search

osm-fr / osmose-backend

Part of osmose that runs the analysis, and send the results to the frontend.
GNU General Public License v3.0
90 stars 114 forks source link

False positive lone pole or tower #2209

Open lholubec opened 5 months ago

lholubec commented 5 months ago

It is example of pole with transformator which is connected to primary and secondary voltage undergroud. obrázok it is very often type of connection. it is node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11215506651 I map it as: line_management: transition location:transition: yes but osmose mark it as error Lone power tower or pole

obrázok
frodrigo commented 5 months ago

Ok, let's ignore this poles with line_management=transition.

frodrigo commented 5 months ago

In fact I am not sure to understand what you ask for.

An alone pole with line_management=transition should be connected to a line... and so not alone.

cc @flacombe

davidpnewton commented 5 days ago

"In fact I am not sure to understand what you ask for."

"It is example of pole with transformator (sic) which is connected to primary and secondary voltage undergroud (sic)."

What's being asked for is simple. Stop incorrectly flagging power poles which have transformers on them and all cabling leading to them underground as errors. They are not errors. Without access to data from the power company in question showing the location of the underground cabling there is no realistic way to map the distribution lines leading to and from them. Therefore it is utterly unreasonable to mark them as errors.

flacombe commented 5 days ago

Hello

The whole facility should be tagged as power=substation imho. However the transformer is located on a riser looking like a power pole (or tower), thee is no overhead line connecting to this. The transitions occur in the facility perimeter and I think there is less point to use line_management=transition + location:transition=yes here.