Re: [Tagging] Discouraging frequency=* on power lines and cables

[Michael Reichert]

Hi David,

Am 09.03.2017 um 06:35 schrieb 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, 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

[Jherome Miguel]

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

[François Lacombe]

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

[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, 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

[François Lacombe]

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

[Michael Reichert]

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

[Warin]

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

[François Lacombe]

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

[Tom Pfeifer]

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