ABRP 4.5.0. gets a major upgrade

[Dustyshades]

Well, the good example why is when I want to drive from Austin to Rockport and back. I think it is a very valid scenario. ABRP would route me to unworking charger despite it marked unavailable for 2 months by EV connect and plug share.

As for user feedback on ABRP - why to create another place for reporting instead of just using plug share and actual data from EV charger providers !?

I mean you have to use the data that is available to you. If the charging providers don’t make APIs available for you to use, you can’t incorporate the charger status. Additionally, the most common issue I see is chargers that are de-rated (ex. EA 150/350kW chargers being de-rated to 37kW). I have never seen this data available in the app and imo, this makes the charger effectively out of service.

As for using PlugShare, that data is also not very good. Their rating system sucks and you have to use the comments to discern the actual charger value. I also doubt PlugShare would let ABRP use their data anyway since it would mean people wouldn’t be going to the PlugShare app anymore.

in short, I think there’s actually a ton of value in ABRP incorporating their own user feedback mechanism. I think there’s some really interesting things they can do with that moving forward

Sponsored

 

[AYAYRON]

Man that has not at all been my experience. Definitely seems like a regional hit or miss.

One thing I do know is that you can deprioritize specific chargers, and prioritize certain charge networks. So if you know which ones you prefer, it should hardly have that sort of problem again.

When there's only 1 network I think this would eliminate that option, so mid-to east Oklahoma has Francis and no one else, only west side is has EA as a competitor

 

[shap]

I mean you have to use the data that is available to you. If the charging providers don’t make APIs available for you to use, you can’t incorporate the charger status. Additionally, the most common issue I see is chargers that are de-rated (ex. EA 150/350kW chargers being de-rated to 37kW). I have never seen this data available in the app and imo, this makes the charger effectively out of service.

As for using PlugShare, that data is also not very good. Their rating system sucks and you have to use the comments to discern the actual charger value. I also doubt PlugShare would let ABRP use their data anyway since it would mean people wouldn’t be going to the PlugShare app anymore.

in short, I think there’s actually a ton of value in ABRP incorporating their own user feedback mechanism. I think there’s some really interesting things they can do with that moving forward

Look, I am not trashing ABRP, it has a value, no doubt. But you can not rely on it, you always need to recheck the routes as many times it will route you to bad chargers, longer routes, etc.

As for APIs - plug share provides API access: https://company.plugshare.com/api.html
This alone can help to see at least the status of the last charge sessions, which can help to predict the availability of the charger.

EA also has API: https://dev.developer.electrifyamerica.com/getting-started

Anyway, as I am not paying an ABRP subscription, so I can not really complain about

 

[hekhl00]

They need to stop spending time and money for nothing - just integrate Car Play / Android Auto and mark it done.

Just wait until they start making us pay for the LTE. Then we will be handing over money every month to use their less than stellar apps. It's absolutely maddening. But RJ won't relent.

 

[D0miniKy]

PlugShare had shown me chargers not listed on ABRP and, I had charge on them. So far, it have been reliable to me.

 

[SlaterGS]

That's interesting, it looks like ABRP is favoring highways more than local roads. If you toss Blanco in as a stop, it gets it "right" per Google. The irony here is my FIL won't use Google because it doesn't route him "correctly" on the back roads in MN and wastes time.

This is it for me.
Using ABRP from OH to VA (325mi) it is nearly impossible to get a reasonable route. If I directly put in one of the two stops that I pulled from Plugshare, then it gets pretty close.

Every mapping service has its quirks and you just have to work with them.
Apple Maps said our 15.5hr trip to Florida would take 13hr. Google was dead on with 15.5hr.
For any trips, I just have to spend a bit of time up front between 3 different services in order to make sure I get the optimal route and charging stations.
Inconvenient for sure but that's the price to pay as early adopters.

 

[zymolysis]

I have documented to Rivian and sent in photos.

To whom, at Rivian, do you document these errors?
I find that the Rivian map app works fairly well, but that isn't high praise. It will try to send me onto highways that are closed for the weekend for maintenance. For the new RAN in Sedona it consistently directs users to the apartment complex next door (no connection between them). It frequently seems a little confused (e.g. "turn left," when it should say "turn right," although it gets back on track quickly, most of the time).

 

[Mathme]

When I first got my truck, I plugged in an experimental trip from San Francisco to the LA Area. ABRP could only offer a suggested route (down I5) and no charging stops...when there are chargers all along that route.

My biggest complaint is that I can plan a trip in the Rivian App -- from San Francisco to Lake Tahoe which requires a charging stop along the 225 miles. Int he App I can specifically set the RAN station along the route and when I send it to the truck and the truck I see the charging stop mystically moved to an EA Station about 20 miles farther along the planned route.

 

[zymolysis]

Just not going to happen in the near/mid term.

You mean as long as RJ is the CEO, because he is adamantly opposed to allowing Car Play and Android Auto in Rivians.

 

[azbill]

When I first got my truck, I plugged in an experimental trip from San Francisco to the LA Area. ABRP could only offer a suggested route (down I5) and no charging stops...when there are chargers all along that route.

My biggest complaint is that I can plan a trip in the Rivian App -- from San Francisco to Lake Tahoe which requires a charging stop along the 225 miles. Int he App I can specifically set the RAN station along the route and when I send it to the truck and the truck I see the charging stop mystically moved to an EA Station about 20 miles farther along the planned route.

I have seen this same issue, the truck ignores the planned trip and overrides it. The truck also is too conservative and wants to insert extra, unnecessary charges. I have a trip planned Phoenix to Tahoe in two weeks. I planned it out on my own, know where I plan to charge and will just select the next charger on the nav when I get within 30-60 minutes of where I expect to charge.

I also found it is easier to find the charger on the phone app and then send it to the truck, instead of searching for it on the nav screen. Especially when many miles out.

 

[emoore]

You mean as long as RJ is the CEO, because he is adamantly opposed allowing Car Play and Android Auto in Rivians.

Yep that’s true. And he could be CEO for a year or 30 years so it’s not something we can count on.

 

[rhumbliner]

As for using PlugShare, that data is also not very good. Their rating system sucks and you have to use the comments to discern the actual charger value.

+1

As a huge fan and constant user of PlugShare, I once contacted them because they rated a RAN site as 7.5 when in fact every charger worked flawlessly. The reason it got a 7.5 was because some users complained it could only be used by Rivian owners. WTF? PS promised they would screen out those comments from the ratings but leave the posts. So far I haven’t seen any evidence that they are actually following thru.

 

[zymolysis]

Seems odd. My friends community is still being built (started in 2018) and it finds his house just fine.

When I got my Rivian (about 5 months ago), it would tell me that I was on the wrong street when I pulled into the lot where my shop is. The building isn't new - must be at least 20 years old. I think they may have corrected that finally - don't recall the issue recently (or perhaps I have exited the map before I get there, more recently). It was odd - it would direct me onto the right street, but then tell me I was on the wrong street once I started to turn into my parking lot. It would also try to take me the slightly longer route - instead of turning at 30th Street, it would take me to 28th Street, and then back (with my shop between the two).

 

[SeaGeo]

+1

As a huge fan and constant user of PlugShare, I once contacted them because they rated a RAN site as 7.5 when in fact every charger worked flawlessly. The reason it got a 7.5 was because some users complained it could only be used by Rivian owners. WTF? PS promised they would screen out those comments from the ratings but leave the posts. So far I haven’t seen any evidence that they are actually following thru.

And yet EA sites with 1 of 4 working chargers are a 10 because you can theoretically, eventually, kinda, maybe get a charge.

 

[Jason_ABRP]

This is some really useful information! We can't improve without knowing what we're doing wrong, so I really appreciate all the feedback in this thread.

