Prorating That Way Can Get You Farther From The Truth
Actually he is giving an abbreviated explanation of the transit rule. The compass rule distributes based on length of line as opposed to proportion of lats and deps...
Simple...
Great explanation. This is exactly what a compass rule adjustment does. I grew to not like balancing angles before compass rule adjustment because compass rule doesn't preserve angles anyway and angular closures may help out a bust but aren't very helpful beyond that in a compass rule adjustment.
Dad taught me how to calculate these when I was in high school. They work well for making slight adjustment to good data. Mostly so you can use the start and end points of a traverse together. Beyond that compass rule sucks. This thread has reminded me how much I don't miss them.
You Are Only Assuming Everything Was Shot
> If it was shot and only the result was recorded, we have no way to test scrivening errors.
> I take the original words to imply shots not taken are being created from other data.
Actually, the original post stated:
>If I have a coordinate file only with just unadjusted points, knowing the direction of the traverse through the points, the sideshot points and also a scale factor where necessary....is there a program that simplifies handling this without having to manually calculate the raw angles/distances??
To me, "sideshot points" and the traverse direction can only mean that the provisional coordinates of "sideshot points" were actually taken from sideshots and that the identities of the traverse stations from which specific sideshots were made is either known or an obvious deduction.
No Statement That The Traverse Points Were Closed
If they were not closed you cannot really adjust said traverse.
Paul in PA
No Statement That The Traverse Points Were Closed
> If they were not closed you cannot really adjust said traverse.
But that, of course, does not appear to be the situation here. What the original poster actually wrote was:
>I am just wondering if there was a simple way for me just to dump the raw coordinates into a program, define the traverse route (point list?), give it the starting and ending known point data and provide a closing angle.
- See more at: http://beerleg.com/index.php?mode=thread&id=284654#p284925
Defining The Traverse Loop Using Coordinates
is only valid if the loop were in fact fully observed.
If in fact the loop was fully observed then those actual observations should be used in the adjustment.
I read it that this individual is looking to shortcut his actual field work and back it up with a bogus adjustment.
Paul in PA
Defining The Traverse Loop Using Coordinates
I got lost on that. Was he speaking about a pair of DOT mon with published values ?
Defining The Traverse Loop Using Coordinates
> is only valid if the loop were in fact fully observed.
I didn't get the idea from anything the poster supplied in the way of information that it had not in fact been. The problem as provided was that the angles and distances were not stored as observations, but as reduced results in the form of provisional coordinates computed from the observations.
You Can Sit At One Spot And Push The Button 100 Times
> Anti McGrath is the excuse of too many alleged surveyors.
>
> BTW, I learned what a measurement was as an engineering student with a tape 30 years before I met McGrath.
>
Ok, I give up, and Google's not helping.
Who the heck is McGrath?
You Can Sit At One Spot And Push The Button 100 Times
> Who the heck is McGrath?
The reference was to an academic who taught at the New Jersey Institute of technology and was fond of using the word "truth" for certain measurements generated by extremely inefficient methods in lieu of the more modern concept of having merely obtained an estimate with low uncertainty.
Defining The Traverse Loop Using Coordinates
Sorry to take so long re-entering the conversation...
Yes...this is correct. The coordinates are based on the original observations...and the traverses would normally run between given control point pairs.
My issue is that occasionally the crew may stray from the traverse/sideshot routines in their data collector, and while I would have proper measurements for connectivity of the traverse, I may not have it in good order in the raw file.
Rather than manually extracting the angles/distances and re-entering them to calculate the traverse, I would want something to do this via a point list from the coordinate data that would let me enter the known control and a scale factor where needed.
