Re: [Tagging] Discouraging frequency=* on power lines and cables
Hi David, Am 09.03.2017 um 06:35 schrieb David Marchal: >> Le 8 mars 2017 à 23:04, Michael Reicherta écrit : >> >> Please keep OSM simple. I don't want to add a power route relation on >> every tiny minor distribution line/cable (230 V). >> > Totally agree with that. I don’t understand the usage of a relation binding > the distribution network elements: the connections between them can be > retrieved from the nodes and ways, and the relation would merely be use for > group tagging. IMHO, the relation would only make sense for transport lines, > which are often viewed and treated as continuous, even if their > characteristics change along their path (overhead, underground…). At a > distribution level, however, this sounds overkill to me. I am not against the usage of power route relations in general. There are lots of cases where they are useful. The Elbekreuzung 2 (Elbe Crossing 2) is a simple and nice example why they are necessary: Most cables of that line are 380 kV AC but four of them are used by DB Energie GmbH for their 110 kV 16.7 Hz to supply traction current for the electrified railway line(s) in Schleswig-Holstein. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elbe_Crossing_2 I just don't like the necessity to add route relations to every power line just to indicate its frequency. Best regards Michael -- Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten ausgenommen) I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Discouraging frequency=* on power lines and cables
Though busy, I will share my opinion on tagging frequency on power lines, and also the use of power route relations On Mar 9, 2017 5:40 PM, "François Lacombe"wrote: Hi David, 2017-03-09 6:35 GMT+01:00 David Marchal : > > > Le 8 mars 2017 à 23:04, Michael Reichert a écrit : > > > > Please keep OSM simple. I don't want to add a power route relation on > > every tiny minor distribution line/cable (230 V). > > > Totally agree with that. I don’t understand the usage of a relation > binding the distribution network elements: the connections between them can > be retrieved from the nodes and ways, Not always: https://www.google.fr/maps/place/74150+Rumilly/@45. 8717133,5.9644766,3a,64.8y,288.41h,97.09t/data=!3m4!1e1! 3m2!1sc9ie9WHjYs2bM-s5jagK9g!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x478b9d830296190d: 0x1ef1a2064da6b8cf http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2560701992 Here you would connect all lines while they are actually not, and sometimes the two apparently independent circuits are actually connected at such points. No general rule regarding this. No relations are currently setup in my example but we'll need to. Distribution lines tend to have that complicated connections than the main transmission lines, as in the case you used, that is a distribution line branching out from its main circuit via a tap connection. And tapping is very common on distribution systems, and ways to isolate the branch in case of power line issues on the main line where the branch is connected is through mechancal switches or fuse cutouts. Switches will see use on a power line segment connected to another circuit in a distribution system with a radial configuration, but may also appear on higher voltage lines, where they are opened to isolate loads from the main line in case of faults or line repairs. Fuse cutouts are rather limited to distribution systems, and are used to isolate a power line segment from the main line in cases of overcurrent or long voltage spikes, but will not isolate a power line during line repair, unless linemen open them using insulated sticks. Indicating switches or fuse cutouts on a distribution circuit may be useful on power route relations, when assuming that power distributors use the data to locate portions of the circuits having faults, or loads temporarily disconnected for line repairs. > and the relation would merely be use for group tagging. IMHO, the relation > would only make sense for transport lines, which are often viewed and > treated as continuous, even if their characteristics change along their > path (overhead, underground…). At a distribution level, however, this > sounds overkill to me. > Distribution networks change more often between overhead and underground, and seems more messy than a A-to-B transmission lines Have you seen this example ? https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6087750 By the way, you aren't forced at all to make relations if you don't want to, right ? You can join the discussion ongoing on : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org /wiki/Proposed_features/Power_routing_proposal All the best And yes,distribution systems will have the most variations in location, either overhead, undergound, or underwater. And while it may occur on distribution systems whose primary lines run in the open countryside instead on the roads, like those in Europe, they are the same on countries where such systems have the primary lines run beside roads or railways, like those in the Americas and most of Asia, but on an urban area, these will usually be found on tunnels accessible via manholes. And finding underground power lines are difficult, unless markers (like manholes or signage) or knowledge from working as a lineman wil help you find their routes. But, it's still fine to add underground or underwater power cables on a power route relation, especially when assuming that utilities or transmission system operators will use the data on the relation to find the specific circuit or line where a line or cable needs repair. ___ 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] Discouraging frequency=* on power lines and cables
Hi David, 2017-03-09 6:35 GMT+01:00 David Marchal: > > > Le 8 mars 2017 à 23:04, Michael Reichert a écrit : > > > > Please keep OSM simple. I don't want to add a power route relation on > > every tiny minor distribution line/cable (230 V). > > > Totally agree with that. I don’t understand the usage of a relation > binding the distribution network elements: the connections between them can > be retrieved from the nodes and ways, Not always: https://www.google.fr/maps/place/74150+Rumilly/@45.8717133,5.9644766,3a,64.8y,288.41h,97.09t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sc9ie9WHjYs2bM-s5jagK9g!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x478b9d830296190d:0x1ef1a2064da6b8cf http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2560701992 Here you would connect all lines while they are actually not, and sometimes the two apparently independent circuits are actually connected at such points. No general rule regarding this. No relations are currently setup in my example but we'll need to. > and the relation would merely be use for group tagging. IMHO, the relation > would only make sense for transport lines, which are often viewed and > treated as continuous, even if their characteristics change along their > path (overhead, underground…). At a distribution level, however, this > sounds overkill to me. > Distribution networks change more often between overhead and underground, and seems more messy than a A-to-B transmission lines Have you seen this example ? https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6087750 By the way, you aren't forced at all to make relations if you don't want to, right ? You can join the discussion ongoing on : https://wiki.openstreetmap. org/wiki/Proposed_features/Power_routing_proposal All the best ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Discouraging frequency=* on power lines and cables
> Le 8 mars 2017 à 23:04, Michael Reicherta écrit : > > Please keep OSM simple. I don't want to add a power route relation on > every tiny minor distribution line/cable (230 V). > Totally agree with that. I don’t understand the usage of a relation binding the distribution network elements: the connections between them can be retrieved from the nodes and ways, and the relation would merely be use for group tagging. IMHO, the relation would only make sense for transport lines, which are often viewed and treated as continuous, even if their characteristics change along their path (overhead, underground…). At a distribution level, however, this sounds overkill to me. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Discouraging frequency=* on power lines and cables
Hi Warin, More than a guide, wiki sounds like a reference to me. Actually, editors presets, QA tools and consumers - all after contributors - will rely on it to define their behaviour and targets. Agree with you there are no rules, just material to discuss and important basis to built up on. Yes, I'm not against a statement encouraging contributors to use relations to separate logical things than physical things. There is this proposal on that particular topic : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Power_routing_proposal Michael, It wasn't about deprecating anything. Frequency is a good key. No point to add relations on every minor line, but at neighbourhood scale, it can mean something regarding the network organization Like this : https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6087750 Network map can't be completed unless we put logical relations on physical lines to know where the power actually flows. Believe me it's useful and have a high value. Mappers aren't force at all to use those advanced techniques, but someone who wants to should be encouraged. That's why I want to tidy up this tiny piece of wiki without needing a lot of arguments and energy. Enjoy your evening ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Discouraging frequency=* on power lines and cables
Hi François, Am 2017-03-08 um 15:18 schrieb François Lacombe: > frequency=* tag aims to qualify active elements on telecom or power > networks (among others, see wiki > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:frequency) > > I see it as an optional property of power lines or cables. > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power%3Dline > > In practice, a physical line/cable section isn't operated at, nor designed > for, any dedicated frequency but it's all about the supported power circuit > (a logical relation going from a place to another place through the grid). > It always exists if line is actually powered on. > We use to map such logical circuits with route=power relations where > frequency is more relevant. > > Can we drop frequency on power lines and cables wiki page ? > It can't be guess by looking at the line (instead of voltage) in landscape > and there may be inconsistencies between circuits relations and lines > members. frequency=* should not be deprecated (if that is ever possible at OSM at all) or removed from the wiki page because otherwise mappers are forced to add a useless relation on every single power line. If you map a power line, you usually know its frequency. For example, 50 Hz is the default frequency in Europe. If the line belongs to the separated 16.7 Hz network, it is signed (signs with the name of the operator, e.g. DB Energie GmbH at the towers). Please keep OSM simple. I don't want to add a power route relation on every tiny minor distribution line/cable (230 V). Best regards Michael -- Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten ausgenommen) I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Discouraging frequency=* on power lines and cables
On 09-Mar-17 03:19 AM, François Lacombe wrote: Hi Tom, 2017-03-08 16:08 GMT+01:00 Tom Pfeifer>: The wiki documents for what particular tags are for. This tag is used 826577 times, so this documentation is essential. Also, we normally do not delete wiki pages at all. The process would be to discourage or deprecate the tag, however the reasons you gave above are very weak for me. My point wasn't to delete any page but to remove frequency=* as a possible tag for power lines. frequency=16.7 is used a lot on railway networks where it is clearly distinguished from the 50 (Europe) or 60 (America) Hz regular energy distribution. frequency=0 (used on 35% of the tags) means DC power which is used on specific railways, and could also apply to DC distribution networks that I vaguely remember are constructed differently from traditional 50/60Hz-Networks. I didn't say frequency isn't used but it is actually misused. Frequency refers to power routes, not physical power lines While the lines themselves don't have a frequency (well there are limits as to what they will take) themselves, as you say the supporting infrastructure (transformers, generators etc) have a nominal frequency. If you want include a statement that power distribution lines themselves do not require a tag of frequency but relationships that have those lines as members should have a tag of frequency? Is that what you are after? Do remember that the wiki is a guide, not rules... try not to be pedantic. Example : A 400 kV 50Hz route : http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6359644 Which has lines as members : http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/41773490 http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/41828020 where frequency isn't mentioned. If a 16.7 Hz line would have shared same sections, the relation would have frequency=16.7 and line sections wouldn't. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Discouraging frequency=* on power lines and cables
Hi Tom, 2017-03-08 16:08 GMT+01:00 Tom Pfeifer: > > The wiki documents for what particular tags are for. This tag is used > 826577 times, so this documentation is essential. > > Also, we normally do not delete wiki pages at all. The process would be to > discourage or deprecate the tag, however the reasons you gave above are > very weak for me. > My point wasn't to delete any page but to remove frequency=* as a possible tag for power lines. > > frequency=16.7 is used a lot on railway networks where it is clearly > distinguished from the 50 (Europe) or 60 (America) Hz regular energy > distribution. > > frequency=0 (used on 35% of the tags) means DC power which is used on > specific railways, and could also apply to DC distribution networks that I > vaguely remember are constructed differently from traditional > 50/60Hz-Networks. > I didn't say frequency isn't used but it is actually misused. Frequency refers to power routes, not physical power lines Example : A 400 kV 50Hz route : http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6359644 Which has lines as members : http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/41773490 http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/41828020 where frequency isn't mentioned. If a 16.7 Hz line would have shared same sections, the relation would have frequency=16.7 and line sections wouldn't. All the best ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Discouraging frequency=* on power lines and cables
On 08.03.2017 15:18, François Lacombe wrote: frequency=* tag aims to qualify active elements on telecom or power networks (among others, see wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:frequency) I see it as an optional property of power lines or cables. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power%3Dline In practice, a physical line/cable section isn't operated at, nor designed for, any dedicated frequency but it's all about the supported power circuit (a logical relation going from a place to another place through the grid). It always exists if line is actually powered on. We use to map such logical circuits with route=power relations where frequency is more relevant. Can we drop frequency on power lines and cables wiki page ? It can't be guess by looking at the line (instead of voltage) in landscape and there may be inconsistencies between circuits relations and lines members. If no further comments, i'll remove this option in 15 days for the above reason. The wiki documents for what particular tags are for. This tag is used 826577 times, so this documentation is essential. Also, we normally do not delete wiki pages at all. The process would be to discourage or deprecate the tag, however the reasons you gave above are very weak for me. frequency=16.7 is used a lot on railway networks where it is clearly distinguished from the 50 (Europe) or 60 (America) Hz regular energy distribution. frequency=0 (used on 35% of the tags) means DC power which is used on specific railways, and could also apply to DC distribution networks that I vaguely remember are constructed differently from traditional 50/60Hz-Networks. Summary: don't touch it. tom ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Discouraging frequency=* on power lines and cables
Hi, frequency=* tag aims to qualify active elements on telecom or power networks (among others, see wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:frequency) I see it as an optional property of power lines or cables. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power%3Dline In practice, a physical line/cable section isn't operated at, nor designed for, any dedicated frequency but it's all about the supported power circuit (a logical relation going from a place to another place through the grid). It always exists if line is actually powered on. We use to map such logical circuits with route=power relations where frequency is more relevant. Can we drop frequency on power lines and cables wiki page ? It can't be guess by looking at the line (instead of voltage) in landscape and there may be inconsistencies between circuits relations and lines members. If no further comments, i'll remove this option in 15 days for the above reason. All the best François ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging