Talk:Key:voltage
...and what about AC/DC? (not the Rock band!!) --RalpH himself 20:05, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
...or Hz on AC lines? --Skippern 16:53, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
Found it: frequency=* (see Map_Features#Power), and set 0 for DC. --RalpH himself 08:15, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
...and what about 3-phase? This really matches nowhere, although I personally would make it part of the frequency (which is closest of all), like 50(3) for 50Hz 3-phase. Exact syntax has to be figured out, maybe a new tag introduced. --RalpH himself 08:15, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Unused lines
Resolved: Use power lines lifecycle instead of voltage=0Hello, what about lines which has been switched off in past and are not used currently? I propose the following tagging: voltage=0/former_voltage e.g. voltage=0/25000. The zero is supposed to mean, that there is no voltage any more on the line. What's your opinion? --DB1BMN 09:09, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
- This is very rarely used. A more common approach seems to be to use construction:voltage to indicate the voltage the infrastructure was built for, with the current voltage showing what is in reality on the line (which could be less than what it was built for, or even zero). (EDIT: I'll need to revisit that statement though, because it seems construction:voltage is used in different contexts only) Joost schouppe (talk) 12:35, 16 November 2025 (UTC)
- I second that, it is documented more broadly on power lines lifecycle. Furthermore, since
power=circuithas been reviewed,voltage=0is even more irrelevant: it means no circuit so the construction / disused line shouldn't be involved in such a relation without the need to altervoltage=*on thepower=line. Fanfouer (talk) 18:33, 16 November 2025 (UTC)- Having looked at this in a bit more detail now: there's
disused=yesthat is recommended. However I don't see anything inpower=circuitthat helps here? Considering the definition ofvoltage=*, it seems pretty clear it should be "real" voltage. So when adding disused=yes, it seems reasonable to me to move the original voltage to disused:voltage. disused:voltage could also be used to indicate voltages as they were intended in the past even if the current voltage is not 0. Joost schouppe (talk) 10:13, 17 November 2025 (UTC)- The problem is we not only encourage people to find the line's voltage by reading signs but also by looking at size of conductors or insulators. The intention behind
power=circuitrelations is to separate logical and physical layer as explained in the proposal. So the visual aspect of a physical line relates to its design and doesn't change upon operation, that's whyvoltage=0means even more delete the corresponding circuit relation instead of anything has changed visually on the line.disused:voltage=*would be fine. The main concern is to always avoidvoltage=0. Additionally, I've just updated the opened case fordisused:power=*rendering on osm-carto github. Fanfouer (talk) 11:06, 17 November 2025 (UTC)
- The problem is we not only encourage people to find the line's voltage by reading signs but also by looking at size of conductors or insulators. The intention behind
- Having looked at this in a bit more detail now: there's
- I second that, it is documented more broadly on power lines lifecycle. Furthermore, since
- This is very rarely used. A more common approach seems to be to use construction:voltage to indicate the voltage the infrastructure was built for, with the current voltage showing what is in reality on the line (which could be less than what it was built for, or even zero). (EDIT: I'll need to revisit that statement though, because it seems construction:voltage is used in different contexts only) Joost schouppe (talk) 12:35, 16 November 2025 (UTC)
How about using voltage:primary voltage:secondary ?
Resolved: We should keep voltage as a list on power segments and involve them in power=circuit relationsWould it not be an idea to adopt this tagging for power lines with multiple circuits that have different voltage?
It is not uncommon around here to see 66kV on top and 22kV below. The key is already in use for transformers. 
Gazer75 (on osm, edits, contrib, heatmap, chngset com.)
- We shouldn't use
voltage:primary=*on power lines as primary, secondary, ... relate to transformer's interfaces. It isn't relevant for power lines on which different voltages should remain in a list involtage=*and each line segment should be involved in one or morepower=circuitrelations. Fanfouer (talk) 18:40, 16 November 2025 (UTC)
Used on areas?
Is there a reason for changing onArea to yes? --Andrew (talk) 11:21, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
- Yes - voltage is used on
power=substations which are tagged as areas. - Russss (talk) 11:24, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
Correct voltage tagging for multiple phases
Resolved: Single phase: phase-to-ground voltage, Multiple phases: phase-to-phase voltage, DC systems: pole-to-groundI have come across some distribution lines (power=minor_line) in some rural areas where there are only 2 cables present, in this case there are 2 cables and a neutral present. That is, 2 phases out of a 3 phase system
How would you describe the voltage of the line? Would you do phase to phase voltage or phase to neutral?
--Wolfy1339 (talk) 21:14, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- Pretty sure you count L-L still as long as there are two phases. --Gazer75 (talk) 23:41, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- Agreed, on AC multi phase systems, let's count voltage between phases as phase-neutral can be deduced. It will be simpler Fanfouer (talk) 08:09, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
- Clarification has been brought by this Osmose issue and recent edits about HVDC systems Fanfouer (talk) 18:49, 16 November 2025 (UTC)
- Agreed, on AC multi phase systems, let's count voltage between phases as phase-neutral can be deduced. It will be simpler Fanfouer (talk) 08:09, 9 October 2023 (UTC)