Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable roads

Moderators: MapSir, USA Champs

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby bgodette » Fri Mar 28, 2014 3:41 pm

Thortok2000 wrote:Essentially, my main problem with this system is that it's got two major flaws in my opinion. The first is that the routing system has a pretty high penalty for NOT using major highways and freeways when they are available. There are plenty of times where a 'shortcut' would more than likely be faster, but because it's not a US highway, Waze wants me to take the US highway as far as I possibly can before getting off it closer to my destination, assuming traffic is clear that day. Generally speaking, unless there's a traffic jam on every route that includes a major highway, then the only options I ever get are major highways, from the closest point to my starting position all the way to the closest point to my destination.
Except that doesn't actually happen in places typed to NFC+US/SR.
alts.jpg
alts.jpg (162.4 KiB) Viewed 675 times

Every route shown takes multiple miles of Primary, the third option additionally uses 1.9 miles of Street that parallels a Major Highway (Colorado Blvd).

Current routing basically does what you'd like it to if:
1. The map is very well edited. This is still rarely the case outside of major metros.
2. The map has actual viable routes typed appropriately.

NFC seems to fit the routing model very well, and is what your State's DOT thinks the viable routes are. This is not an accident as Waze's routing model in the absence of historical and live speed data is based on the classification system of the time. This still matches fairly well with the current classification system which is a simplified version of the older one.
ImageImage
bgodette
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 3437
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 8:19 pm
Location: Denver, CO
Has thanked: 117 times
Been thanked: 538 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby bgodette » Thu Mar 20, 2014 8:23 pm

qwaletee wrote:
CBenson wrote:Do we need to define at-grade connector? Specifically are roads at different grades required to meet the definition of "freeway" and "ramp." This comes up for roads like this. In this case there are no intersections that permit traffic to cross US-50. US-50 has an unbroken median. This combined with the fact that there are only limited access point to US-50 - that is the businesses do not have driveways that are directly served by US-50, makes me think this is a freeway. However, Duke St, Thomson Creek Rd, Castle Marina Rd, Cox Neck Rd, Dominion Rd, Chester Station Ln, Piney Creek Rd, S Piney Rd, Dundee Ave, Main St, Piney Narrows Rd etc all provide access to US-50 at junctions where there is no grade separation, because there is simply no access provided from one side of US-50 to other on these roads. There are BGSs at these exits on US-50 just like at the grade-separated interchanges.

So in the freeway definition it is stated that there should be "no at-grade intersections." I think that US-50 in this stretch meets the requirement for no at-grade intersections and the exit and entrance roads are not at-grade connectors and are thus properly ramps. However, given the current guidance and the proposed guidance if you interpret these access points "at-grade" then the US-50 would be a major highway and the exits and entrances should not be ramps.

I would state that if you can't cross the highway without either passing over or under the highway then all exits and entrances with acceleration and deceleration lanes along that highway should be considered "grade-separated."


Well, since the FC juggernaut seems to be rolling merrily along, what is its functional classification?
Freeway.
ImageImage
bgodette
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 3437
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 8:19 pm
Location: Denver, CO
Has thanked: 117 times
Been thanked: 538 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby bgodette » Wed Mar 19, 2014 5:09 pm

banished wrote:Out-of-area editor: "It's a primary street according to FC."
Local editor: "No, it's a minor highway. I know, because I drive it frequently."
Sorry, but in this case the state's DOT wins.

banished wrote:3. Florida doesn't even have a web-based FC map.
Yes it does. It's here and it's been in the Wiki for a while. However that site does not appear to work from IP addresses that GeoIP from out of state. Last time it worked for me was when I was there last December. F.I.T. may also have GIS resources usable with ArcGIS.

banished wrote:Hoping for Waze clarification why road type even matters given https://www.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=212&t=48543.
Because road type is the fall-back for long distance routing. Rates only provides potentially better/more routes over Type based but only IF there's a statistically significant amount of rate information. That amount seems to closely correlate to the road rank that we currently see in the beta editor.
ImageImage
bgodette
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 3437
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 8:19 pm
Location: Denver, CO
Has thanked: 117 times
Been thanked: 538 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby bgodette » Mon Mar 17, 2014 12:02 am

Isn't your current mapping a modification on that table where US/SR are always Major/Minor unless FC says it should be higher?
ImageImage
bgodette
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 3437
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 8:19 pm
Location: Denver, CO
Has thanked: 117 times
Been thanked: 538 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby bart99gt » Sat Feb 14, 2015 2:02 pm

bz2012 wrote:Paragraph needing possible revision:
Emergency Vehicle and DOT Service Roads Service road.png[edit]
Emergency.jpg "Emergency and Authorized Vehicles Only" and DOT Service Roads are to be treated as Non-drivable roads. These are found primarily through the median of divided highways to connect opposite direction lanes. If mapped, they should not be connected to any drivable road, with properties set to road type Private Road, and lock the segment at as high a rank as possible, up to rank 5.

