Activity Feed › Discussion Forums › Strictly Surveying › Drones, surveying and witchcraft
Drones, surveying and witchcraft
Posted by paden-cash on September 14, 2018 at 7:26 pmAs an official “old duff” I have seen the world of land surveying through some pretty big changes.
Picture yourself occupying a quarter corner with a 30″ K&E mfg. in 1902 and scanning the horizon for a flagman a mile away in a tree waving 4 sq. ft. of a traffic flag to give you line. And this was just to clear line to the opposite quarter corner so you could eventually chain the distance (a few times). One leg of a survey might take two or three days. That was land surveying in 1969.
A scant 6 years later we had the orange HP “Pumpkin” 3810A and could make short work of that kind shot, as long as you had something tall enough upon which to steady an array of glass. My old party chief (who would be 101 years old this year had he lived) simply called it “witchcraft”. I wish he had lived a little longer to see where we’re at today. The technology we utilize will probably only get better and better. And I’m all for it.
Maybe someday we’ll all use a “roving base” drone to follow us through the woods. It could stay well above the canopy and spit corrected data down to us as we walk through the woods. And maybe someday the caps we place on our pins will be fixed with a data chip inside them. It could contain a copy of the survey that located the pin, or any other info…and read in a heartbeat and then recorded in our DC.
So many wunnerful things that are still yet to be. And yes I’m a dreamer.
Sometimes our dreams don’t turn out so good though. Years ago I thought there would eventually be “gummed-edge tortillas” to keep your burrito from flopping open..and that hasn’t happened yet. ?
thebionicman replied 5 years, 7 months ago 13 Members · 24 Replies- 24 Replies
2nd the gummed edge burrito… Just sayin!
Imagine a large drone, equipped with robot stuff. And, 4gps antennas. You are in the woods. The drone is overhead, flying, and following you around. The drone has 100% sky view. It uses the 4 antennas, to turn angles, and edm to measure distance. Direct said drone, to a sorta clear hole, and tell it to record your ground position. Move drone to another hole, repeat. And compare. And, adjust, or compile to one coord.
It has fancy batts, that last all day.
Or, get the “two telescope option”.
Now, you can set a backsite, and turn angles, from the drone, with one telescope pointing at you, and the other at the backsite.
When you record your plat, it is an electronic file, that goes straight into the GIS, from the surveyor. Each surveyor has his own layer, and is responsible for it.
Every time the surveyor records a plat, he gets PAID, either a fixed fee, or at a rate, determined by how much linear footage is shown. Substantial financial incentives are involved. Also, erroneous plats work in reverse… Record one, and the GIS fines you. But, it warns you too.
So, fines are not frequent, but substantial.
All corners set, are also shown, on the plat, via digital image. There is a pay rate per monument.
….
Happy Friday!
N
The summer of 1980 I was tying in a line we had run with a HP 3810a along a divided 4 lane somewhere around Morristown Tn. I got the last shot so me and a helper were dinking around with the HP while waiting for the rodman to drive back to pick us up.
The 3810a does not look like a typical survey instrument so I started using it like a video camera on a tripod. Watching cars as they approached and spinning around real quick as they passed. There were several that looked back and tapped their brakes trying to figure out what we were doing.
The last to come by was an old beat up pickup truck and I saw as it passed and I swung the 3810a around to follow, the driver was a great big hillbilly with long hair and a beard. About twice my size. He hit his brakes and turned on his left turn signal headed for a median crossing. About that time the rodman was pulling up. We were loaded and gone in nothing flat!
The moral? That new technology can get you in trouble if you don’t use it properly! ?
James
Nate…I think it’s closer than you realize. This is the drone we are probably going to go with. I can run two cameras that can view two separate focal points. One can be a very powerful zoom and the other forward…a few modifications and I can easily see a distometer being utilized making aerial resections very possible…or taking sideshots to those hard to reach corners from above.
