AI Assistant
OPUS - Extended Rep...
 
Notifications
Clear all

OPUS - Extended Report

8 Posts
6 Users
0 Reactions
951 Views
Dan Patterson
(@dan-patterson)
Posts: 1272
Member
Topic starter
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Does the extended report contain the orthometric height in feet anywhere? I've been converting it using Corpscon with the updated geoid stored per corspcon instructions, but since the have the coordinates in feet I thought maybe the height was there also.

I typically use a network setup, but periodically I use OPUS as a check on control.


 
Posted : October 30, 2016 3:07 pm
ekillo
(@ekillo)
Posts: 559
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Dan Patterson, post: 397569, member: 1179 wrote: Does the extended report contain the orthometric height in feet anywhere? I've been converting it using Corpscon with the updated geoid stored per corspcon instructions, but since the have the coordinates in feet I thought maybe the height was there also.

I typically use a network setup, but periodically I use OPUS as a check on control.

I have not seen it either, I just use a calculator and divide by 0.3048.

Ed


 
Posted : October 30, 2016 4:18 pm
Dan Patterson
(@dan-patterson)
Posts: 1272
Member
Topic starter
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

ekillo, post: 397576, member: 773 wrote: I have not seen it either, I just use a calculator and divide by 0.3048.

Ed

Good point....I guess the geodetic part is already done. Just converting units...


 
Posted : October 30, 2016 4:50 pm
loyal
(@loyal)
Posts: 3735
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Well "technically" you should multiply by 3.280833333333...

NAVD88 is in US Survey Feet, not International Feet. But the difference is only about 0.01 ft. in Denver!

Loyal


 
Posted : October 30, 2016 4:51 pm
geeoddmike
(@geeoddmike)
Posts: 1556
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

To be pedantic, the exact conversion factor for meters to US Survey Feet is: 3937/1200. See: http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/PUBS_LIB/FedRegister/FRdoc59-5442.pdf


 
Posted : October 30, 2016 6:04 pm

Mark Mayer
(@mark-mayer)
Posts: 3371
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

GeeOddMike, post: 397583, member: 677 wrote: the exact conversion factor for meters to US Survey Feet is: 3937/1200

I find that easier to remember than 3.280833333333 anyway.


 
Posted : October 30, 2016 6:58 pm
ekillo
(@ekillo)
Posts: 559
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Loyal, post: 397580, member: 228 wrote: Well "technically" you should multiply by 3.280833333333...

NAVD88 is in US Survey Feet, not International Feet. But the difference is only about 0.01 ft. in Denver!

Loyal

I know technically you are, but for us flatlanders it is about the same and a lot easier to key in. We do use the correct conversion number for horizontal.

Ed


 
Posted : October 31, 2016 4:03 am
paul-in-pa
(@paul-in-pa)
Posts: 6034
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

No,

My most recent extended results:

"Note the Board will not let me paste in portions of it. They flash in this window then disappear."

The extended output gives SPC N & E in the State specific feet, but Orthometric height is in meters.

In the report I attempted to post, the orthometric height was 0.3m different from GEOID12B to the new prototype GEOID16B.

Paul in PA


 
Posted : October 31, 2016 4:56 am