I've described a work flow in that way to illustrate the point that collecting control is one set of tasks, collecting topo is another, and you should regard them as such. If you choose to leave the tripods up and to use them that is OK, it's more in where your mind is at while doing so.
This has been a constant point of contention between and within our various offices, as folks can't seem to understand that maintaining separation between tasks at hand is far cleaner than just trying to collect as much data as possible at once.
Personally, my experience is that if there is a division between the office and field, field crews should be running control and tying monumentation before doing anything else, then send the data to the office to be reviewed, QC'd and adjusted while they begin the mapping/topographic work. Otherwise you've got office techs sitting around twiddling their thumbs, waiting for data. With today's cloud transfer, I can review control and monumentation over the crew's lunch hour, then tell them to re-observe certain points if necessary, or run a network adjustment and send back a control template for them to run with for the remainder of the job. Then the crew starts in on the topo while office folks do the boundary analysis and set a basemap. Then, by the time the crew gets done with the topo, the office can tell them if there is anything additional they need to pick up boundary-wise.
If there is a true field-to-finish process where the same folks who do the project setup are the ones collecting data in the field, then processing and adjusting it themselves, then sure, it is sometimes OK to mix control and topo data, because presumably those folks are able to understand how to gather enough quality data, and processing won't necessarily happen until the fieldwork is complete. Plus, they were the ones on the ground and are in a better position to perform the processing. I really miss doing remote jobs because I could process data every evening, drop it into CAD, and by the time we came back from the field trip, I literally had everything done in terms of QC, adjustment, and CAD basemap.
The latter option is far faster, yet used by a small fraction of firms.
Over the past 5-10 years, my impression is that at most organizations, PLS/PMs are simply budget-driven and couldn't care less about workflow as long as their projects are shoved out the door and payment is received. But they still want to mandate "standard procedures" despite not understanding current equipment and processing capabilities.
As the field & office trainer and technical SME, it drives me nuts. If someone doesn't understand the ins and outs of the equipment, software and actual work being done, they shouldn't be making decisions regarding workflow.
?ÿ
The AOLS Survey Review Department (SRD) requires a check shot to your backsite at the end of every setup.?ÿ They will definitely ding you on it w/ their review.?ÿ Enough little dings will add up and may eventually put you here:
https://www.aols.org/public-protection/complaints/discipline
You don't want to be there.?ÿ
?ÿ
It does not always need to be a full, complete shot (though, that is recommended).?ÿ Angular measurements are another option.?ÿ?ÿ
Example 1 w/ a laser robot.
Switch the robotic to laser, angle 0?ø, zenith 92?ø, and take a shot called CHECK or CHK.?ÿ It should take a shot just infront or behind your backsite.?ÿ You can set the F2f that shots w/ those codes go on a specific layer.?ÿ Then just turn off that layer.
?ÿ
Example 2 w/ a robot that does not have a laser.
Switch to the offset routine.?ÿ Site a church steeple, top of a water tower, etc. Go to the angle & distance routine.?ÿ Record the angle.?ÿ Don't bother to hit distance.?ÿ Take a CHECK shot and note in your field notes what that point number was referencing.?ÿ It may complain, but it should record.
?ÿ
I prefer the laser method.?ÿ Guys far more knowledgeable than me might call that "checking your picket."?ÿ For a church steeple, I usually do both methods (ie. laz something on the ground w/in range after sighting the steeple and also the angle method as you can then later use the cross on the steeple as a rough BM check around town).?ÿ I use the laz w/ the steeple so that I can easily check in CAD using a ray from the setup point to the laz shot and extend them all from multiple steups to the steeple.?ÿ As Norman is fond (and right) of saying--plugging them into a LSA program like Starnet will give you a pretty decent control point.
?ÿ
Everybody has time to do it a 2nd time.?ÿ Nobody seems to have time to do it right the first time.?ÿ I would rather have my boss annoyed at my timesheet than angry over a lawsuit.?ÿ That doesn't mean I drag my arse; it just means I treat every job as though a lawyer wants to shred my arse in court w/in the allowable tolerances of each individual job.?ÿ Time, and your boss, should teach you what those allowable tolerances are.
I always check my backsight before finishing up a setup. I used to always just shoot another point on it but now I use this...
?ÿ
Just saw that Carlson got that feature in version 6 so I will have to try it.?ÿ Thanks!?ÿ Does Fieldgenius record that info somewhere??ÿ
?ÿ
Side note--if I remember right, you're in the GTA.?ÿ If you're using FieldGenius, I'm guessing you're w/ JDB?
It does record it in the raw data same as the "check point". When I do my notes I scroll through the raw data to get the backsight error, checks etc and it's all in there.
I'm actually a couple of hours away from Toronto, working for a smaller firm with 6 crews.?ÿ
Sorry, I should have been more specific and said that is my workflow. Our workflow is a hodgepodge of random "I've always done it this way, therefore it should be done this way in perpetuity" procedures culled from folks who have worked at a single firm for most of their careers and have never attempted personnel or equipment/workflow optimization. Our "standards" shift depending on who you're talking to, whether there was a standards meeting last week, moon cycle and the project manager's horoscope for that day.
So I can occasionally influence teams to streamline things on a project-by-project basis, but enacting firmwide change is basically trying to push a boulder up a hill. We have a lot of variation between offices, and consequently a wide variation of job satisfaction.
And I wouldn't recommend moving anywhere near a major city in the PNW for survey work. Even at the PLS level pay isn't nearly enough to compensate for the cost of living (and the insanity)...if the wife and I didn't have family nearby, we would already be gone. As it is, unless things change for the better, we will have to be gone in the next few years, whether we want to or not.
IF you use Field to Finish, simply code the check point to a different code. Simply putting it in Raw Data is a recipe to have someone not notice the check. Everyone can miss a data line in the Raw Data, however, we all see the points sitting on the same location in CAD.
Always store a point.?ÿ
For small open traverses I'm a fan of setting out at least a couple of targets in addition to the points I'm going to occupy. At the end of collecting data from a set up, naturally you can turn to your back sight to check your zero but with a target you can simply stake out to the target and visually check how well your hitting it without having to store a point. The added advantage with the targets is they can be used to resect back in your control after your points have been wiped out or used for an alternate back sight when you show up and there's a moving truck in the way. Many times the targets are the only control to survive. Checking in to one before and after collecting data will let you sleep better.
Defensible data should be a minimum standard, at the very least. Shredding an attorney on Surveying principles would be a fun way to make money in court.
????
Hi Fobo, sorry just needing abit more info on the situation, are you doing this arbitrary and you've just set up on STN1 e.g.N1000 E1000 RL100 and shot in STN2? In this case you're fine doing so as long as you've accurately measure between?ÿ them e.g. 4 shots left right face x2
?ÿ
Or have you traversed any of the 2 stations so they have known coordinates and then you're extending another station for the second set up? In this case I would do a third point check to make sure you don't accumulate any error extending the next station.
?ÿ
Like said above you can survey with just 2 stations though you'd benefit alot from creating more control points from both of these stations incase you loose 1 and can't set up again.
?ÿ
