Re: [Tagging] fire hydrants

[Robert Koch]

Hello Richard,

On 2017-06-15 01:32, Richard Welty wrote:
> an american usage note:
>
> the "standard" hydrant in the US has 2 x 2.5" hose connections
> and 1 x 4.5" pumper connection. other sizes have existed in the
> past.
Which coupling-type do you use? NST
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hose_coupling#NST)?

If so one would describe this hydrant as:
fire_hydrant:coupling_type=NST
fire_hydrant:couplings=2.5;2.5;4.5

Open: How do we reflect the unit? Millimetres won't work for the US.
Possibilities:
fire_hydrant:couplings=2.5";2.5";4.5"
  OR:
fire_hydrant:couplings=2.5;2.5;4.5
fire_hydrant:couplings_unit=inch
> the wrench required for the bolt at the top of a dry hydrant may vary,
> pentagonal bolts are most common but others have been used.
> this is something that a mapper can observe, and something that
> a fireman cares about.
There is not yet a tag for this. In Austria a typical wrench looks like
this: http://i.ebayimg.com/images/i/251745653405-0-1/s-l1000.jpg
The left side is used to open the bolt at the top, while the right side
can be used to open the cap of the hose couplings.

Best regards,
Robert
>
> On 6/14/17 6:52 PM, Robert Koch wrote:
>> Hello Alberto,
>>
>> I like your remarks and would like to work together to improve things.
>>
>> On 2017-06-14 19:06, Viking wrote:
>>>> in OsmHydrant [1] there is already fire_hydrant:coupling_type with various 
>>>> values from Storz to Barcelona
>>>> (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/fire_hydrant:coupling_type). Then 
>>>> there is fire_hydrant:couplings to complement that, describing the > 
>>>> actual connectors: 
>>>> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/fire_hydrant%3Acouplings
>>>>
>>>> This implementation might not be the best for various reasons, but we 
>>>> could consolidate its structure/values if needed.
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://www.osmhydrant.org/en/
>>> It is a bad implementation: first of all because there is no reference on 
>>> hydrants wiki page (and indeed I didn't know it) and consequentely there is 
>>> a wide range of heterogeneous values that are almost useless for automatic 
>>> data search.
>>> By the way, let's try to improve these existing tags.
>>> fire_hydrant:coupling_type indicates the standard (UNI, Storz,...)
>>> fire_hydrant:couplings indicates the number and diameters.
>>> Right?
>> Right!
>>> First question: is it possible that the same hydrant has different coupling 
>>> types, for example Storz and UNI? I know that in Italy, where I work as 
>>> fireman, this is not possible, so a single value in 
>>> fire_hydrant:coupling_type is enough.
>> In Austria I've only seen hydrants with one connector type (mostly Storz). S
>>> Second question: how would you indicate the number of couplings? For 
>>> example an hydrant with two UNI 45 mm couplings and one UNI 70 mm coupling 
>>> would be:
>>> fire_hydrant:coupling_type=UNI
>>>
>>> fire_hydrant:couplings=45;45;70
>>> OR
>>> fire_hydrant:couplings=2 x 45;70
>>> OR...?
>> So far it was really up to the contributor on OsmHydrant but the
>> recommended way in this case have been so far:
>> fire_hydrant:couplings=2x45/1x70
>>
>> Before going on, I've to explain the rationale behind using that scheme
>> first. In Austria we're using character A for 110mm diameter, B for for
>> 75mm and C for either 52 (or 42). In this case it looks easily readable:
>> "1B/2C" or "1A/2B".
>> When it comes to "2x45/1x70" I totally agree that "45;45;70" is much
>> better. Back in time when doing the implementation for OsmHydrant, I
>> didn't know about using the semicolon to split values, but I like it
>> more than the forward slash.
>>
>> Coming back to the Austrian "1A/2B" I would additionally allow using
>> these characters instead of diameter values as well resulting in: "A;B;B"
>>
>> If the proposal is accepted I'd propose migrating all values
>> automatically and changing OsmHydrant. Your scheme with repeating the
>> diameter is much better readable & parse-able by humans & tools.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Robert
>>> I would prefer 45;45;70 because it's more explicit and less prone to errors.
>>> The use of semicolons to separate different values is commonly accepted on 
>>> the wiki.
>>>
>>> Alberto
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus.
>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] fire hydrants

[Robert Koch]

I changed the proposal at [1] to have "l/min" instead of "lpm". While
"gpm" is often used, "lpm" isn't.
Rationale: According to [2] "km/h" should be preferred over "kmph"
(which is highly discouraged).

Additionally I added "survey:date", which should be included as well.

Regarding the count: I'm on the same page as Alberto: I don't see any
advantage of having just a count. As a result I'd recommend removing
"fire_hydrant:count=#" from the wiki page.

If we gonna change the couplings tag naming, we should adapt:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Dry_riser_inlet

The fire_hydrant:type values without "pond" are still unclear to me: How
would I tag this one [3]
Moreover how useful is "pillar" if there is "dry_barrel" and
"wet_barrel"? How would non-fire-fighters or non-local fire-fighters tag
such pillar hydrants?


[1]
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Fire_Hydrant_Extensions
[2]
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features/Units#Explicit_specifications
[3]
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/62/Dry_hydrant.jpg/150px-Dry_hydrant.jpg
taken from [4]
[4] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:emergency%3Dfire_hydrant#Types


On 2017-06-16 19:42, Viking wrote:
>> for flow_capacity, should m3/h be preferred instead of lpm ?
> Normally, the best unit for fire purposes is lpm (or gpm), because you can 
> easily determine how many minutes it takes to refill e.g. a 4500 litres fire 
> engine. Also fire pumps specs are in lpm or gpm.
>
>> fire_hydrant:coupling_type -> fire_hydrant:coupling:type
>> fire_hydrant:couplings -> fire_hydrant:couplings:size
> Then couplings, plural:
> fire_hydrant:couplings:size = 45;45;70 / ...
> fire_hydrant:couplings:type = UNI / Storz / ...
>
>> for people unable to recognize coupling diameters, is it useful to tag 
>> their count ? Or this information has no utility ?
> Well, I think that inserting only the number of couplings would complicate 
> the tagging scheme and would have a very little utility. I wouldn't do that.
>
> Alberto
>
>
> ---
> Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] fire hydrants

[Robert Koch]

Okay, I got the difference between the pillar hydrants. What about
dry-hydrants where you need to pump water out of a river/pond. There is
not a shutoff in the center of the bonnet.

Formerly this [1] would have been:

> fire_hydrant:type=pond
> fire_hydrant:pressure=suction

WIth the new proposal this would be then:

> fire_hydrant:type=pipe
> fire_hydrant:pressure=suction
Is this right? In German one would translate pipe as "Ansaugrohr".

[1]
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/62/Dry_hydrant.jpg/150px-Dry_hydrant.jpg
taken from [2]
[2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:emergency%3Dfire_hydrant#Types

On 2017-06-17 21:51, Kevin Kenny wrote:
> On Jun 17, 2017 2:30 PM, "Robert Koch" <robert.k...@loggia.at
> <mailto:robert.k...@loggia.at>> wrote:
>
> Moreover how useful is "pillar" if there is "dry_barrel" and
> "wet_barrel"? How would non-fire-fighters or non-local
> fire-fighters tag
> such pillar hydrants?
>
>
> "Pillar" is "I don't know which." There are a few hydrants near me
> that have a different appearance from our usual dry barrel design and
> carry signs warning that they must be pumped out after use.  I tagged
> them "pillar" because I honestly don't know what they are.
>
> Around the US, virtually universally, wet barrels have individual
> shutoff valves for each coupling while dry barrels have a single
> shutoff in the center of the bonnet. You have to get pretty far south
> for wet barrels to be practicable, since they'd burst in a hard winter. 
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] fire hydrants

[Robert Koch]

Hi,
in OsmHydrant [1] there is already fire_hydrant:coupling_type with various 
values from Storz to Barcelona 
(https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/fire_hydrant:coupling_type). Then there 
is fire_hydrant:couplings to complement that, describing the actual connectors: 
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/fire_hydrant%3Acouplings

This implementation might not be the best for various reasons, but we could 
consolidate its structure/values if needed.

[1] https://www.osmhydrant.org/en/

On 14 June 2017 12:13:11 AM GMT+02:00, Viking  wrote:
>I've proposed the subtag fire_hydrant:outlets=#;#;# in hydrants
>discussion page [1].
>If nobody opposes this proposal, I will add this subtag to hydrants
>page.
>Alberto
>
>
>[1]
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:emergency%3Dfire_hydrant#fire_hydrant:outlets.3D.23.3B.23.3B.23
>
>
>
>---
>Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast
>antivirus.
>https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
>___
>Tagging mailing list
>Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] fire hydrants

[Robert Koch]

Hello Alberto,

I like your remarks and would like to work together to improve things.