The way I see it once an accurate coordinate (lat, long) is recorded in a public database WE ARE DONE. Put a chip on it if you want, won’t compete with a phone app. For all intents and purposes the use of phone apps in my area has already taken over. The ONLY thing left to do is the coordinates being tuned up. I’m skeptical of that happening BUT maybe with enough lawsuits generated by the goofy use of these apps and the public will then PAY (for the coordinates to be surveyed that is). I’m probably delusional the the public will EVER PAY for this.
- Posted by: LRDay
The way I see it once an accurate coordinate (lat, long) is recorded in a public database WE ARE DONE.
That takes no account of the fact that the Earth is dynamic and measurably moving.
Our recent earthquakes have shown that sometimes the movement can be very quick.
Over time your boundary based on lat/long will move. What was a boundary on a wall becomes one through the middle of the apartment.
There is good reason that the doctrines of accretion and erosion exist, and that the monument controls.
- Posted by: jim.coxPosted by: LRDay
The way I see it once an accurate coordinate (lat, long) is recorded in a public database WE ARE DONE.
That takes no account of the fact that the Earth is dynamic and measurably moving.
Our recent earthquakes have shown that sometimes the movement can be very quick.
Over time your boundary based on lat/long will move. What was a boundary on a wall becomes one through the middle of the apartment.
There is good reason that the doctrines of accretion and erosion exist, and that the monument controls.
I do not disagree with what you say.
I think that as long as the reference frame and epoch are included with the coordinates that after an event they will be able to correct for the movement. May take some time.
I firmly believe that the coordinate should be a reference to an in the ground corner marker (that controls), that all that meta data should be included. OK, preaching to the choir, how do we convince the rest of the world?
I have been a Surveyor nearly 4 decades. The last 3 have been on the bleeding edge. Every time the profession gets a new toy I dive in as deep as my circumstances allow. That describes most of us on this site.
My geodesy library is very nice and very worn. There are many far beyond me, but I can hold my own. I can say with firm conviction that we are nowhere close to a place where coordinates are high in the order of calls. Boundaries are best controlled by local evidence, period.
Surveying is not a math test, it is an investigative process. Coordinates are evidence, nothing more, nothing less. They will find thier place in the order of calls through case law and policy changes. Pushing them along or declaring them the lone item in that order will lead to embarrassment at best, disaster at worst.
My .02, Tom
- Posted by: thebionicman
I have been a Surveyor nearly 4 decades. The last 3 have been on the bleeding edge. Every time the profession gets a new toy I dive in as deep as my circumstances allow. That describes most of us on this site.
My geodesy library is very nice and very worn. There are many far beyond me, but I can hold my own. I can say with firm conviction that we are nowhere close to a place where coordinates are high in the order of calls. Boundaries are best controlled by local evidence, period.
Surveying is not a math test, it is an investigative process. Coordinates are evidence, nothing more, nothing less. They will find thier place in the order of calls through case law and policy changes. Pushing them along or declaring them the lone item in that order will lead to embarrassment at best, disaster at worst.
My .02, Tom
I agree coordinates are not the highest form of evidence, need to point to a monument.
OK BUT where are we at with the technology. We can derive pretty accurate coordinates. What do we do with them, navigate to the corner (monument). You don’t need to be particularly educated and licensed to do this. Just about any phone savvy person can do it, just give them the coordinates. AND this is what is happening, I run into folks using phone apps every project it seems. Been told that there is no need to hire a surveyor, they can find their corners with the app. AND some do if their monuments are there. AND I don’t really have a problem with that if what they find is the REAL monument. BUT we know that there are problems with that and some corners (many actually) don’t have a monument and some have, let’s say “many.”
This use of apps for hunting (and whatever other use that shows a “boundary”) is going exponential. I’ve even talked with one app company that is very popular these days. They tell me they “warn” their users not to use the app for “surveying,” but I can’t find it on their web site. They sent me their, lets call it fine print, and buried in there is the “disclaimer for use.” Last excuse I got from them ??Thank you for your feedback Leon. We do let our customers know that we receive this data from the county assessors offices and in no way is this a legal survey of boundaries.?
Well I suppose then if they use the data its the county’s fault that it is not accurate. WELL, there you go!! I Hope the lawsuits soon get going.