I believe the word I have shown in red above should be removed, or the rest of the sentence revised to remove the inherent contradiction (why bother to have it at all, if it is not connected to a drivable road and why bother to set it to private type?)


Agreed. I never draw in the "Emergency Vehicle Only" crossovers (paved or unpaved) on limited access roads. Since a typical driver can't legally use it under normal circumstances, there's little point to even have them there.
US Country Manager
Memphis, TN Area Manager
Cobb/Douglas County, GA Area Manager

Mississippi Wiki Page https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/Mississippi
bart99gt
Country Manager
Country Manager
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:53 pm
Location: Olive Branch, MS
Has thanked: 95 times
Been thanked: 234 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby bart99gt » Sat Dec 27, 2014 5:06 pm

pumrum wrote:After driving 8+ hour trips a few times over the last couple weeks, I can say that the new FC implementation in Waze is AWESOME. On several occasions I have been routed off a congested interstate onto a nearby US Highway or other MH/mH and around some very gnarly traffic (accidents, construction, rubberneckers). These are routes that would previously not have been considered.

If I could be granted one wish, it would be that everyone prioritizes getting the US Highway system upgraded to at MH or FWY (as appropriate). Spending most of my time in the New England area I really took it for granted, but driving more of the southeast and midwest I have come to realize how useful it is.


And I'm following up several months later and....

Yes it is AWESOME. The number of URs I get for Waze going out of the way when it could have taken another route that was shorter and faster, but previously had low or no classification have almost disappeared. When I drive through a relatively unedited area, one of the first things I do is check to see if FC has been done there, and if not, where I can find the maps and get it done. While it isn't a perfect system, it really has improved Waze for the better.
US Country Manager
Memphis, TN Area Manager
Cobb/Douglas County, GA Area Manager

Mississippi Wiki Page https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/Mississippi
bart99gt
Country Manager
Country Manager
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:53 pm
Location: Olive Branch, MS
Has thanked: 95 times
Been thanked: 234 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby bart99gt » Wed Jun 04, 2014 11:36 am

davielde wrote:
bart99gt wrote:FWIW, US-51 in N Mississippi has several stretches where it is classified as a primary collector. It parallels I-55 for most of its length.

The goal of the automatic upgrade to MH minimum for US routes was to have a consistent "resolution" level, which is the pruning concept discussed elsewhere as part of the FC rollout. A US route collector (actually any collector) classified as a Primary Street segment will not be considered apart from the first or last 15km of a short route or 50km for a longer route. Major Highways do not have that limitation, and they help better reflect the "network" that makes up the US highway system. The upgrade to MH doesn't mean that Waze would prefer the collector portions of US-51 over another potentially faster road, but it would at least consider them for longer routes.

Unless as a collector it routes someone through a fire swamp or is filled with rodents of unusual size, it sounds like it may be a good bypass for I-55 if someone has "avoid highways" (freeways) enabled. Waze would be more willing to use it for longer distance travel or detours as a MH if it's deemed faster than any other route. Keeping it as PS may end up routing such a user way out of the way even if US-51 otherwise would be part of a fastest or shortest non-freeway route.

Perhaps we need to get a basic section on "pruning" added to the wiki as well. That may help clear up some confusion as to where road types actually do matter from a routing perspective.


I really wasn't suggesting downgrading it to a primary street, as I've always been of the opinion that in 99% of cases that any road with a state/US highways shield should always be classified as some sort of highway in Waze. I was just pointing out that there are instances where a US highway could have a fairly low FC.
US Country Manager
Memphis, TN Area Manager
Cobb/Douglas County, GA Area Manager

Mississippi Wiki Page https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/Mississippi
bart99gt
Country Manager
Country Manager
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:53 pm
Location: Olive Branch, MS
Has thanked: 95 times
Been thanked: 234 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby bart99gt » Sun Jun 01, 2014 1:37 am

davielde wrote:
irowiki wrote:So a US highway should be a major highway regardless of FC?

