xRoute: electricityConsumption validation for electric vehicles when using VehicleParametersAtWaypoint

[CAPcargo]

Hi,

We are currently working with electric vehicles in xRoute and have a question regarding the usage of electricityConsumption in combination with VehicleParametersAtWaypoint.

In our request, we define electricityConsumption on each waypoint via
VehicleParameters/consumptionValues/electricityConsumption, as described in the documentation for waypoint-based vehicle parameter adjustments.

However, we still receive the following limitation:
"<resultLimitations xmlns:ns4="http://service.xserver.ptvgroup.com" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:type="ns4:ParameterInconsistencyLimitation" parameter="/profile/vehicleProfile/engine/@electricityConsumption" value="0.0" relatedParameter="/profile/vehicleProfile/engine/@engineType" relatedValue="ELECTRIC" message="The electricity consumption must be specified for electric vehicles."/>"

From this behavior, it seems that electricityConsumption must also be set on the base vehicleProfile.engine, even if it is already provided per waypoint.

Could you please confirm:

- Is it mandatory to always define electricityConsumption on the base vehicleProfile.engine for engineType=ELECTRIC?
- Are the values provided in VehicleParametersAtWaypoint only treated as overrides, but not sufficient to satisfy the base validation?

Additionally, we would like to mention that we do not encounter this issue when using fuelConsumption in VehicleParametersAtWaypoint for combustion vehicles - in that case, no similar validation error is returned.

If this is the intended behavior, it would be helpful to clarify this in the documentation, as it may currently suggest that waypoint values alone are sufficient.

Please find the request attached for reference.

request.txt

(6.22 KiB) Downloaded 19 times

Thanks in advance for your clarification.

Best regards

[Bernd Welter]

Hi there,

How about this: In the technical concepts there's some more information:

• Routing.VehicleParameters

Among other info the technical concept says:

• Required parameters: ELECTRIC requires electricityType, electricityConsumption to be specified:

  

• Value range:

  

Is that what you were looking for?

Bernd

PS: Would be better if it also shows that info in the API doc itself.

[CAPcargo]

Hi Bernd,

thanks for your response and for pointing to the documentation.

We are aware of the requirement that for engineType=ELECTRIC, both electricityType and electricityConsumption must be specified.

However, in our case, this requirement is already fulfilled - we do provide electricityConsumption, but at the waypoint level via VehicleParametersAtWaypoint/consumptionValues.

The issue we are facing is specifically that:

When electricityConsumption is only defined at waypoint level, xRoute still returns a validation error for the base vehicleProfile.engine
This behavior does not occur for combustion vehicles, where fuelConsumption defined at waypoint level is accepted without requiring it on the base engine

So, the core of our question is:

- Is it expected that electricityConsumption must always be defined on the base vehicleProfile.engine, even when it is fully specified via VehicleParametersAtWaypoint?

Or in other words:
- Are VehicleParametersAtWaypoint values not considered during validation of required engine parameters?

From our perspective, this behavior seems inconsistent with how fuelConsumption is handled, and also a bit unclear from the documentation.

Could you please clarify if this is intended behavior or a limitation?

Thanks in advance for your help.

[Yann Bartesch]

Hi,

Well you found an inconsistency in our validation process, when VehicleParametersAtWaypoint is used.
Actually, we check the initial vehicle configuration before checking it for every changes you do at waypoint.
That's something wrong.

The fact that it is working for combustion is because the fuelConsumption has a non-zero value by default.

So we will handled that.

For a workaround, you could just add a non-zero energyConsumption in your default vehicle profile. Whatever the value (greater than 0), it will be overriden with the value of your first vehicleParametersAtWaypoint.

From a calculation point of view, everything is correct because, at the end, the value which is considered is the value of the last VehicleParametersAtWaypoint ; i.e. in your case, the first waypoint.
By the way, you can see that the emission results are always the same whatever the value you put in the VehicleProfile ; because it is automatically overriden with the value on the first waypoint.

Thanks for finding this.
Best regards,

[CAPcargo]

Hi,

Thanks a lot for the clarification - this explains the behavior very well.
Good to know that this is related to the validation order and that the waypoint values are correctly considered during the calculation itself.

Just one follow-up question from our side:
- Do you plan to fix this inconsistency in one of the upcoming xServer versions?

If yes:

Is there already a version planned where this might be addressed?
And do you have an approximate timeline when such a fix could be available?

Thanks again for your support.

Best regards

[Bernd Welter]

Hi guys,

Thanks for your answer, Yann!

From my side I can only contribute with a statement about the xServer2 release cycle:

• We just released xServer 2.40 (end of March 2026)
• Typically the next regular release is about to come in 3-4 months

So probably it is helpful to apply the workaround you mentioned...

Bernd