Latest Contributions by RachelApplebaum

Hi Ian, Glad that you were able to get Waste Collection working after removing those lollipop roads! Let me start with answering why WC had a problem and Route didn't, since that's a shorter answer. The WC algorithm internally batches all stops on a street into a single stop that represents all the batched stops and then creates collection edges from the streets. You can read more about collection edges here. Collection edges are unique to WC. Since the problem you were encountering was with the generation of collection edges, it is a problem unique to WC. Finding those lollipop roads is a multistep process. These steps require the Data Reviewer license.  1. Use Dissolve (Data Management) with ObjectID as the dissolve field and choose to make single part (not multipart features)  This will create a feature class where those lollipop roads are split into 2 different features, one being the loop/candy and the other being the stick 2. On the dissolved lines, set up a validation attribute rule for Polyline or Path Closes on Self. You can use the Error Inspector to find the features that violate this rule This is a preset rule that is available with the Data Reviewer license. It will identify all the self-intersecting loops in your dissolved lines. Attribute rules require a globalID on the feature class, so you'll need to set that up using Add Global IDs Not all of the loops will be from lollipop features, but it gives us a place to start 3. For each feature identified by the Polyline or Patch Closes on Self rule, select the corresponding features in the original streets feature class. Some will be lollipops, other will just be regular loops. But this should find all the lollipops that need to be fixed. Do whatever geometry fixes you need to on the lollipop roads   If you have someone savvy with python in your office, they could write a python tool that checks geometries of road lines to see if the first and last vertex of a road have the same coordinates. That would remove the need for the Polyline or Path Closes on Self rule (and thus the need for the Data Reviewer license). Hopefully that helps and makes sense! -Rachel ... View more

Hi @GISManager5 , I just heard back from my contact and was able to generate a feature class of all the lollipop roads in the dataset. Fix these and you should not get that error anymore (though I only looked for lollipop roads, so I can't guarantee something else won't pop up).   -Rachel ... View more

Hi Ian, I apologize for the delay. The support analyst who has your case reached out to me and I've been communicating with them.  The issue with the data is not that there are multipart features, it's that single part features intersect themselves. I've been working on finding a way for you to identify the different types of this in your data, but I don't have a good way yet. I've found a few things that can find loops that end on themselves, but the methods don't find lollipops (where one endpoint of the feature touches the interior). Like this: An example of this type of geometry is OID 631 in the streets. I've reached out to some contacts and hopeful to have something for you.  -Rachel   ... View more

Hi Ian, I wanted to let you know that I haven't forgotten about this! We've been investigating this on our end and I think we've found the issue, now it's a question of what we can do about it for you. I should hopefully have an update on that within a couple days. I'll keep you posted on it! -Rachel ... View more

Hi Ian, Thanks for the data! After a quick look at the data, I don't see anything wrong with the connectivity or streets, though a thorough look might find something. I do think this is specific to Waste Collection, as that is a very specialized solver with specialized needs. Your update about successfully running a Route solve corroborates that.  We'll take a further look at the data and let you know 🙂 -Rachel ... View more

Hullo! I'm happy to take a look as this for you, as something unexpected is definitely happening. Would you be able to provide a layer package with your waste collection layer (which should bring the ND along with it)? -Rachel ... View more

Hi David,   No mistake made. The filtering on the Network Analyst ribbons does apply definition queries to the relevant sublayers. However, Solve is one of the few geoprocessing tools that does not care about definition queries; it's always going to solve on the full set of inputs, even if you have definition queries applied to limit which features are displayed in the map and shown in the attribute tables.   If you want to solve against a subset of your input points, you can apply the filters, then duplicate the network analysis layer. To do this, either run the Copy Network Analysis Layer geoprocessing tool, or right click the Network Analysis layer in the Table of Contents and select "Duplicate" (this runs Copy Network Analysis Layer in the background). Duplicating the Network Analysis layer will respect the definition queries, so you'll be able to quickly solve that layer.   I also want to mention that your confusion is very understandable (geoprocessing tools mostly do respect definition queries), so we'll update the documentation to make it clear for this scenario.   Regards, Rachel ... View more