Example I drive Dallas to Bentonville every 1-2 months, it's 400 miles each way, I know where the chargers are, so I use plug share and know which ones are currently working and which ones aren't. IF I try to use ABRP it adds 100 miles to the trip, using chargers that are inoperable.

I'm really curious on this one. When I try the Dallas -> Bentonville route myself I get a route very close to what Google proposes, with a ~20 min detour to a 200kW charger most of the way to Bentonville. That results in a ~7hr drive, not 10 hours. Could you send me an example of what you're seeing so we can try to replicate it and fix it?

What is really bad is when you are driving and it recalculates that you can make your destination removing a charger you wanted to actually charge. With that it never updates traffic or arrival time to the point on long trips it was hours off.

I hate it when ABRP does this (and we're going to fix this in the future), but the Rivian implementation shouldn't auto-switch. If I recall correctly, you get a popup saying there's a faster route, and clicking it will swap to that route. Doing nothing stays on the current route. If it doesn't show up and/or auto-switches, that's a problem we need to solve.

Would love to see a response from the Rivian team as to what they are proactively working on.

I'm on the ABRP Team and work closely with the Rivian team, and we've got a lot of stuff in the works that we're very excited about. On the nav / turn-by-turn quality, it's a tough trade space. I can't go into specifics, but it's hard to both get really good routing / traffic data and also all the data we need for a good range prediction from any given provider of A-B routing. But it is a solvable problem, and we're working on it.

In general, our priorities right now are:

1. Route quality - Better ETAs, better road selection
2. Range estimation - Better range prediction, personalized learning

And of course, if you've seen Wassym's talks you know that aligns with the Rivian priorities too.

...Austin, TX to Lost Maple State Park and then compare it to google maps. ABRP adds 20+ miles w/o ANY reason. Also, the expected drive time is 30% off in ABRP.

Or try to plan a route from Austin to Rockport, TX. 211 miles only, but it insists you can not make it even when you specify 2.9 miles per kW for 65mph and set arrival SoC to 10%. But what's worse ABRP insists you charge at a nonworking charger (for more than a few months).

I love Lost Maples! I'll be heading there this fall. Pretty exciting that we have two eclipses coming up, both going right over Lost Maples.

For that route, I would chalk that up to differences in traffic data between ABRP, Mapbox, and Google. Google's is certainly more extensive and up-to-date, especially for back roads. So if Google has better knowledge of speeds on back roads, it can pick out those routes which on paper should be worse, but in reality are better.

As far as the range prediction from Austin -> Rockport, when the Rivian deal was announced, we updated the R1T/S models quite a lot, so maybe you're still using the old alpha model? It might be worth re-selecting your car model from the list to make sure you're using the new model.

Can you point me to the non-working charger? I'll check what data source we're using for that and see if there's something we can do about it.

The onboard NAV consistently recalculated my trip unless I hopped from charger to charger.

Constant rerouting is definitely not what we want. I'd love to get some more details from you so we can investigate and solve it.

On charger APIs, I'll say that we've (ABRP) looked into most publicly advertised APIs, and the ones we don't use are generally because they have either very restrictive terms of use or are crazy expensive.

I'll also note you can expect to get different results between ABRP and in-vehicle Rivian Nav. But the Rivian Nav should be the same between the Rivian App and in-vehicle. Rivian uses Mapbox for A-B routing, and ABRP does all the heavy lifting for turning that into a proper EV route. And of course, Rivian and ABRP have different agreements with different providers of charger data (Although, why charge networks aren't more willing to get their data out there to apps that could help drivers find their chargers is beyond me).

All in all, we really do appreciate feedback, and are always looking for ways to improve. Rest assured we're not sitting still, and we are really working on making improvements to the way ABRP and Rivian nav works. It's a complicated problem to solve, but it's one we're invested in. We all drive EVs at ABRP (including an R1S I own), and use our own tools so we can see the weak spots and identify the areas to improve on.

Sponsored