ArcGIS Pro Conflation short fall?

[SalemOR_BAP]

I have directional road linework. Conflation refuses to transfer attribution to both linework features...only the closest even though both are clearly within the search distance. Fat grey is Source. Red & thin black are Targets. The black Target is the one that received the attributes. The red received none. My search distance is 100' and the greatest distance from the Source to target missed is <50'. My entire state network shows this issue. Conflation seems to 'stop' for an area once is finds the first match. Suggestions? Thanks all. Greatly appreciated.

Spatial join is too messy in the metro areas with all the crossing highways & ramps. The results are too invalid.

[DanLee]

It sounds like you have a centerline (the grey line) against dual-lines situation. Our Transfer Attributes tool currently only transfers to one side of the dual-line. We are aware of this shortcoming and are trying to address that in a future release along with some other enhancements.

Would you be able to share a sample data so we can test/verify that our code change would work on your data as expected? Thanks!

[SalemOR_BAP]

Thank you for your speedy response. You are correct - Source dataset is single line & Target dataset is double.

I have attached the Target & Source data.

Greatly appreciated.

🙂  bap

[DanLee]

Hi Bap,

Thanks for the sample data.  I found that your source data has many relatively short lines. Below is the upper left corner of the source data. Do you know why they are not merged into longer lines?

I also found that your target data has many overlapping or duplicate lines. That really makes feature matching difficult.  Are they intended this way? Here is the upper left corner of your target data; you can tell where overlapping features are by the double labels:

[SalemOR_BAP]

Sorry - Is there a flag on this community that lets me know when there is a response to my post?

1: Short lines are correct. This is highway data and is split for several reasons/attributes, e.g. change of speed, functional classification, traffic count, etc. No way around this.

2: Overlapping linework is correct. This indicates directional traffic. Transportation software (INRO EMME, PTV VISUM) manages transportation networks this way. Directionality of linework drawn indicates direction when exported out of the transportation software (in the transportation software it is depicted by a From Node -> To Node). No way around this.

I greatly appreciate your efforts.

[DanLee]

As far as I know, you should get an email notification for any new post on a topic you are involved, unless you selected "Unsubscribe" or "Mute" option from "Post Options".

Thanks for your clarifications on the data situations. Much appreciated!

[SalemOR_BAP]

Should have mentioned my 'work-around' as it seemed to produce successful results and may be something to work in behind the scenes in Arc.

After I ran the Conflation Attribute transfer and the overlapping linework only identified one feature, I queried out those segments that didn't transfer and re-ran the process on that subset. I did that for a 3rd or 4th time until the results were acceptable. The final step was to Union all the Attributed subsets back into a single output. A model can be created to do this repetitive process if necessary although it wasn't much manual work. 

Perhaps the iteration process can be applied behind the scenes for your software.

Just thought I'd pass on my work-around and let you know the geoprocess works regardless.

[DanLee]

Glad your workaround worked.  Thank you for the suggestion.

The tool does "see" multiple candidates internally. It currently transfers to only one best matched target is by design for the time being. Future enhancement could be made to support transfer to multiple candidates. It's a matter of time and resource to do that.  🙂 

[SalemOR_BAP]

You mentioned ESRI is aware of this shortcoming...should we not expect a 'fix' anytime soon? It sounds like it might be a low priority item.

Either way, I greatly appreciate the your responding and addressing my post here. Knowing it wasn't me doing something 'wrong' is useful to know so a work-around is needed and I can document it for co-workers who may also struggle.

[DanLee]

It's not a low priority, and it is also not as simple as just transfer to any candidates found. I have not verified whether all the overlaps in your data are identical. Some of them seem partially overlap. In other users' data, candidate lines within search distance could be totally unrelated roads and need to be unmatched or flagged. We definitely want to make some enhancements to simplify the workflow at user's end. It's great that you brought this up and shared your use case data. Really appreciated!  I will update this post when I have new information. 🙂