Hi Emma, I want to make sure I'm understanding the problem, though, so I'm going to recap what I think you're asking about: You have your own network dataset that was given to you by someone else. It has 3 cost attributes: Minutes, TravelTime, and Miles. Presumably Miles is based on the shape length (though with no pictures of that cost attribute setup, I can't be sure), Minutes is based on a field that was calculated by some equation with distance (unknown if shape length or something else) and the speed limit, and TravelTime is not mentioned (or unknown; usually when I see TravelTime it uses traffic info [that's how SMP and ArcGIS Online do it] but I doubt you have historical traffic info with this network). When you solve using the Miles cost as the impedance, the route makes sense and fairly closely matches what Google Maps gives you for shortest time route. But when you solve with Minutes as the impedance, the route is a lot longer and doesn't look correct.   My first thought upon seeing the pictures is that there is a problem with the calculation of the costs somewhere in the data. I'd look at the FT_ and TF_Minutes field values on the centerlines and check that they make sense. Pick a few random streets and divide the shape length by the speed limit (make sure you keep the unit conversion correct) and see if those numbers match what's in the FT_ and TF_Minutes fields. For a more circumspect review, pick streets that are on and around the path that's return when solving with Miles as the impedance. Do the Minutes values for those streets make sense? My guess is that somewhere, maybe on a few streets or maybe everywhere, the Minutes values aren't correct; they are too large, and that's what's making the route solver take a longer path when solving using Minutes. I'd also double check how the Miles attribute is set up. If it's not using the Shape field directly, double check the numbers and make sure that it was calculated correctly. To inspect the network attributes directly, you can use the Explore Network tool https://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/latest/help/analysis/networks/explore-network.htm . Or look directly at the attributes on the street centerlines. Whichever works best for you. Regards, Rachel ... View more

Hi Emily, Based on that error, I'm guessing you're using our ArcGIS Online Routing Services to create these service area polygons. When using the ArcGIS Online Routing services, there are limits to the number of inputs or size of requested output. For the Service Area Routing Service, there is a 15 min or 15 mi cutoff limit when you are requesting detailed polygons. https://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/latest/help/analysis/networks/credit-consumption-and-analysis-limits.htm#ESRI_SECTION2_A56B7F96629540E0BB787272B9C8EFE0 If you would like a larger cutoff, then you can switch to generating generalized polygons, which are gnerated quickly and are fairly accurate. Or, if you have your own local network dataset, then you can use that as the network datasource. In that case, there are not hard limits on the size or number of polygons you can generate in a single solve. If you are not using ArcGIS Online Routing Services as your network datasource but are still getting that error, please let me know and we can dig into this further 🙂 Regards, Rachel ... View more

Does this happen after every time you run the model? And would you be able to share your model (or a screenshot of it)? Also, if you close and reopen Pro after seeing the issue, does it continue to flip the cost/impedance in Explore Network? Does it happen for every edge? Does it happen with junctions and/or turns as well? Could you share a screenshot of the settings page from Explore Network? I'd like to see what travel mode settings it is using. ... View more

Hi @ReginaldoPaderon2 , This looks like it might be related to ND connectivity. Use can use the Explore Network tool in Pro to look at the connectivity of the edges in that intersection area. When selecting an edge with Explore Network, all connected edges should be highlighted in a bluish-purple color. Make sure that all roads you expect to be connected are highlighted like that. The Connectivity tab will also list all of the connected elements. There could also be some attribution issues, like maybe oneways aren't attributed correctly? (I've definitely done that a few time [or more]). Use the Travel Attributes data grid to check things like oneway attribution or cost values. I'm probably biased, being that I'm on the Network Analyst team, but I think Explore Network is pretty darn handy for things like this. -Rachel ... View more

Hi Jamal, You are correct; in the Field Script (or Element Script) evaluator dialogs, there is currently no list of fields (for Field Script evaluators) or network attributes (for Element Script evaluators). We have plans to improve the experience of creating Field Script and Element Script evaluators and to make it more similar to other expression editors, such as Calculate Field. I don't have an estimated time of arrival on when it will happen, but it is a high priority project for us. Regards, Rachel ... View more

Haven't forgotten this. We're still looking into the enterprise portal part.  ... View more