Monuments hold, not dimples!
What about the pipe stickin' outa the ground at 45 degrees, 12" outa the ground:
-center of cap?
or
-"guzunta"?
or
-bottom of monument based on "out of plumbness"?!
?????????????????????????????????????????????????
What about the "expert measur'er" that dimples your dimpled cap?
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
What about the "expert measur'er" that subdivides the section geodetic and/or plane?!
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
If you have to worry about a (0.10 FT) in absolute accuracy, I feel sorry for you and that is one reason why you have GREY hair!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Please explain the process of Identifying Millimeters in this process!!!!!!!!!
I know what the professionals in my life taught me and maybe I need some enlightenment outside of high rise surveys!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?
Monuments hold, not dimples!
> What about the pipe stickin' outa the ground at 45 degrees, 12" outa the ground:
[bunch of stuff redacted for clarity}
> Please explain the process of Identifying Millimeters in this process!!!!!!!!!
LOL! What you're describing is some object that used to be a survey monument and you think it must tell you where the corner is even though that may no longer be the case.
An essential ingredient to a boundary monument is that it has a unique and determinable position. Thing doesn't have those? You've got a Used-to-Be or Never-Was.
The folks who get hot and bothered about being able to center a prism pole repeatably over some boundary marker (with a punch mark to facilitate the process) are really just objecting to the idea that the corners marked by boundary monuments are actually unique and determinable positions. :>
Monuments hold, not dimples!
> An essential ingredient to a boundary monument is that it has a unique and determinable position. Thing doesn't have those? You've got a Used-to-Be or Never-Was.
Always-Will-Be and Never-Upheld! That's how we roll!
Survey on my friend, but remember...
If you want to challenge a legit corner within the diameter of the cap, or realm of possibility, you do so at your own risk!
Good luck!
Monuments hold, not dimples!
> If you want to challenge a legit corner within the diameter of the cap, or realm of possibility, you do so at your own risk!
Actually, probably the better statement (appropriate to your example above) is that if an original monument has been disturbed, it isn't an original monument any more. An object remains a boundary monument for so long as it retains its original position. I don't see this as being some theoretical paper in the the realm of Rocket Science. If your whatever is no longer where it was placed when the boundary was originally established, your whatever is no longer a boundary monument. Next.
Some questions for the "NON-DOT'ers"
In holding to the idea that there is no need to put a precise mark on your monument-
Do you show your distances and bearings to be "+/-", or to the nearest foot and minute- if not - why not?
Do you (or your crews) record check shots on set monuments? why or why not?
How many sets of angles do you turn using your backsite- probably over a defined point, from the instrument also probably over a defined point- to your foresite set up in the vicinity of the monument?
Do you take redundant measurements to the foresite being set up in the vicinity of the monument?
What limits do you have for rejecting a set of angles? Why?
Do you set PPM corrections in your instruments? Why?
Do you worry about adjusting rod bubbles and/or optical plummets? Why?
Do you use paint spots for traverse/ control points?
kind of reminds me of the old adage.....
measure it 3 times with a micrometer, mark it with chalk and cut it with an ax...
Monuments hold, not dimples!
Don't blow a gasket.
I dimple the cap of my monuments so I can set up in the same spot multiple times to reduce my own centering errors.
Usually on existing monuments I just make a sharpie mark for my own use.
Bent and leaning monuments should be rehabbed by the surveyor.
If I am going to make redundant measurements then I like to make them to the same place as far as practically possible.
Some questions for the "NON-DOT'ers"
All I can say after reading this thread is WOW !!!!
Some questions for the "NON-DOT'ers"
To clarify, by thread, I meant the entire thread, not just one comment.
This discussion reminds me of a time I was staking curb for a contractor, setting round hubs about 3/4 of an inch in diameter. After the staking was complete, I walked the stakes with the super. About half way through the stakes, he asked me where the tacks were... So I got my tack ball out and proceeded to tack the hubs in a manner that didn't disturb grade. The super happy as a clam at that point.
Some questions for the "NON-DOT'ers"
Do you (or your crews) record check shots on set monuments? why or why not?
Yes everything gets checked. Funny thing, on urban surveys typically the checks are within 0.02' and rural surveys like I've been discussing here they are within .05'. And to think that's without a dot. I wonder how that's possible? Hmm...
I suppose I could dot my 400+ monuments for the COS I'm filing and run multiple 4 hour static sessions on each one, then adjust all the points using OPUS. Of course, my client would get the bill and fire me. But hey they would have a coordinate list within something maybe really close. Not that they want that-what they really want is a well marked and monumented boundary.
Monuments hold, not dimples!
> > If you want to challenge a legit corner within the diameter of the cap, or realm of possibility, you do so at your own risk!
