<HtUbb−RelaxHtUbb and s>HtLbb+RelaxHtLbb. Note that since the slots s are numbered from the top of the rack, upper bounds are given by s being less than the upper bounds and lower bounds are given by s exceeding the lower bounds. For the soft height constraints, a penalty term is added to the second objective according to the sum of RelaxHtUbb and RelaxHtLbb.
The hard height constraints may be given by Xk(b, s)=0 for s<HtUbHardb and s>HtLbHardb.
A fourth implementation adds the contiguous placement constraint to the second implementation. When certain components are within the set of components to be placed in the rack, the contiguous placement constraint requires that the certain components be placed contiguously. In the fourth implementation, a pre-placement solution may be used to provide a relative placement for the certain components and forms them into a new single component. Then, the second implementation may be used to provide a placement solution for the new single component and remaining components.
A fifth implementation adds a relative height constraint to the second implementation. The relative height constraint ensures that a first component b1 having a first component height k1 is closer to the top of the rack than a second component b2 having a second component height k2. The relative height constraint may be given by:
Xk1(b1, 1)≦Xk2(b2, 1)
Xk1(b1, 1)+Xk1(b1, 2)≦Xk2(b2, 1)+Xk2(b2, 2)
. . .
Xk1(b1, 1)+Xk1(b1, 2)+ . . . +Xk1(b1, H−1)≦Xk2(b2, 1)+Xk2(b2, 2)+. . .+Xk2(b2, H−1)
where H is the height of the rack.
A sixth implementation adds empty space requirements to the second implementation. The sixth implementation includes fourth input values, a fourth decision variable, and empty space constraints.
The fourth input values are given in Table 4.
The fourth decision variable comprises a free slot variable Z(s) where Z(s)=1 if the slot s is unoccupied and Z(s)=0 otherwise.
The sixth implementation modifies the second implementation's constraint of ensuring that a slot is occupied by no more than a single component. The sixth implementation replaces this constraint with a constraint ensuring that a slot is occupied by either a single component or by an empty slot. For the first slot the constraint may be given by
For the second slot, the constraint may be given by
For the third slot, the constraint may be given by
For the sth slot, the constraint may be given by
The empty space constraints include requiring one or more empty slots below or above a given component according to the fourth input variables, SpaceBelowb and SpaceAboveb. The constraint of requiring one empty slot below a given component may be given by
Xk(b,s)≦Z(s+1) for s=1, 2, . . . , H−1.
This constraint is only imposed when an empty slot is required.
If two empty slots are required below the given component, the constraint becomes
Xk(b,s)≦Z(s+1) for s=1, 2, . . . , H−1 and
Xk(b,s)≦Z(s+2) for s=1, 2, . . . , H−2.
The constraint of requiring one empty slot above a given component may be given by
Xk(b,s)≦Z(s−k) for s=2, . . . , H+1.
This constraint is only imposed when an empty slot is required.
If two empty slots are required above the component, the constraint becomes
Xk(b,s)≦Z(s+1) for s=1, 2, . . . , H−1 and
Xk(b,s)≦Z(s+2) for s=1, 2, . . . , H−2.
While the foregoing has been with reference to particular embodiments of the invention, it will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that changes in these embodiments may be made without departing from the principles and spirit of the invention, the scope of which is defined by the appended claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5383562 | Gay | Jan 1995 | A |
5850539 | Cook et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
6086617 | Waldon et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6378119 | Raves | Apr 2002 | B1 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20050071134 A1 | Mar 2005 | US |