Add icon for man_made=petroleum_well #3494
Comments
|
Great idea.
In the USA, the “pump jack” style oil well is very common, eg:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Man_made_petroleum_well.png
However, I believe other styles of well heads are more common in other
countries. The old-fashioned lattice tower “oil rig” / “oil derrick” could
be a recognizable icon, but these are not very common on modern production
wells:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Earlyoilfield.jpg
Derrick “gusher” example icon:
https://healingearth.ijep.net/glossary/oil-well-icon
Many production oil and gas wells just have a set of pipes and valves:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NaturalGasWell.jpg
Are there any subtags which tell if the well is produced with a pump jack
vs natural reservoir pressure, or even if it primarily oil vs gas
production?
Do offshore oil platforms already have a unique rendering?
…On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 2:14 AM Mateusz Konieczny ***@***.***> wrote:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dpetroleum_well
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#3494 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AoxshIJQZ4ZymBRKmIY3FzrYX2eUidcoks5urc7zgaJpZM4YM1h9>
.
|
|
My icon proposal:
|
|
@jeisenbe, I looked into it and there doesn't seem to be a way to tag them differently based on what type of well they are. There is a sub tag for if its an oil or gas well. Although I can't remember what it was now and its not listed on the tags wiki page for some reason. I don't think there would be an easy to tell what type of well it is by looking at satellite photos anyway. Plus, a lattice tower oil well icon might have the potential to be confused with other types of lattice towers. Whereas, its pretty to the meaning of @Tomasz-W's icon, but I also think its a well known enough image that people will know what it means for both types of wells. |
|
Ok, that works for me.
…On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 3:38 PM Adamant36 ***@***.***> wrote:
@jeisenbe <https://github.com/jeisenbe>, I looked into it and there
doesn't seem to be a way to tag them differently based on what type of well
they are. There is a sub tag for if its an oil or gas well. Although I
can't remember what it was now and its not listed on the tags wiki page for
some reason. I don't think there would be an easy to tell what type of well
it is by looking at satellite photos anyway. Plus, a lattice tower oil well
icon might have the potential to be confused with other types of lattice
towers. Whereas, its pretty to the meaning of @Tomasz-W
<https://github.com/Tomasz-W>'s icon, but I also think its a well known
enough image that people will know what it means for both types of wells.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#3494 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AoxshML2IhPWQUujdIN-_QY60NQrULljks5uuReAgaJpZM4YM1h9>
.
|
|
Alright. I'll probably test it and do a PR if everything goes as it should. Do you have an opinion on what zoom level it should start rendering at? Towers start rendering at z17. So that might work. starting at z18 might be better though. |
|
Let’s try test renderings for both levels.
Los Angeles has a number of active oil wells in the city. I think there is
one right next to Beverly Hills high school. So that might be a good place
to test
…On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 8:48 PM Adamant36 ***@***.***> wrote:
Alright. I'll probably test it and do a PR if everything goes as it
should. Do you have an opinion on what zoom level it should start rendering
at? Towers start rendering at z17. So that might work. starting at z18
might be better though.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#3494 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AoxshO1LDiFF5K76nphwAH592IQRAC2tks5uuWAlgaJpZM4YM1h9>
.
|
|
Bakersfield ended up being a good area. z17 |
|
Another area z17 |
|
The second rendering set (Long Beach, California) is very helpful.
The icons are a bit close together on z17, but that does represent the
real-world situation. I used to work right next to those 2 fields.
And I notice that the area with oil wells is still quite distinct from the
medical center and shops.
So I think z17 will work
…On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 10:42 PM Adamant36 ***@***.***> wrote:
Another area
z17
[image: petroleum_well z17]
<https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/30259065/48350984-ac206d80-e63d-11e8-80f6-f29c15960f39.png>
z18
[image: petroleum_well z18]
<https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/30259065/48350992-b2164e80-e63d-11e8-9ebd-24611a9506ea.png>
z19
[image: petroleum_well z19]
<https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/30259065/48350998-b9d5f300-e63d-11e8-8b7a-89aac00e2cd2.png>
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#3494 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AoxshDD3N4UqbUpAz0rQVgBykwSh2tcJks5uuXrKgaJpZM4YM1h9>
.
|
|
Well that's cool. I agree with you. It does look better at z17 on the second one. About 5,000 of them are mapped with names and I was thinking the addition of names on them somewhere like in the first example might cause problems, but then I couldn't get OverpassTurbo to do a query for ones with names for some reason. So, I guess its not that much of issue. I doubt they would all have names where there is a bunch of them together anyway. Unless its miss-tagging. |
|
Hey @kocio-pl, I just noticed there is also man_made=pumping_rig. Do you think it would be worth adding? I'm not really sure what the difference between the two are, but at least its an approved tag with 2,393 uses. |
For info, there are a bunch of named (and in some cases actually mistagged - some are no longer active) petroleum wells in the UK. See e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/53.2563/-1.0090 and (in another rendering) https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=15&lat=53.25638&lon=-1.00952 . These came from a very old import in the UK. |
|
@Adamant36 Petroleum wells are very rare in my country, there are none of them in my region, so I rather won't be a good adviser here. |
|
@Adamant36 I'm not sure and I'm not even interested in rendering oil-related objects. On the one hand they have its own tag, on the other hand it's listed as a tagging mistake, so probably it all needs discussion on Tagging list: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dpetroleum_well#Possible_Tagging_Mistakes |
|
Here, I suggest to use the present icon only to |
|
This proposition makes sense for me. However tag scheme documentation is not clear and should be discussed so we know if this scheme is OK. |
|
@kocio-pl, they are listed as items that are possibly tagged wrong as each other. It doesn't sound like that means either tag shouldn't be used though. Doing a search for oil well in iD comes up with man_made=petroleum_well. So its at least accepted there and has way more numbers then the other one. It makes sense to render man_made=petroleum_well even if it and man_made=pumping_rig is different because a pumping rig depends on a petroleum well, whereas the other doesn't depend on a pumping rig. 99% of oil wells will get pumping rigs at some point. A lot of the petroleum wells are also tagged with abandoned. So I think ignoring the temporary state of them being just a whole in the ground versus not is the better to go and render them as the complete setup. Since that's most of them probably are. I don't think they take down the rig after the site runs out of oil either. So there's nothing misleading about it. I don't think many people are mapping sealed holes in the ground. Either way, man_made=petroleum_well is clearly the preferred tag of the two. |
|
It still needs some documentation cleaning before we start rendering, IMO. Since both are under |
|
That's why I think one of them should be rendered over the other. Although, I didn't find any places where they were tagged on the same thing. So it might not even be a problem. Maybe rigs should rendered with the current icon and wells should be rendered with a similar icon to water wells. If anyone wants to ask on the mailing list feel free. Id like to see them rendered on the map, but I don't have that much spare time right now or id do it myself. |
|
Pumping rig can be used for different substances ("a tag for pumping platforms - gas, oil, etc." with For petroleum well we have no clarity if there is a rig or not, so tagging discussion is needed anyway, because we don't know how it relates to pumping rig tag. My intuition is that if we know there is a rig, it should be simply retagged as |
|
Alright. That sounds fair. I think pumping rig is the better tag anyway. Since it solves the issue of if there is a rig there or not. Especially since its approved and the other one isn't. I'll switch around the code and retest it. |
|
Links for testing (only rendering images were posted): https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/35.4290/-118.9797 |
|
Just to point out regarding the numbers - over 7,000 uses are also tagged as disused=yes, from a UK import 10 years ago: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Fj8 |
|
Please do it. When I map in Alberta, I often wonder why there are service roads going to nowhere, only to see that there is a tagged well when I get into editing mode. |
|
Personally, id like to. I have the same problem myself with many seamingly random roads going into farmland, there's currently an embargo on any new icons being added though. So its probably not going to happen until that gets worked out. Which I don't see happening anytime soon if ever. See the "to many icons" issue. |
|
You will get basically a lot of disused wells in some areas. It's especially the case with shale gas (take a look in Pennsylvania for example). But as I said some months ago, it's much more interesting to render pumping_rig than wells which are underground features. @boothym most of wells in your request are located on the sea floor of the North sea which raises an other problem: their rendering should be restricted to terrestrial area unless you dive at several hundred meters depth ;) |
|
Can we have some progress on this? Going to note that |
It would be cool if there was an icon for petroleum wells. There's a lot of them in northern California where I mainly map that haven't been added yet. Maybe it would get people to add them. Plus, they are important features of power and industrial infrastructure. Also, being rendered they would give important context to smaller industrial areas, where sometimes they are the only feature. The numbers are also there too. There's currently 52,090 of them mapped and the numbers seem to be increasing steadily.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: