FYI - A survey crew comes in today, downloads data and inverses between 2 found irons and the distance is 50.0013' (they were so proud of themselves) - (I wasn't)
I attempted to explain to them it wasn't so much their good work, nor was it the good work of the surveyor that came before them, it was a statistical anomaly and if they measured it tomorrow, the distance may be 50.18'
Then I went into errors as it relates to the instrument :totalstation: , distance, angular, optics, :gammon: sighting, plumness :plumbbob: of rod, positioning over point, mirror :stakeout: , bubble, temperature, etc. AND the surveyor before you had the same issues, not to mention he had to pound the point into the ground in an imperfect :stakeout: way.
With glazed over eyes, my crew just looked at me as if, "why are you being so hard on us, when we did a good job".
My response was simply, Your "good work" is nothing more than compensating errors, so don't be so proudfull.
--- I think they think I'm just being a jerk...
At Least You Know What You Are
It sounds like you need some supervision courses.
A pat on the back sure helps moral. A lesson you need to learn.
JOHN NOLTON
Tombstone, AZ.
Do you treat all of the crews this way?
That's hilarious. How long did it take you to prepare that speech and then how long after that was it before some crew came along and made such an announcement, thus allowing you to give the speech.
I remember a time during my first year of surveying when we ran a loop with something like 18 turns through fairly rough terrain and hit flat with the last shot. I thought we were the best crew in the world. My co-worker began to give a speech similar to yours. He didn't get to finish it.
If I had a crew that couldn't measure 50' consistently within a couple hundredths I would fire them. I know about compensating errors, and I hope you were exaggerating.
Every post here is a learning opportunity...
> FYI - A survey crew comes in today, downloads data and inverses between 2 found irons and the distance is 50.0013'
Well, this may be a dumb question, and possibly a little off subject, but I must ask:
If they "found" these two pins, why would they have to "inverse" anything at all from whatever data they gathered?
If the objective was to find the distance between the two, why wouldn't they just tape between the two pins (or, if they had all the time in the world, setup a TS and prism, and measure it forwards and backwards 9 times, and put it all in LSA)?:-/
Every post here is a learning opportunity...
Occasionally in the field we find points with obstructions between them.
Every post here is a learning opportunity...
On all the survey jobs I've done the goal was to locate the pins and property features. We always compared plat distances to measured while in the field to make sure we were finding the correct irons or to let us know to keep looking.
50.00' Is Not Important, Are They In The Right Place?
Two pins 50.00' apart do not constitute a survey, it is the relative positions of all the pins from all the evidence.
Paul in PA
:good:
N10,000, E7,000, Z100.00
PLS - IL, MO, AR, KS, MN, KY
> If I had a crew that couldn't measure 50' consistently within a couple hundredths I would fire them. I know about compensating errors, and I hope you were exaggerating.
In order to get that 50.00' between founds the crew that set them had to be on the ball, too.
> --- I think they think I'm just being a jerk...
This is much like having your kid skip home from school, excitedly showing you the "A" he got on his math test, and you want to know why he didn't get an "A+". The time for the statistics lesson is when they measure 50.02' between similar monuments, and you explain how that is statistically the same as 50.00'.
Showing bearings to the nearest 0.01 arc seconds
Seriously. I have seen a supposed final plat of a subdivision where all bearings shown (and there are many) read something like 12 degrees, 24 minutes and 18.00 seconds. One-one hundredth of a second amounts to about 1/8 inch in 50 miles.
Cut it with a chainsaw and report the distance in microns.
True, but the intent of my statement was to say that observations to monuments separated by relatively short distances should be quite reproducible. The original poster implied that the crew could shoot the same two monuments tomorrow and come up with 0.18' difference in inverse from the previous observation. Unless they're shooting big trees that is nonsense.
I disagree on the 0.18' That seems like a lot. I could see 0.05' maybe. Especially at 50'. Now if you'll excuse me I have to go pound some tacks into plastic rebar caps to show how 'good' I am.;-)
A comedy of errors
At least that adds a little humor to their perfect work.
This is like me sending a crew out to survey a property and for them to locate the monuments of the adjoining properties too because the previous survey is being questioned.
The come back well early in the day and make a pass thru and leave ASAP.
When I download the job and pull it up they have only located the monuments on the lot we are surveying.
There response is that they were all in and they had double checked all their measurements and know they are good.
I inform them that we are not only measuring our property. We are also making sure that these monuments were put in their correct place to harmonize with the deed information of the adjoining properties.
The look in their eye never changes, only that it is obvious that the reasons of our survey are just flying by and they are not understanding any of it.
A Homer moment if there ever was one.
I worked one summer recovering monuments in a mill town.
I cogo'd the whole town in from record and would set up in the shade doing a 3 point resection from found monuments. Rarely did we not hit the pipe when staking out search locations. If something was off, it was either bent or was several feet out of position. I recovered hundreds of monuments in that manner.
The crew that set that town up in the 1960's did an excellent job.
There are a lot of surveys here holding record bearing/dist. and I know why.
Yea, I would have thought you a jerk also.
Either you are a jerk or your crew is not very well trained in the basics of field measurements. Sure there are factors in every measurement, but teach them these things instead of being a smart arse.
Why not share this great infp you have of the art of measuring with the crew before you feel the need to degrade them.
If they are proud of a 50 foot distance check, then a 5000' distance check might blow their minds.
I could pull a distance of 50 feet with a cloth tape in the wind and on a slope that would satisfy me that I had found the right monuments. and get the same measurement the next day, I dont agree that a measurement in 50 feet will change by 0.18 in any given day with modern surveying equipment.
Thats why we have this very expensive equipment, calibrate and check them and keep our other tools in good to great working order.
Its your job to have them understand a ppm setting, check the bubble on the pole, use a bipod every time you measure an important shot, not to criticize when they are proud of their work.
Good thing I was not the crew chief, I would have......, (fill in the blank).
Randy
> I could pull a distance of 50 feet with a cloth tape in the wind and on a slope that would satisfy me that I had found the right monuments. and get the same measurement the next day, I dont agree that a measurement in 50 feet will change by 0.18 in any given day with modern surveying equipment.
Anybody that sets up on the same construction control everyday knows how consistent distance measurements are when they check their backsight.