Zumo User Forums

Peobody wrote: ↑Wed Dec 20, 2023 6:33 pm We know that your ADV Riding custom profile will not be recognized by the XT so I believe it will import the route using its Motorcycle profile. That is just my suspicion.

Anything that isn't Driving or Motorcyle, the Zumo uses its setting in its own motorcycle profile.

Peobody wrote: ↑Wed Dec 20, 2023 6:33 pm Do you know whether the unpaved roads option is honored by the XT upon import of an ADV Riding route? If not, I think a test is in order. Create two duplicate test routes that contain an unpaved road. Use the ADV Riding profile on one and a None profile on the other (create it using the Motorcycle profile and then enable unpaved roads in the route options tab). Transfer them to the XT and see what the resulting routes look like once imported.

As far as I know, (And I did a lot of testing) none of the other avoidances from Basecamp are sent to the Zumo - of any variety.
The only way that this 'might' be possible is if route preferences were sent via the subclass fields.

What Basecamp does do is send the exact route that it plotted. The Zumo (of any variety) will receive this route and will not recalculate it - assuming that the edit options device transfer settings are cleared, and that maps are the same. You would also have to stop the route from recalculating by turning off that option.

I'll check that subclass theory now.

Oh references - XT and profiles / custom route settings app.php/ZXT-P38 and subsequent pages.
BC and Zumo 590 / 595 and profiles / custom routes. viewtopic.php?t=521 Download the pdf. Section 4. But it is heavy going.

nb 'A Custom route doesn't pass anything in the GPX file about the vehicle so the Zumo has nothing to recognise. It resorts to using its own motorcyle settings.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edit

OK - I prepared a very short route along an A Road. Motorcycle profile - No Avoidances set. Faster Time selected.
I exported the route to a GPX called Custom-All.gpx

Then I changed the route to use no profile setting, and set the individually for as a route with Custom settings. In there, I changed all avoidances to be ticked and all road types to be avoided. The route didn't change. So I exported that as a GPX file called Motorcycle-None.gpx

I then ran a DOS FC (File Compare) to compare the two files. This goes through the two files, compares them side by side and displays the lines that are different, with the line immediately above and below that are the same in both files - so that there is a point of reference.

E:\temp>fc Custom-All.gpx Motorcycle-None.gpx

It reported the difference in two sections. and came up with two differences.

The first difference between the two is the time . The bounds lat/long are identical.
The second difference (after the gap, that I have enlarged) is the section which defines the section where I the motorcycle profile was used - and passes the Motorcycling profile name to the XT. The Custom route (which had all avoidances ticked) didn't use a saved profile - the settings were customised just for this route. So it doesn't know what the transport method is. The XT will therefore default to using its motorcycle settings.

There were 77 lines in the Custom route including lat/long ghost points, start and finish via points, Settings for Faster Time and 5 subclass fields. All were identical.

If there is nothing in the file that recognises any road type preference, then the Zumo cannot possibly act on it.
I can conclude that none of the routing preferences set in Basecamp are passed to the Zumo - apart from Faster Time.

Comparing files Custom-All.gpx and MOTORCYCLE-NONE.GPX
I have highlighted in red the lines that are different between the two files


***** Custom-All.gpx
</link>
<time>2023-12-20T20:59:22Z</time>
<bounds maxlat="54.302630424499512" maxlon="-2.160165561363101" minlat="54.302072525024414" minlon="-2.173352474346757" />
***** MOTORCYCLE-NONE.GPX
</link>
<time>2023-12-20T20:58:06Z</time>
<bounds maxlat="54.302630424499512" maxlon="-2.160165561363101" minlat="54.302072525024414" minlon="-2.173352474346757" />
*****



***** Custom-All.gpx
</gpxx:RouteExtension>
</extensions>
***** MOTORCYCLE-NONE.GPX
</gpxx:RouteExtension>
<trp:Trip>
<trp:TransportationMode>Motorcycling</trp:TransportationMode>
</trp:Trip>
</extensions>
*****

I've tried a few different combinations of setting with the same result. First, my BaseCamp and Zumo Motorcycle and Zumo Driving profiles are configured to match, particularly in that they both allow Unpaved Roads. The image below is after importing from the SD card and it shows the correct route.


You can see the launch screen ready to begin the route. If I switch the Motorcycle icon at the top to Driving it recalculates as shown below. This is even though the profiles match exactly. You can see the small segment of the track indicating how close it got to the next shaping point before turning around and going the long way.




So it looks like neither of my ideas for an alternate ADV profile are working without the risk of a recalculation that alters the route. I don't know if a similar recalculation would take place for some other reason if I just stay with the Motorcycle profile. I leave my Off-Route Recalculation setting at "Prompted."

@jfheath

About the subclass field: You know I spent a lot of time investigating it. I think it's very unlikely that it contains avoidances

@tombarrington

The only way I know that the trip on the XT remains unaltered is to create a track from the route in BC. Send the track to the XT. On the XT convert the track to a trip. Start the converted trip.

You will lose the via point anouncements. I think@jfheath calls it a track-trip.

I'm hopeful that I'm just missing some minor detail. I actually depend on via point announcements for such things as designate fuel stops, hotel info, etc.