On 2017-06-14 19:06, Viking wrote:
>> in OsmHydrant [1] there is already fire_hydrant:coupling_type with various 
>> values from Storz to Barcelona
>> (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/fire_hydrant:coupling_type). Then 
>> there is fire_hydrant:couplings to complement that, describing the > actual 
>> connectors: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/fire_hydrant%3Acouplings
>>
>> This implementation might not be the best for various reasons, but we could 
>> consolidate its structure/values if needed.
>>
>> [1] https://www.osmhydrant.org/en/
> It is a bad implementation: first of all because there is no reference on 
> hydrants wiki page (and indeed I didn't know it) and consequentely there is a 
> wide range of heterogeneous values that are almost useless for automatic data 
> search.
> By the way, let's try to improve these existing tags.
> fire_hydrant:coupling_type indicates the standard (UNI, Storz,...)
> fire_hydrant:couplings indicates the number and diameters.
> Right?
Right!
>
> First question: is it possible that the same hydrant has different coupling 
> types, for example Storz and UNI? I know that in Italy, where I work as 
> fireman, this is not possible, so a single value in 
> fire_hydrant:coupling_type is enough.
In Austria I've only seen hydrants with one connector type (mostly Storz). S
> Second question: how would you indicate the number of couplings? For example 
> an hydrant with two UNI 45 mm couplings and one UNI 70 mm coupling would be:
> fire_hydrant:coupling_type=UNI
>
> fire_hydrant:couplings=45;45;70
> OR
> fire_hydrant:couplings=2 x 45;70
> OR...?
So far it was really up to the contributor on OsmHydrant but the
recommended way in this case have been so far:
fire_hydrant:couplings=2x45/1x70

Before going on, I've to explain the rationale behind using that scheme
first. In Austria we're using character A for 110mm diameter, B for for
75mm and C for either 52 (or 42). In this case it looks easily readable:
"1B/2C" or "1A/2B".
When it comes to "2x45/1x70" I totally agree that "45;45;70" is much
better. Back in time when doing the implementation for OsmHydrant, I
didn't know about using the semicolon to split values, but I like it
more than the forward slash.

Coming back to the Austrian "1A/2B" I would additionally allow using
these characters instead of diameter values as well resulting in: "A;B;B"

If the proposal is accepted I'd propose migrating all values
automatically and changing OsmHydrant. Your scheme with repeating the
diameter is much better readable & parse-able by humans & tools.

Best regards,
Robert
>
> I would prefer 45;45;70 because it's more explicit and less prone to errors.
> The use of semicolons to separate different values is commonly accepted on 
> the wiki.
>
> Alberto
>
>
> ---
> Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] fire hydrants

[Robert Koch]

According to this wiki entry:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features/Units

it would be:

fire_hydrant:couplings=2.5";2.5";4.5"

If not given, a default unit could be specified by the wiki entry (based
on official SI units; therefore metric).
Alternatively we could tell people to always use a unit value to avoid
mistakes on this tag.

On 2017-06-15 15:09, Richard Welty wrote:
> On 6/15/17 8:38 AM, Robert Koch wrote:
>> Hello Richard,
>>
>> On 2017-06-15 01:32, Richard Welty wrote:
>>> an american usage note:
>>>
>>> the "standard" hydrant in the US has 2 x 2.5" hose connections
>>> and 1 x 4.5" pumper connection. other sizes have existed in the
>>> past.
>> Which coupling-type do you use? NST
>> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hose_coupling#NST)?
> generally NST. the standardization effort in the US started immediately
> after the catastrophic 1904 Baltimore high rise fire. companies coming
> in from outside of the city found out that their equipement couldn't hook
> up.
>> If so one would describe this hydrant as:
>> fire_hydrant:coupling_type=NST
>> fire_hydrant:couplings=2.5;2.5;4.5
>>
>> Open: How do we reflect the unit? Millimetres won't work for the US.
>> Possibilities:
>> fire_hydrant:couplings=2.5";2.5";4.5"
>>   OR:
>> fire_hydrant:couplings=2.5;2.5;4.5
>> fire_hydrant:couplings_unit=inch
> the norm in OSM usually looks like
>
> fire_hydrant:couplings=2.5in;2.5in;4.5in
>
> but maybe spelled out (inch vs in), i'd have to check.
>>> the wrench required for the bolt at the top of a dry hydrant may vary,
>>> pentagonal bolts are most common but others have been used.
>>> this is something that a mapper can observe, and something that
>>> a fireman cares about.
>> There is not yet a tag for this. In Austria a typical wrench looks like
>> this: http://i.ebayimg.com/images/i/251745653405-0-1/s-l1000.jpg
>> The left side is used to open the bolt at the top, while the right side
>> can be used to open the cap of the hose couplings.
> i'd need to do some research. there are a variety of wrench types available,
> you can get an idea from the grainger website:
>
> https://www.grainger.com/category/spanner-and-hydrant-wrenches/fire-protection/safety/ecatalog/N-kyk?okey=hydrant+wrenches=hydrant+wrenches=hydrant+wrenches=14=hydrant+wrenches=true=hydrant+wrenches
>
> richard
>


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging