Talk:Tag:man made=crane

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

semi-permanent cranes

The wiki page says "Not for temporarily erected cranes on construction sites." What does 'temporarily' mean in this context? Some cranes on construction sites exist for 5-10 years or longer, and become well known landmarks. Many are lit up colourfully at night and/or fly flags from the top.

So, could we refine the sentence "Not for temporarily erected cranes on construction sites.", perhaps changing it to "Not for temporarily erected cranes on construction sites, unless they remain there for multiple years or become well known landmarks." --Kylenz 10:25, 15 May 2021 (NZST)

Tag values

Tag values usually are lowercase without spaces. So crane:type=Portal crane should not be used. Instead crane:type=portal_crane is an OSM compliant tagging. The same for crane:mobile=Rail should be crane:mobile=rail. If noone vetos I will change that. --WanMil 09:41, 25 September 2012 (BST)

TODO types


Container crane, Gantry crane, Travellift, Slewing pillar crane, Floor-mounted crane, Portal crane, portal, travel lift, portal_crane, slewing_pillar_crane, Truck-mounted crane, Portalkran, Travel Lift, travellift, floor-mounted crane, portal crane, Saulendrehkran, saulendrehkran, gantry, travel_lift, gantry_crane, crane, rail, slewing pillar crane

So, I think this is list of common types: bulk-handling, container, deck, floor-mounted, gantry, hammerhead, hoist, jib, level_luffing, overhead, portal, rail, saulendrehkran, self-erecting, slewing_pillar, tower, travel_lift, winch

I dont know about "-" "_" and " " so I left "-" and chance " " to "_" --- User:Kr12 18:59, 28 May 2013

Mapping of crane rails

How should we tag the rail of the cranes? For example, ways and currently have no tags, and they seem to represent rails for cranes. Zstadler (talk) 14:27, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Revisiting this issue after a few years... At the time I invented a man_made=rail tag for these, but that wasn't liked by the person who mapped that industrial complex and after some discussion then the original (but in my opinion still wrong) railway=rail tags were restored, and it still has railway=rail tags on there today
We really need something for this, it's displayed and seen as proper railway tracks now (even more prominently as the actual railway tracks going through that complex) and I don't think that should happen... --Eimai (talk) 08:10, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
I totally agree with the above. I added some gantry cranes at DeltaPort e.g. (Way: 503678145) with the tags "man_made:crane" and "type:gantry_rail". However, they do not display on OSM, and it would be decent if they would with a noticeably weighted line style and colour, different from rail lines. It would also be preferable if the two rails were combined on the same way, if possible.
I checked in the big ports of Longbeach and Singapore, and there does not seem to be any acceptable solution there.
--Badenk (talk) 20:52, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
@Zstadler: @Eimai: @Badenk: Need a solution for special use tracks such as for launch pedestals for rockets and mobile service buildings in a spaceport. For example: and Ohsin (talk) 00:21, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

What is a travel_lift?

When looking up travel lifts, I find pictures of cranes on wheels that can drive about. I would think that we can't map those, so what is meant with "crane:type=travel_lift"? —M!dgard [ talk ] 20:05, 19 November 2017 (UTC) I looked up travel lifts and I have used similar vehicles - they are often used to lift a boat or small ship out of the water at a special dock at a marina or boatyard. Similar vehicles also carry containers around container ports. There may be other uses. I have a view that a travel lift used to lift boats from the water should be mapped at the point where the lift out of the water actually occurs - the lifting dock, but not the container port vehicle. --TonyS (talk) 23:34, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Crane rails

If the crane is on rails, add this tag to crane rails.

We can not just reduce cranes to the rails. It is better to draw the area of the crane with a rectangle and add the tags. An example is here. There are even 6 cranes running on the same tracks. It is then better to divide the area to represent the number of cranes.

I would change the wiki page so that cranes are tagged only on nodes or areas, not on simple ones. Is that OK?--geozeisig (talk) 13:58, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Good point. I fully agree. Tomasz W (talk) 07:20, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
I did an update. Take a look at that, especially the English.--geozeisig (talk) 10:42, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
I think that rails should be treated as a separate thing than a crane, because rails without a crane won't lift anything. So I would go with linear railway=crane or railway=yes for rails and separate node/ area with man_made=crane tag for certain cranes. Tomasz W (talk) 11:14, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
Has anyone ever come to a consensus over this? I particularly like your suggestion to use the railway=crane tag for the rails. It makes the most sense to me, at least. I'm working on a large shipyard in the US, and the rail tagging there before I got in was a little bit of a mess, this would clean things up and allow the people who maintain the renderers control of the appearance (and display) of crane rails in a sensible way. Chuck (talk) 15:49, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
railway=crane makes sense to me. It gives the renderer something sensible to apply styling to. The current documentation for the rails doesn't make much sense from a tagging perspective. crane:mobile=rail is a good tag for the actual crane(s) on the rail, but not for the rail itself. In fact, disused crane rails may be left long after the cranes are taken down. JeroenHoek (talk) 09:33, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Actually, thinking about what we are mapping with gantry cranes, railway=* may not be a good fit. With railways we map the routes, but with gantry cranes and similar constructs, we map the (highly visible) tracks on both sides of the gantry. This makes sense for cranes, but it makes it hard to match with the railway=* semantics of mapping routes. I wonder if a new man_made=* value wouldn't make more sense, especially if it is something generic enough to use for any type of fixed track/rail used to move large constructs like gantry cranes, but also things like horizontally moving bridges. JeroenHoek (talk) 09:08, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

I have wondered how to map such cranes - they can be very large and visible from 25km distance. I like the area denoting the area travelled by the crane(s); I think that the quantity of cranes operating in that area needs to be tagged - and each crane may be different in its capacities; I think that they should be clearly rendered on the standard map. Changing the description of the wiki from stationary to limited mobility may be helpful. --TonyS (talk) 23:34, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

@Tomasz W ...and draw a separate way way through the rails. How exactly is that meant? Can you give an example? --geozeisig (talk) 08:39, 12 November 2018 (UTC)


Would a shiplift classify as a crane?

One that I spotted which made me wonder is at (edit mode in Bing). Here, the lifting platform goes down a ramp till it's underwater, lifts the vessel, comes back up the ramp, travels sideways till it lines up with the correct "parking" bay, then forward / back into that bay & lowers the vessel onto a prepared framework for storage / maintenance.

We have =travel_lift which says it is for moving ships, but that is really for smaller boats only, & which is self-propelled so it can go anywhere with the boat yard, rather than being on rails as these type of lifts are. --Fizzie41 (talk) 02:53, 8 February 2021 (UTC)