Not exactly. It would be a major highway minimum, but if FC has it as a freeway, keep it as a freeway.

If FC has it as a minor arterial (or less if that ever happens), it would always be upgraded to major highway under the new rules.


FWIW, US-51 in N Mississippi has several stretches where it is classified as a primary collector. It parallels I-55 for most of its length.
US Country Manager
Memphis, TN Area Manager
Cobb/Douglas County, GA Area Manager

Mississippi Wiki Page https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/Mississippi
bart99gt
Country Manager
Country Manager
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:53 pm
Location: Olive Branch, MS
Has thanked: 95 times
Been thanked: 234 times

Re: Re:routing

Postby bart99gt » Mon May 26, 2014 1:24 pm

dbraughlr wrote:
I highly doubt waze is going to divert you 40 miles to stay on higher classified roads if that specific primary road cuts 40 miles off your trip.

This sounds like a testable assumption.


It will. Last summer I took a trip to Gulf Shores, AL, from just south of Memphis, TN, and Waze wanted to route me off of US-45 right at the AL/MS state line to stay on a Major Highway (4 lane state highway) instead of taking the shorter route on US-45 which was still classified as a minor highway at the time. IIRC, taking that state highway was somewhere in the neighborhood of 20-30 miles longer as it added a fairly significant dog-leg to the route. The Mississippi functional class map showed US-45 to be a minor arterial, so at least under the old system, it was correctly classified as well.

Link to the junction in question:

https://www.waze.com/editor/?lon=-88.45 ... 01&env=usa
US Country Manager
Memphis, TN Area Manager
Cobb/Douglas County, GA Area Manager

Mississippi Wiki Page https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/Mississippi
bart99gt
Country Manager
Country Manager
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:53 pm
Location: Olive Branch, MS
Has thanked: 95 times
Been thanked: 234 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby bart99gt » Sun Apr 06, 2014 1:50 am

sketch wrote:Where was that first example? How did you fix it?

Memphis to Gulf Shores is a long distance route. That's a pruning problem, not a preference problem. It has nothing to do with "overclassification" in urban areas. What you're telling me is that upgrading the roads to meet this standard actually fixed the routing.


I really wasn't referring to the urban road classification on that particular example, but I will try to explain what I mean.

For rural classification, the FC system seems to work great. However, when it comes to urban classification, what the DOT classifies the road as, and what Waze expects the road to be, in my observation, diverge somewhat. I make the assumption that Waze shows such a strong preference for MH because it is expecting a road that is multi-lane, with a higher (probably 50+ mph) limit, and few controlled intersections. However, the urban classification system will classify a 35 mph road with red lights every half mile (or less) as a primary arterial, because it is an arterial road in the area it serves, but probably doesn't merit classification as a major highway because of what Waze is expecting the road to be. The UR I worked on in the Memphis area was an example of that, it had a user drive an extra 8-10 miles up a road to use a major highway vs. a primary street/minor highway (that I upgraded the primary street portion to minor highway) when under most conditions it probably makes better sense to take the non-major highway route because 1) the amount of truck traffic on US-78 inside Memphis often causes quite a bit of congestion and 2) where the user was eventually going the minor highway/primary street was actually a few miles shorter.

As far as the Memphis-Gulf Shores route was concerned, I tried having Waze re-calculate directions several times along the way to see if I could get it to stop forcing the major highway route, including one time just a few miles away from the city of State Line, MS, which is only about 100 or so miles away from Gulf Shores.

The only flaw I see in the way Waze "prunes" routes over long distances is that it almost totally neglects that keeping someone on a major highway or freeway may sometimes add a considerable distance to the drive, while neglecting that a minor highway may be the shortest and FASTEST route to the destination. It would just be nice if they'd make a change to the routing algorithm that would at least consider the speed data on a lesser road if keeping someone on a higher classified road means extending the driving distance more than a predetermined amount. I can hope though, right?
US Country Manager
Memphis, TN Area Manager
Cobb/Douglas County, GA Area Manager

Mississippi Wiki Page https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/Mississippi
bart99gt
Country Manager
Country Manager
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:53 pm
Location: Olive Branch, MS
Has thanked: 95 times
Been thanked: 234 times

PreviousNext

Return to US Wiki Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dfortney