At this point I'm considering changing the Motorcycle profile to allow for Unpaved Roads and letting all my old routes recalculate. I'm not sure anymore if that would solve the recalculation issue I noted above.

Yes @FrankB - I know you looked into it, and I was certain anyway. I just thought of a simple way of proving that there was no avoidance information in the subclass field.

@tombarrington The avoidances that are set in Basecamp do not get passed to the Zumo. You get a route which remains fixed - providing you do not allow it to recalculate.

There are 3 easy ways of making it so that it doesn't screw up your trip.

1. Use BC to create a track - load that, say Go. It will not give directions, but it shows you in relation to the track. The track will never change. If you deviate, a dotted straight line points the direction to the closest point.

2. Use the track to creat a track-trip - as described. It gives directions, but there are no vias or shaping points. And it isn't foolproof. If you deviate from the magenta line, it finds the closest point to the original route and puts an invisible marker there. Anything after the marker is retained, and a new section of magenta line is plotted from your position to the marker. THe old magenta line up to that marker is lost.
This means that if you deviate by heading 180 degrees away from the orifginal route, the closest point will always be behind you. But if you ignore instructions and aim for the line that you can see, when you joint it, it will navigate ahead.

(Does this sound familiar to those that have been following the RUT investigation. Oh yes. This is what put me onto what was happening).
3. Display a track and a route together. If the route changes, the track will show up and mark the original route. BC will make a track from the route which follows exactly the same line.

The best way in Basecamp is to create a route without selecting a profile. Use custom preferences which are saved with the route itself.
Set these with no avoidances. When you are happy with the route, choose an avoidance - say avoid unmade routes. The route line will change instantly. Add a shaping point(s) until toggling that avoidance makes no difference to the route. Then do the same with other avoidances.
By choosing carefully where you add the shaping points, you can get a route that doesn't alter no matter what you change without having too many shaping points.

Then either use the route without a profile assigned - ie keep it as it is - or change it to use the motorcycle profile. I keep my motorcycle profile with no avoidance boxes ticked. When the Zumo receives the route, there is no vehicle specified, so it uses the Zumo motorcycle settings anyway.
If you want to be certain, then set the key avoidances on the Zumo to (say) avoid unmade roads, avoid ferries. Do not do this after loading the route - that will causue the Zumo to calculate a new route.

Consider setting the route to not automatically recalculate when you deviate. It is more likely to stay in place.

After loading a route into the XT, if you change the vehicle, change the route preferences, add extra point, edit the route or press skip - the entire route will be recalculated using the avoidances that are set in the XT. This is not good as it and will prefer where possible to use main roads rather than the fastest or shortest route.

As a result of those recalculations, under certain circumstances, if you take a road that leads away from a shaping point - that shaping point will be removed from the route and will not visit it. Ditto Via Points.

Thank you, @jfheath. I've been using the third option you cite and it works great. With the addition of some light dirt roads to my trips I anticipate an occasional recalculation, whether essential or an unforced error on my part. I'm hoping to keep that to a minimum.

I have a brain ache from working on this so much today so I'll need to give more thought to your last paragraphs. I'm sure I can use something there to improve my trip plans.

tombarrington wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 12:51 am
I have a brain ache from working on this so much today.

I know that feeling !

The last paragraph describes unwanted things that could happen rather than suggestions of what to do. Ive broken it into two paragraphs to make that clearer.

Not related, but a couple of snippets that were triggered.....

I often use the trick of reading something so that I know what it says and then go to sleep on it, or leave it for a few days. The brain sorts it all out - usually when dreaming - attaching info to the nodes in its neural net. The light bulb appears above your head in the morning or a few days later when you're doing something completely different.

"My brother is much more intelligent than me, so if I don't know what to do, I think about what he would do. Then I do that."

Prepare the route and track in Basecamp. Just before the dirt portion begins, add a via point called something like "Follow Track". Display both route and track on the XT. You will be warned when you are approaching a point where the route might diverge, so you can follow the just the track until it rejoins the route.

lkraus wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 1:11 pm Just before the dirt portion begins, add a via point called something like "Follow Track". Display both route and track on the XT. You will be warned when you are approaching a point where the route might diverge, so you can follow the just the track until it rejoins the route.

This is a great idea! This is typically how I use via points, as reminders or triggers, and I've already taken to including the track.

@jfheath, I'm still confused about a subtlety of my settings and the potential for recalculation. Let's say I create an ADV Riding profile in BaseCamp that is set for Faster Time and has all avoidances unchecked (Except Narrow Trails, which is not a choice in the XT. It would differ from my Motorcycling profile by only the Unpaved Roads avoidance.). I then successfully create a route following some dirt roads, using a reasonable number of shaping points, and transfer it to the XT. The XT's Motorcycle settings are set match those for the ADV Riding profile. The maps also match. The XT will display this route exactly, as you've said. Shouldn't it also reproduce this same route in the event of a recalculation?

If there is a reason why the recalculation is different then is changing the Motorcycling profile in BaseCamp the solution? The thought of all those older routes recalculating (because Unpaved Roads was checked) is scary.