This line:
DV 100-2 ? 93-19-03.00 5.050/0.000
Resulted from taking a backsight shot azimuth only; no distance.
It shows the reflector height as 0.000, I assume, because there was no reflector.
Bu if there's no distance, isn't the line completely irrelevant? Like just take it out?
The zenith could still be useful if you are running a 3D network. Maybe with a better HT from your paper notes.
Would be good to know if your data collector stores HT=0.00 for observations without an EDM distance.
half bubble, post: 369643, member: 175 wrote: The zenith could still be useful if you are running a 3D network. Maybe with a better HT from your paper notes.
Would be good to know if your data collector stores HT=0.00 for observations without an EDM distance.
Hmmm. I know from many other observations, the elevation of the point is 2.5' below the observation point. Can I just add that to the line (without it being "cheating")? For that matter, I know the distance from a gazillion other observations too. Why not fill that in too then?:
DV 100-2 129.82 93-19-03.00 5.050/2.550
To add in data that wasn't really observed at that setup would add a false redundancy.
Adding in the HT and using the zenith would be ok by me if you knew the target height was repeatable.
(seems like that shorty target holder you made is fixed height?)
half bubble, post: 369666, member: 175 wrote: To add in data that wasn't really observed at that setup would add a false redundancy.
Adding in the HT and using the zenith would be ok by me if you knew the target height was repeatable.
(seems like that shorty target holder you made is fixed height?)
In this case, the "target" was a small tube slipped directly over the rebar with a fine wire placed in a hole in the top. It's the only mark so set up (it's my Control POB), so yes, in this case it is always repeatable.
But since I've seen how SurvCE handles azimuth only back sights, I'm just not doing them anymore. Thanks for the advice about not adding data, though.