>
> Actually, probably the better statement (appropriate to your example above) is that if an original monument has been disturbed, it isn't an original monument any more. An object remains a boundary monument for so long as it retains its original position. I don't see this as being some theoretical paper in the the realm of Rocket Science. If your whatever is no longer where it was placed when the boundary was originally established, your whatever is no longer a boundary monument. Next.
great point.. I think this whole discussion is based on pretty much nothing, since the later clarification of what the OP actually stamps cleared up the idea that he was basically setting blank monument caps. (the way I read the OP anyway)
Personally, I just order the nice big aluminum caps with my name and number and a punch mark made dead center with a punched triangle around it. Can't be more obvious.
And, I got a great tip here from "someone" to invert the cap and pound the rebar into the plastic sleeve using a hub to protect the stamping was the way to go. Thanks!
it really doesn't matter where on the cap the location was taken.
So I'm re-reading this... that does seem to be a novel idea, that just anywhere on the 3 1/2" cap is good enough. I stamped a good number of BLM caps in the short time I worked on a crew and I can say that we always measured to the chiseled '+' ... seems like the natural course to me as a surveyor, but I suppose we could have just set up right over the edge, then BS to the opposite edge, then repeat that all day long, setup after setup.. then wonder WTF went wrong when we got back to camp.
Obviously, the monument IS the corner, but for the sake of repeatability, closure, and just common sense, shouldn't we measure to a specific point on a cap? however you delineate it?
Sometimes the bars are supposed to be leaning
I could take you to many stones that now have a bar driven in next to them with the tip of the bar being directly above the center of the stone. The surveyors who put them there were: 1) getting the mark closer to the surface, 2) providing their estimation as to where the center of stone was and 3) providing an iron signal for future surveyors. They never envisioned a world full of micrometer users attempting to hit the same micron 16 times to be sure they were actually measuring to that micron and none other. Meanwhile, the forces of mother nature have caused the stone to move 0.13 feet in some direction from where it was the last time a surveyor saw it.
THE STONE IS THE CORNER, not a specific atom within that stone.
All the newest surveyor is really doing is attempting to prove to himself that he can hit the same spot more than once.
>> Obviously, the monument IS the corner, but for the sake of repeatability, closure, and just common sense, shouldn't we measure to a specific point on a cap? however you delineate it?
Yeah, it defies common sense not to. If a surveyor is going to say that the *center* of the cap is that specific point, then why not save everybody the bother of getting down on hands and knees with a pocket tape and a Sharpie to make an temporary mark at the center of the cap to measure to and just add a punch mark or a "+" to mark that center permanently? No brainer.
Sometimes the bars are supposed to be leaning
> THE STONE IS THE CORNER, not a specific atom within that stone.
Actually, the accepted practice familiar to me is to consider the high point on the stone to mark the corner if there is no station mark chiseled on it. If the top has no high point, then the center of that top surface is the corner.
Depending upon the quality of the stone, grouting a 1/4-in. copper or brass rod into the stone can make a permanent reference point on it.
Sometimes the bars are supposed to be leaning
No, those surveyors are just using good and proven measuring techniques by taking steps to obtain repeatable data where the monument lies. I have never seen a note on a survey stating that they recovered a monument and the dimple, dot, X or center punch mark was tied and held as the exact point of the corner, all that is noted is the described monument. Making such a big thing of this is childish.
jud
Dots on cap and width of property line?
I guess that if a 4" x 4" monument is the corner, and there is not a discernible mark (or even if there is according to some of you folks) then the property line is about 4" wide?
And if you hit a stone as a monument ( I always use the drill hole, chiseled x, or the highpoint on the stone) then the width of that stone = the width of the property line.
This must clear up a lot of disputes right away! And how about setback lines? I can see it now, "Well what we got here is a 1" square monument, so your property line is 1' wide and that there supposed encroachment is only 0.9 or so near that 1' property line so we have no encroachment."
That will certainly help me a with property lines around here! LOL
Sometimes the bars are supposed to be leaning
HC,
I'm not arguing any of those points... The original post is about setting brass markers on a large retracement survey. Do you agree with the concept that taking a measurement just anywhere on a capped monument is good enough? How long has it been since surveyors regularly set STONES as their corner monuments? Maybe since the 1920's or so, I guess.
If you're going through the valiant effort to reset durable monuments, there is nothing wrong with stamping a position on that cap for yourself to reference and for future surveyors. Why put down or (almost) laugh at another surveyor for suggesting such a thing?
AJ
Wow, Only a pack of surveyors would be pedantic enough to
Discuss this into the ground.
I for one, make a dimple, so my rod won't slip. But, sometimes those mons get turned. And if the dimple is 0.10 South of center, now it is 0.10' north of center.
So, use the middle.
OK, now I answer my tele, when I see another surveyor calling, "SW Arkansas Pedantic Group, how may I help you?"
🙂
Nate
Sometimes the bars are supposed to be leaning
Because the center of the cap is where the corner should be. This BS of sloppin' something in and then acting as though you are setting a tack in a hub is a bunch of foolishness. Do the job right in the first place or get out of the business is my motto on this subject.