BETTER YET, when are they going to pay (the public) to make the coordinates accurate and give surveyors the work?
The low hanging fruit of the technology development has been picked. They have released it into the wild, way out in front of their skies. From my view they are going to ??save a lot of money ?? in the process of creating another nightmare. The app PIN CUSHION has fired up for sure.
THIS IS WHAT the public wants. The genie is not going back into the bottle. Instead of pointing out how bad it is, against boundary law and all the stuff surveyors understand but nobody else really cares about, let’s work towards providing the coordinates and the massive amount of work that will be until it’s done and then we are mostly DONE also. I’m telling you if surveyors don’t do it they will find someone else that will! Or worse they may adjudicate that the coordinates as currently exist at that point in time ARE THE CORNERS. We say NO WAY, but which option costs the least? Ponder that!
- Posted by: thebionicman
I have been a Surveyor nearly 4 decades. The last 3 have been on the bleeding edge. Every time the profession gets a new toy I dive in as deep as my circumstances allow. That describes most of us on this site.
My geodesy library is very nice and very worn. There are many far beyond me, but I can hold my own. I can say with firm conviction that we are nowhere close to a place where coordinates are high in the order of calls. Boundaries are best controlled by local evidence, period.
Surveying is not a math test, it is an investigative process. Coordinates are evidence, nothing more, nothing less. They will find thier place in the order of calls through case law and policy changes. Pushing them along or declaring them the lone item in that order will lead to embarrassment at best, disaster at worst.
My .02, Tom
I agree! But once the evidence and investigation is uncovered and complete why not properly monument and documented with a properly documented coordinated measurement? That could be the best available evidence in the future. I’m going back to points measured 25 years ago from just a coordinate file within hundredths of a foot in XY&Z. Interesting topic! Jp
- Posted by: Jp7191Posted by: thebionicman
I have been a Surveyor nearly 4 decades. The last 3 have been on the bleeding edge. Every time the profession gets a new toy I dive in as deep as my circumstances allow. That describes most of us on this site.
My geodesy library is very nice and very worn. There are many far beyond me, but I can hold my own. I can say with firm conviction that we are nowhere close to a place where coordinates are high in the order of calls. Boundaries are best controlled by local evidence, period.
Surveying is not a math test, it is an investigative process. Coordinates are evidence, nothing more, nothing less. They will find thier place in the order of calls through case law and policy changes. Pushing them along or declaring them the lone item in that order will lead to embarrassment at best, disaster at worst.
My .02, Tom
I agree! But once the evidence and investigation is uncovered and complete why not properly monument and documented with a properly documented coordinated measurement? That could be the best available evidence in the future. I’m going back to points measured 25 years ago from just a coordinate file within hundredths of a foot in XY&Z. Interesting topic! Jp
It is true that properly treated coordinates MAY become the best evidence, but they also may not.
I have 10 year old positions determined correctly by multiple surveyors that don’t work. They are 3 feet in the opposing direction from points on the ssme theoretical plate. Even when they work, you have other operations of law and evidence to consider.
Let the policy develop and layer it with case law. If you rush it things will go very sideways…
- Posted by: Jp7191
…I’m going back to points measured 25 years ago from just a coordinate file within hundredths of a foot in XY&Z. Interesting topic! Jp
It is an interesting topic and can foster some healthy arguments from all sides. Now I am at heart a monument oriented surveyor. And around here our dignity of calls places existing monuments at the top and “coordinates” near or at the bottom.
But I will also be the first to agree that a coordinate base (or geodetic position), successfully retraced and verified, is some good strong evidence for a corner location. However I would hesitate to hang a survey on that without some sort of corroborating evidence such as physical or occupational evidence.
My hesitation to accept a coordinate for a corner location is probably more founded in fear than anything else. Fear that ”coordinates” could eventually usurp physical evidence for a boundary corner. I believe that would be a disservice to ourselves and the procedures we have developed over centuries in our profession. I see no need to rearrange our “dignity of calls” simply because one is easier than the other. I have seen a lot of recently ‘staked out and set corners’ with an existing corner somewhere in close proximity that no one bothered to uncover.
And I am truly interested in the points you “went back to after 25 years”. I’ve done similar myself. But how did you know you were “there” and within a few hundredths in XY&Z if you didn’t find “something” at that point? Something like a “physical” object…
my 1/50th. of a $
That’s a good article to read.
The answer, I guess, as with everything else, it depends… ?
- Posted by: thebionicman
Surveying is not a math test, it is an investigative process. Coordinates are evidence, nothing more, nothing less. They will find thier place in the order of calls through case law and policy changes. Pushing them along or declaring them the lone item in that order will lead to embarrassment at best, disaster at worst.
?
Paden said “And I am truly interested in the points you “went back to after 25 years”. I’ve done similar myself. But how did you know you were “there” and within a few hundredths in XY&Z if you didn’t find “something” at that point? Something like a “physical” object…
my 1/50th. of a $”
In my case the points points were Mag nails (50 +-)set in the middle of aerial targets in 1998 as part of a city wide aerial project (7 miles sq.)
You caught me in a white lie though. Horizontal the points fit +-less than a tenth. But vertically, I think we have about 4 tenths across the city in a north south direction. I believe this error was caused by restraining the control to our existing bench mark network that may have error within it? I’m not sure and don’t plan on running level loops to find out. If we constrain to one of our local bench marks all the target points fit together in the general area that we are working in. Point is, it is very repeatable and much better than the results I was getting with a chain and t-16 back in the day when I didn’t get up early enough to beat the other crews to the EDM.:) Jp
- Posted by: Jp7191
…But vertically, I think we have about 4 tenths across the city in a north south direction…
I always thought vertically was more of an up down direction, not north south…
I hope everyone has a great day; I know I will! - Posted by: RADARPosted by: Jp7191
…But vertically, I think we have about 4 tenths across the city in a north south direction…
I always thought vertically was more of an up down direction, not north south…
The originators of the control held the bench marks in 1998 creating a tilted plane in a north south direction. +.2 in the south,-.2 in the north (or maybe vice versa ???)now holding 1 bm in the center. Not sure what the truth is, nor do I care. It works. Jp
I never meant to say that coordinates should be at the top of the list of evidence. I firmly believe there should be a monument and information to show the public that the use of the coordinate is to get you to the monument.
Anybody worth being licensed as a land surveyor should be able to put a properly referenced coordinate (world coordinate based on a lat and long) on a monument within say a tenth of a foot (horizontal). It’s not that hard and the profession should demand this competence.
BUT what I’m seeing is we as surveyors don’t have our own little exclusive club here. We provide services that the public uses. The GIS, phone apps, and other technology’s use coordinates. THE PROBLEM is the coordinates haven’t been determined properly yet the technology has been released into the wild. I believe if the coordinates were correct they could be applied fairly simply by the public. Why do surveyors object to this? We should be at the forefront and pushing to get the work to make coordinates work. It’s going to happen whether surveyors are on board or not. If opportunity knocks on the door, open the door. We need to lead them to our door, if not they will never knock. The public will be more than willing to leave us in the dust if we can’t keep up. You must be useful to be needed.
This is an opportunity here. THEY WANT the coordinates, we can provide them. MAYBE, JUST MAYBE we have reached the turning point where they will pay for what they are becoming addicted too. You want coordinates, they need to be correct or they produce chaos. Surveyors can provide the coordinates.
Leon,
In practical terms we aren’t that far apart. In our neck of the woods, most work gets done on some known or repeatable datum. My issue is with statements such as, ‘Once we have a good coordinate our job is done’.
Repeating the theoretical location of where a pin once was in relation to distant control is not boundary surveying. The farther in time and distance you get from the derivation of any reference, the lower the value gets. Putting the monument back where it was is best accomplished using local control.
We have anomolies where the validated velocity of small areas is about 0.3′ per year in the opposite direction of our plate. Even without these anomolies we should be gathering evidence of the actions of owners over time. I’m sure you know this, but it bears repeating…
Log in to reply.