Modify

Opened 4 years ago

Last modified 4 years ago

#401 new enhancement

[analyser] Prise en compte du nouveau formalisme des centrales électriques

Reported by: francois.lacombe@… Owned by: frodrigo
Priority: major Component: osmose-backend
Keywords: Cc:

Description

La proposition concernant la modélisation des sites de production d'énergie ayant été acceptée, l'aide d'osmose peut être apportée pour permettre d'accélérer son application dans la base.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Power_generation_refinement

Désormais, les features power=plant doivent être spatialement ou rationnellement reliées à une ou plusieurs feature power=generator.
Cela dépend du type de centrale, comme expliqué dans la proposition.

Des features power=generator peuvent rester indépendantes, par exemple dans le cadre de panneaux solaires pour une production domestique.

Doivent être considérées comme incohérentes les configurations suivantes :

  • feature power=plant sans générateur associés (cartographie juste mais incomplète d'une centrale électrique)
  • feature power=station se référant à une power=plant (usage déprécié).

Un point d'attention sur le périmètre d'un site : si une area fermée suffit pour délimiter une centrale électrique, alors toute relation power=plant est superflue.

La proposition spécifie également le formalisme des puissances de sortie des générateurs comme de la centrale toute entière.
On part du principe que celui de la centrale toute entière sert de référence est sont bien souvent issus des document publics opérateurs (en France c'est obligatoire et imposé par l'UE/UFE)
Dans le cadre de cette relation plant/generator, les valeurs de generator:output:* et plant:output:* peuvent être vérifiées selon les règles suivantes :

  • Si plant:output < somme(generator:output), alors il y a une erreur
  • Si plant:output > somme(generator:output), alors il manque des générateurs

Le tag pouvant présenter différents types d'énergie, on prendra soin de valider ces valeurs type à type.

Discutons dès maintenant des modalités de mise en place.

Attachments (0)

Change History (8)

comment:1 Changed 4 years ago by frodrigo

  • Summary changed from Osmose : prise en compte du nouveau formalisme des centrales électriques to [analyser] Prise en compte du nouveau formalisme des centrales électriques

comment:2 Changed 4 years ago by francois.lacombe@…

Bonjour.

Où en est-on avec cette demande d'évolution ?

comment:3 Changed 4 years ago by frodrigo

Always in the same state. You can start by write detailed checking rules.

comment:4 Changed 4 years ago by francois.lacombe@…

Can you tell me how can I do that? which format can I use? Is someone else involved ?

I wasn't aware simple users like me even could edit rules and foremost I don't have a clue of how Osmose works...

comment:5 Changed 4 years ago by frodrigo

It's not about writing osmose code, but about what you wan to be checked

comment:6 follow-up: Changed 4 years ago by francois.lacombe@…

Let's see what is said in ticket description...

Must be considered as non-consistent configurations :

  • power=plant features without any associated power=generator (good but incomplete mapping of a power plant).
  • power=station feature used in place of a power=plant (deprecated) - pretty tricky to check isn't it ?
  • power=generator used in place of power=plant (generator:output > 10 MW without be enclosed by power=plant). 10 MW may be refined as long as we get false alerts in production.

Furthermore, with power=plant enclosing :

  • If plant:output < sum(generator:output), then there is a power mistake
  • If plant:output > sum(generator:output), then we miss generators

What kind of extra details are needed ?

comment:7 in reply to: ↑ 6 ; follow-up: Changed 4 years ago by frodrigo

Replying to francois.lacombe@…:

  • power=plant features without any associated power=generator (good but incomplete mapping of a power plant).

Check for :

  • power=plant relation without power=generator member
  • power=plant way, not member of relation (witch tags ? on relation) and not closed
  • power=plant way, not member of relation (witch tags ? on relation) and closed without power=generator (node, way, rel) inside polygon

power=plant on multipolygon act as power=plant relation or polygon, or tow ?
Any check on isolated power=generator ?

  • power=station feature used in place of a power=plant (deprecated) - pretty tricky to check isn't it ?

Just deprecated of power=station ? If so, already done by deprecated analyser.

  • power=generator used in place of power=plant (generator:output > 10 MW without be enclosed by power=plant). 10 MW may be refined as long as we get false alerts in production.

Furthermore, with power=plant enclosing :

  • If plant:output < sum(generator:output), then there is a power mistake
  • If plant:output > sum(generator:output), then we miss generators

Check with sum of sub type like generator:output:electricity ? Check by type ?

What kind of extra details are needed ?

comment:8 in reply to: ↑ 7 Changed 4 years ago by francois.lacombe@…

Replying to frodrigo:

Check for :

  • power=plant relation without power=generator member

Ok.

  • power=plant way, not member of relation (witch tags ? on relation) and not closed

power=plant way is always closed since each power plant is obviously fenced.
Which relation are you talking about ?

  • power=plant way, not member of relation (witch tags ? on relation) and closed without power=generator (node, way, rel) inside polygon

Ok. power=generator way is always closed too.
Same question for relation.

power=plant on multipolygon act as power=plant relation or polygon, or tow ?

A multipolygon power=plant must be converted in relation since power=plant specifies that multi-site power plant are represented by a relation.

Any check on isolated power=generator ?

On all and each generator, generator:source, generator:method and generator:type consistency must be checked (as for not finding things like generator:source=nuclear + generator:method=combustion + generator:type=francis_turbine)
Nothing special about isolated ones.

Just deprecated of power=station ? If so, already done by deprecated analyser.

"deprecated analyser" is part of osmose system or another standalone app ?
power=station will be totally deprecated when Substation refinement proposal would have been accepted (but I'm sure it will)

Check with sum of sub type like generator:output:electricity ? Check by type ?

Check type by type (can't compare electricity rating with hot water rating).

Add Comment

Modify Ticket

Action
as new .
Author


E-mail address and user name can be saved in the Preferences.

 
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.