grid distances on your survey, you have to also include the ground distance....
why?
Because the public doesn't understand grid and it confuses them, so we must show "ground"... putting grid distances on maps misleads the poor things.....after all they may want to go check the measurements.....
I contend that the public doesn't understand decimal feet dimensions either, so maybe the rule should require showing distances in feet and inches, so the public can "understand" and check the measurements with their 16 foot Stanley...... :-/
I know what you mean.
I had a project which was a mile of boundary was through very steep, thick and brushy terrain. I probably couldn't measure it the same twice but the County Surveyor wanted ground distance for the same reason like the lay person would go measure it with their pocket tape?
We put both on the map.
I think that makes sense except for cases with extreme vertical relief. "Grid" is an imaginary surface. It's not explicit. "This distance is 1000' along a mysterious surface that you can neither perceive nor access."
Places with extreme relief don't lend themselves to "ground distances" and closed geometries. A reference elevation is necessary. Preferably not one that is far removed from the project elevation as state plane grid tends to be.
NEW rubber-band rule
The best way to measure grid distances is with a rubber-band tape!
> grid distances on your survey, you have to also include the ground distance....
> why?
> Because the public doesn't understand grid and it confuses them, so we must show "ground"... putting grid distances on maps misleads the poor things.....after all they may want to go check the measurements.....
>
> I contend that the public doesn't understand decimal feet dimensions either, so maybe the rule should require showing distances in feet and inches, so the public can "understand" and check the measurements with their 16 foot Stanley...... :-/
That makes so much sense.
The public doesn't understand grid distance so it makes sense that we show multiple distances on the plat. Yea, I think I see the logic now. How about we make it even easier for them to understand. We could show grid, and ground and slope and .... why don't we also show the distance the space station would travel if they were directly over that same line. Let's have 4, 5 ... hell... why not 10 distances for every line on the plat. That will certainly make everything easier for the public to understand. (insert face palm here)
Larry P
Ground Distance Is A Serious Misnomer...
...because it is not on the ground. It is calculated at an elevation midpoint between elevation of Point A to elevation of Point B.
However for the typical project we calculate ground distances at a meaned project elevation. If we want to we can complicate the project with a meaned ground elevation for every line. After all the horizontal distance is corrected per that specific slope distance from the instrument location. To get a proper horizontal we also need the slope distance back from the ahead point.
How many of you carry an elevation for every project point and shhot every traverse backsight distance?
Grid is an explicit elevation, Shawn, i.e, the ellipsoid and everyday persons know exactly what an ellipsoid is, right?
Next request is someone wants the projected elevations at every control point and then they will rely on it to construct a linear accelerator.
I supply ground elevations at a meaned ground elevation, but only provide the grid to meaned ground adjustment factor. Too much information is a bad thing. If required I provide the grid coordinates for the held point and for the azimuth point.
After all those grid coordinates and distances may be of only 1/10,000 precision.
Paul in PA
Ground Distance Is A Serious Misnomer...
Aimed at the surveyors more than the public.
"grid distances on your survey, you have to also include the ground distance....
why?
Because the public doesn't understand grid and it confuses them, so we must show "ground"... putting grid distances on maps misleads the poor things.....after all they may want to go check the measurements.....
I contend that the public doesn't understand decimal feet dimensions either, so maybe the rule should require showing distances in feet and inches, so the public can "understand" and check the measurements with their 16 foot Stanley...... :-/"
ARE THERE ANY REAL SURVEYORS ON THAT COMMITTE ??
I've come across enough Surveyors that get confused with Grid distance, especially those moving from TPS to GPS. So I can understand why Joe public wouldn't care/know (or know to care) about the difference.
Best Way To Comply
Is to not show grid distances. Show grid coordinates. If you show grid distance and azimuth for a pair of reference points then you also must include convergences.
Paul in PA
"Because the public doesn't understand grid and it confuses them..."
It's not just the public!!
MDOT submits their Certificates of Survey in state plane meters, US survey feet, and gives State Plane co-ordinates for all points and the scale factor. Talk about a lot of work for an Examining Land surveyor:'( Most adjacent landowners say ??? :-S is the actual distance.
> MDOT submits their Certificates of Survey in state plane meters, US survey feet, and gives State Plane co-ordinates for all points and the scale factor. Talk about a lot of work for an Examining Land surveyor:'( Most adjacent landowners say ??? :-S is the actual distance.
yes, there was a time in the dark years of metrication when we showed SP meters in parentheses - because that was our agency policy -per metrication in 1993,- and we also showed US survey feet because the ARM said you'll show feet on your surveys- and we showed coordinates as additional info for use by those competent enough to do so....
Metrication ended in MT in late 2004- early 2005- I don't know the exact date off hand because I was in Iraq at the time and that was the first news the crew gave me on my return- metric is dead and so is Kaice....
all that to say, we haven't done a dual unit survey in my district since that time, unless it was on a project that was in metric and was not intended to be converted.
Also, please specify the type of clock used to determine the minutes and seconds shown on the plan.
You hit it in the head. I haven't done ELS for 4 years. I do remember checking all numbers; meters, feet, scale factor, closure, and co-ordinates inverses to matching lines on an MDOT COS was a LOT of work.
I used the one on the dash of Paden's Chevy. What'd you use?
WYDOT rules were that coordinates shown in meters were to be shown to three decimal places and USsurvey feet coordinates to four decimal places. Never made any sense but.....just do it as they tell you to;-)
I've been watching this thread and wondering something, why would I show grid distances on a boundary survey plat?
I usually show feet, tenth's, hundredths, and SMOOTS (because smoot is a local MA unit of measure.)
Dtp
This seems to me to be more like asking you to use a minute with 60 seconds in it instead of 57.
Google Earth's measuring tool offers feet, miles, meters, km, nautical miles, and several others including Smoots, but sadly no chains.