Linear referencing on intersections in R&H

2131
17
01-21-2019 07:37 AM
MajaMesserli
New Contributor III

Hello R&H Users

We have discovered a different behavior between linear referencing in R&H.

Our data model is based on road axes. The direction of linear referencing is predefined.

Most of the axis are straight and the linear referencing works perfectly in R&H. But some of them have ramps intersecting the axis. These ones are not correctly referenced in R&H. The only way to do this is to set the M-values manually. However, these values are lost after using R&H, for example after realigning the axes.

 

Did you encounter this problem too?  If so, what was your way to solve it?

Currently we are using ArcGIS 10.5.1 and Windows 10. Do you know if the problem remains in 10.6? What about ArcGIS Pro?

Tags (1)
0 Kudos
17 Replies
CliveReece
Esri Contributor

Hello Maja,

Thanks for including the route diagram.  If I understand it correctly, the purple line represents a single route that has a main line which is calibrated from 0 to 900+, then a separate branch with measures from 1000 to 1200 which crosses the main line near measure 140, and finally a third branch with measures from 1300 to 1400 which crosses the main line around measure 900.  If that is correct, then that kind of route shape is not supported in Roads and Highways 10.5.1.  Roads and Highways only supports Loop and Lollipop types of self-intersecting shapes (c.f. here).  The only way to possibly create the route envisioned in the diagram and have Roads and Highways support it would be to introduce gaps in the routes so that the areas of intersection do not actually touch.  The collection could then be modeled as a gapped route (which is supported).  

We have heard from the Roads and Highways product team that a future ArcGIS Pro-based Roads and Highways release will support additional kinds of self-intersecting routes shapes.  Until the route shape you show gets supported, I think the best approach will be to either model the route in the diagram as either three separate uniquely identified routes, or to create small gaps and model the line collection as a gapped route.  

Regards,

Clive

0 Kudos
RyanKoschatzky
Occasional Contributor III

@Clive, are you sure gapped routes are supported in 10.5.1? That has not been NC experience.

@Maja, if your route is as Clive described that would be called a branch route and that is not supported at 10.5.1. Nathan demo'ed branch route support at another version and I think was Pro early in 2018 at a RHUG meeting, I just don't recall off hand which meeting it was to help you watch that meeting. I would recommend using Clive's idea of separate routes if possible and not using gapped routes. You can also add calibration points to the intersecting locations to set the measures (I would also split the centerline at those locations also), when using other R&H edit commands uncheck the edit recalibrate downstream. That should keep your route measures static. I don't like that method overall because if you export out that data it will lose that data manipulation. 

0 Kudos
CliveReece
Esri Contributor

Yes, gapped routes are supported. That capability and options for calibrating across a route gap have been in the product since 10.3. 

Here is the doc link:  Methods for calibrating routes with physical gaps—Roads and Highways Desktop | ArcGIS Desktop 

Personally, I prefer separating branches into separate route ids. Preferably with a modifier that would allow someone to know that the routes are related. However, I have seen cases where an organization cannot or will not split routes because of a legacy business rule or connected system. I would recommend rapid protyping of the two options to test and review which fits your organization the best in terms of data and data management. 

Cheers,

0 Kudos
RyanKoschatzky
Occasional Contributor III

Clive,

I will have to respectfully disagree with the definition that gaps are supported. The functionally to create gaps exists but there is still many issues with using other LRS edits and event behavior working correctly on gapped routes from our experience. Our practice is for our editors not to interact with or create gapped routes when possible. We use euclidean distance and are at version 10.5.1. 

I believe these bugs still exist on gapped routes: 

BUG-000117736

BUG-000114098

BUG-000114097

BUG-000101392

0 Kudos
NicoleHanson1
Occasional Contributor

Ryan - 

When we were on 10.5.1, we had gapped routes, and have had no issues with events.  We used the same measure from where the route gap started as where it ended.

NathanEasley
Esri Regular Contributor

Hi Ryan,

I wanted to give you and the rest of the community an update on the bugs you mentioned above.

BUG-000117736 - This issue is being investigated by our team.  I will point out this is not a common workflow or anything documented in the Roads and Highways documentation..

BUG-000114098 - This issue is related to cover behavior.  It was logged in 10.6 and was fixed in 10.6.1.

BUG-000114097 - This issue is also related to cover behavior.  It was logged in 10.6 and was fixed in 10.6.1

BUG-000101392 - Our team looked at this issue at the 10.4.1, 10.5, and 10.5.1 releases and were not able to reproduce the issue.

I would encourage you, or any other user, who thinks there are issues with gap calibration to log a case with support so our team can address the issue.  As of today, we have a few issues related to gap calibration and cover behavior that have been submitted to our team through support cases, but there are no other gap calibration issues we're aware of.

0 Kudos
RyanKoschatzky
Occasional Contributor III

Thanks for the information Nathan. I have some gapped work coming up (making the gap smaller, at the start of the gap and the end of the gap) after I address the invalid geometries you and I have been working on. 

0 Kudos
AndrewVitale3
New Contributor III

Ryan Koschatzky‌ or Nathan Easley‌,

Can either of you point to a definition for the two bugs that have not been patched (BUG-000117736, BUG-000101392)?

NYSDOT is weighing our options for self-intersecting routes on R&H 10.5.1, which may involve adding 400 more gapped routes to our network. We'd like to know what issues have occurred in the past so that we can be vigilant.

Thanks.

RyanKoschatzky
Occasional Contributor III

Andrew,

Thanks for the follow up:

BUG-000101392, I export out Bug List from RHUG  that Kyle G had taken from the google site, the export to excel was not clean and I selected the wrong number but for completeness the issue for bug is as follows: BUG-000101392 (TFS51810) Route Edit -  extend, realign Extending a route to create a concurrency then realigning the other route to remove the concurrency on the same date results in incorrect event behaviors for the non-concurrent events on the realigned route. I don't recall off hand the issue but I can research the use case if needed. 

What I meant to copy was TFS51854 Route Edit - Reverse, Reassign Reverse and Reassign to Create Gap Causes Measures Downstream From Gap to be Incorrect.  Issue also occurs doing a reverse and retire to create a gap

BUG-000117736 Events on the gap route does not updates correctly if the 'Gap calibration method’ field is set to ‘Applying Euclidian Distance’. 

I don't recall off hand the issue to provide more information but I will be researching all our gap route issues this week and I will create a new post where we discuss gapped routes as a community.