Mr. Morgan& Mr. Adams
The purpose of the field book, raw data file and other form of notes is to show actual work preformed.
I have seen many including myself put data from plans into and fill field books as an easy reference to stake highway and other routes and other surveys.
The important difference is that all actual measurements should be documented in a similar fashion and in a recoverable way to show proof of actual work.
Field book only for level runs. Rarely use it for anything else, but I do ALL the field work and the drafting, so I don't have to re-communicate anything to anyone. I was there, I know how I want the drawing to look. your results may vary. I measure up the house and sketch improvements on regular paper, hate trying to read all the little dimensions that end up on a small field book page.
by Richard Schaut, Thursday, October 21, 2010, 08:29 (3 hours, 33 minutes ago) @ Kris Morgan
...Deed stakers are completely oblivious to the fact that any reasonably competent lawyer could destroy any case built only on the interpretation of the 'evidence' supporting the record description when the law clearly gives precedence to inaccuratley recorded occupation and control as supported by established physical evidence...
Just how does this relate to the method used to record your actions in the field?
check out Trimble's S8 VISION technology
The early info on their visual verification seems promising.
> by Richard Schaut, Thursday, October 21, 2010, 08:29 (3 hours, 33 minutes ago) @ Kris Morgan
>
> ...Deed stakers are completely oblivious to the fact that any reasonably competent lawyer could destroy any case built only on the interpretation of the 'evidence' supporting the record description when the law clearly gives precedence to inaccuratley recorded occupation and control as supported by established physical evidence...
>
> Just how does this relate to the method used to record your actions in the field?
I wondered the same thing. Of course, it's simply Schaut's same tactic over and over, just say the same thing in every post no matter if it's on topic or not.
I use a FB for all traverse data/control, and when done, make copies for the file. The originals go into another FB that is stored in a cabinet. I cannot imagine going without one. I always need the sketch, notes, etc. There is always something to add about certain things you find in the field. Photos are taken of some things and printed for the file too.
I restrict myself to boundary's and I do not use a data collector. I have in the past but only found them useful on topographical surveys or for site plans where a lot of one angle and distance shots was the norm. When I was using them for traverse work they wasted time in the field but saved time in the office, field crews cost more than an office type to keep around. Some of the newer DC with cogo programs built in would be nice or if running real time GPS or a robot. I don't and the field book does just fine for my work, it is payed for. Wife runs the gun and I run the other end and also do the comps and drafting.
jud
Mr Schaut U R showing your lack of understanding technology
U stated , Your 'Field book entries' prove that your were there at least.
Data recorders since 1990 have enabled you to add location details . The raw data file records your set up and traverse data and radiations. On my raw file... There is an initial code line for instrument set up that includes... I station , its HI, HI of BS and BS station..
Then every observation line includes unique point number, bearing, slope distance, slope angle, PPm correction, target prism ( for prism correction)height of target, generated raw field x,y and z coordinates, point code, date and time of observation.
If there were a dispute the raw data could be emulated even if some of the original traverse or found and placed marks marks were lost in the interim to prove that there was initial field work was indeed done. After all to manufacture all the data I record would take far longer than the real survey.
ON JBS excellent thread I concur , but add for those field book horders that I do not retain field books having opted to a sketch pad but scan the notes and add to the electronic file. In all the 40 years I have not gone back to notes!
Having said that when returning to a job in the field for additional data or setting out every point is coordinated I take the whole data base and roughly sketch on paper the point numbers I want to use for control. If setting out in the area that data base is added to the data set out file and a point file plot generated. These days with modern instrument screens you can see points to set out , call up nearest point etc to negate that plot.
We are now in the twenty first century ....with state of the art not state of the ark technology!
RADU
> Does anyone do something similar or am I still in the stone age?
Well, you're in East Texas, right? So there's no way you're in the 21st century.
I use a data collector for logging all measurements on boundary and topographic surveys, but I do keep a field book as well. The field book gets the basic data: HI for all setups, HT for shots. That is exceptionally useful.
The other area where there is no substitute is in mark descriptions. I can write as much as is needed in a field book quite a bit faster than I can key it into the DC. So, "SET.ROD.CAP" in the descriptor field can be logged in the field book as "Set Standard Rod and Cap approximately 0.75 ft. North of Center of old 6 in. Cedar Corner Post (top leans off plumb 1.5 ft. Southerly from base) at approximate center of scatter of six large cobbles found".
Naturally, sketches can be very useful as well and the field book is the ideal place to make them.
Field Books Chris u said
My imen are idiots with codes.
May I respectfully suggest who the idiot is??
Yourself!!!!
Take a few hours to TRAIN YOUR STAFF WITH CODING!!!
Getting them to both code and book is information overload for them as in state of ark days they simply only recorded in a FB.
Drop the FB duplication and have the Imen properly educated in understanding coding .
Then perhaps your respect and their respect may mutually improve.
RADU
We used to keep a detailed set of field notes on paper until we got a good feel for the data collector's foibles. We have main juice from 3 AAA batteries and a 'dime' battery backing up the RAM card. The secret, in our case, was to download immediately after coming in from the field and take a quick look at the raw data printout to see if any FUBAR's appeared.
Our instrument man has a habit of just punching buttons when he gets flustered and this creates havoc. I've instructed him to just STOP when he's got a problem, and we backtrack through the last couple of shots to see what went wrong.
I write setup information in the field book on traverses, BS TH, Setup HI and FS TH. I also have a detailed description of the found monument including size, type, cap, up or sub distance and other features.
I don't write down raw data unless I forgot the DC (rare).
I keep a table of GPS static observations in the book. Point No., Start, Stop, Receiver, Type, AH and Description. This can be helpful in figuring out what I did later when processing.
I usually make a sketch showing control points and found monuments with point numbers.
Sometimes I draw cap sketches but I also take photos of most monuments particularly more detailed ones.
We also often set bearing tree tags with compass and tape so those go into the field book along with size and type of tree.
I use the field book pretty much like Kent. I do up a sketch of the traverse, note things like #231 is a fd 5/8-iron rod with cap, RPLS # xxxx. While in the the data collector #231 is code RCF (saves time and space). I also do calc's using the data collector cogo in the field. Quicker than punching stuff into the hp32. And very handy to be able to get some idea in the field where to look for corners when there's no occupational topo (fancy words for fences, walls, line trees, etc). So they both compliment each other.
As far as my field book being used in court as evidence goes, nope-in over 40 years never happened. You want fun- hand a lawyer a field book with sets of angles and distances ahead & back. Throw in BS, IS, FS, or other surveyor codes and watch their eyes cross and glaze over. None of the ones I've dealt with had a clue about what our professional hieroglyphics mean. Basically, all they want to know are: 1) were you there with the crew?, 2) did you retrace the work of the original surveyor?, and 3) what are your professional conclusions?
RADU
Different legal system = different priorities.
Richard Schaut
Mr. Falk & Mr. Breysacher
In the US, a surveyor begins 'building his case' before getting to the job site. How do you convince a judge you were in 'responsible charge' if you can't prove that you decided what evidence was to be recovered or is your field crew licensed and putting their stamp on the survey?
Richard Schaut
Richard
I didn't trash the way you do business or protocol. My imen are idiots when it comes to codes and point numbers. They are trained just not motivated, but do the job well.
If you don't have anything productive to bring to the table, go somewhere else and stroke your ego.
>My imen are idiots with codes.
Har Har Har
>go somewhere else and stroke your ego.
Double Har Har Har
RS... Excuse me a code is a code for a description.
So there can be a point code for all that is required to be located. Software allows you to add supporting data to point at time of measurement.
Ideal for the Solo operator of a TS or real time GPS when the LS is at the coal front.
RADU
Kris , I was not trashing you .
You clearly publicly stated that your staff were idiots!
You are in charge of their field output and therefore responsible for how they work.
Nothing pious about stating the bleeding obvious!
RADU
Radu
It came off to me Richard as a big slam, so that's how one reader saw it.