Latest Contributions by RobertKrisher

@SamDeLore a >3x gain in performance from tracing is a lot more than what we would expect to see and implies that there may be something else that needs reviewed/tuning in your environment. @TomBrown ?

@Rohanrajan in your screenshot it appears that the line is selected by the junction is not. this implies that the connectivity is stopping at the LINE and not the junction. Use an aggregated geometry result type to see exactly where the trace is stopping. It's possible the line is a barrier, or that there is a barrier feature drawn midspan on the line.

First Instead of directly referencing asset groups or types in your subnetwork definition you should strongly consider creating a new network category, assigning it to the asset types, and referencing that in your subnetwork definition/traces. This makes it easier to maintain your subnetwork definitions (and trace configurations) without needing to memorize all the code. Second It should. You can always test it out by running the python in pro then opening the tool in your GP history. In this case I'd just swap out the condition barriers in the trace. Third Is that really what you want? You only want to treat certain types of closed devices as barriers? A closed device should be treated as a barrier regardless of what type of equipment it is.

The model is flexible, so you can always add and configure a new asset type to meet your needs.

If you want a controller to propagate out as de-energized then set its phasing value to be de-energized. So you'd need to have some kind of check or process that would adjust the phasing of the controller when its no longer energized from its parent subnetwork. This behavior can also be intentionally forced in v8 utility networks by assigning the PropagatorResetter category to an asset type. This is commonly used on open delta and step transformers for phasing purposes.

Currently the only way to do this is through a post-processing step, but if you log a case with support there is an existing enhancement you can help escalate: ENH-000126146

@Rohanrajan if you select the junction and move it, do both lines come with it?

There are some differences between the labeling engine of ArcGIS Enterprise/ArcGIS Pro and the JavaScript labeling engine. Because this is a Web Map question I'd recommend you check that community for recommendations about which label settings to use/avoid.

Create a web map pointed at the feature service using the desired label expression and placement properties. Then reference that web map in your experience builder and field map applications.

Capturing directly into an asset package is a little unusual for manual editing is a little unusual. Why not deploy the utility network to a local mobile geodatabase and let your user edit it there? Editing in an asset package means you won't have access to any of the tools for populating terminals, associations, or subnetwork controllers. You also won't have any of the built in intelligence of the editing tools to enforce snapping/connectivity rules or validating your topological edits. Anyways, if you are going to capture in an asset package, you can let the users edit as normal in the asset package. But before deploying it run a script that will find any blank guid columns (the 000... that you mentioned above) and calculate them to a proper value. This can be done by modifying the script Patrick provided to identify GUIDs that need to be recalculated. Doing it incrementally would allow you to deploy the asset package to a mobile geodatabase on a weekly basis to do QaQc (enable network topology, look for errors, then correct them in the source data).

Run a subnetwork trace with the aggregated geometry result type to see EXACTLY where the subnetwork stops. The most likely scenario is that the pipe itself has become a barrier (lifecycle status is the most common cause) or there is a feature on the pipe that is acting as a barrier (lifecycle status, activate volume, or device status are all possible causes). In the case of a device/junction on the line being a barrier the aggregated geometry will show you exactly which junction/device is stopping the trace.

Because the asset package is designed for data migration, the "globalid" field in the asset package is actually a GUID. This allows you to map the global id from your source data into this globalid (guid) field in the utility network. If we made it an actual globalid field, it would be managed by the system and you wouldn't be able to preserve your globalids through the data migration process.

The junction doesn't appear to be selected, so the line is probably a barrier. If you are modeling z-values in your geometry make sure that end point of the line is actually snapped to the juction.

Unless you're using the "use digitized direction" option, the digitized direction of the line doesn't matter. If the trace stops at the junction, and includes the junction in the returned features, then the junction is a barrier. Check its attributes against the condition barriers of your trace (lifecycle status, device status, etc). If the trace doesn't select the junction, its actually stopping at the line (this is the more likely scenario) which means that the line itself is a condition barrier. Once again, compare the attributes of the line against the condition barriers of your of your trace.

@KokilaM I can't remember the specific asset type, but that's correct. The Power transformer that steps transmission/subtransmission voltages down to distribution levels would be a subnetwork controller for the distribution side of the station, then the circuit breakers for each feeder are also subnetwork controllers for each circuit.

Online Status	Online
Date Last Visited	a minute ago

My Ideas

Latest Contributions by RobertKrisher

Re: Feedback on the Prune Branch History Tool

Re: SubnetLine covers whole network but Upstream/Downstream Trace does'nt reach to/from controllers

Re: Query Syntax for Condition Barriers in Tier Definition

Re: How to model a Clearwell for Water Distribution?

Re: Phase Propagation in a higher tier informing the next tier's subnetwork controllers.

Re: Export Subnetwork: Including indirectly associated structure elements

Re: SubnetLine covers whole network but Upstream/Downstream Trace does'nt reach to/from controllers

Re: Utility Network Sewer Main Lines: Labeling Issue

Re: Utility Network Sewer Main Lines: Labeling Issue

Re: Change Asset Package Spatial Reference Deletes all data

Re: storm water fittings not keeping connectivity

Re: Change Asset Package Spatial Reference Deletes all data

Re: SubnetLine covers whole network but Upstream/Downstream Trace does'nt reach to/from controllers

Re: Subnetwork stops at connected line

Re: Subnetwork Modelling in Esri UN

Re: Add Network Attribute (Trace Network) Issues

Re: How Does deploying UN in a Cloud PostgresQL Db...

Re: Subnetwork problem after upgrade UN v5 to UN v...

Re: Tracing Result by Flow Direction

Re: Validate Network Topology Fails ArcGIS Pro 3.7...

European Utility Network Community (UNC)

APAC Utilities Community of Practice