Aloha, Everyone: Thank you so much for your guidances. I was able to successfully practice all the four different KISS method suggested (keep it simple Swami 🙂
The record distant was 334.640 ft.
Field measured result average was 334.585
[msg=216373]Original post[/msg]
> Aloha, Everyone: Thank you so much for your guidances. I was able to successfully practice all the four different KISS method suggested (keep it simple Swami 🙂
> The record distant was 334.640 ft.
> Field measured result average was 334.585
>
> [msg=216373]Original post[/msg]
The difference in distance is why the rotation and translation is best in this case than resection. I suppose most of us were just skipping a step in the calculus problem in our head when we didn't say you NEVER find the call distance between others corners. I don't think what you found was bad, but, if you hold their values as absolutes then the only thing that can change is where your true value is. We all know it and that's why we don't do it.
Now, from my control networks, I'm a BIG fan of resection, but to resect into anothers set corners, not so much.
Glad it all worked out dude. 🙂
:good: :good:
> > Aloha, Everyone: Thank you so much for your guidances. I was able to successfully practice all the four different KISS method suggested (keep it simple Swami 🙂
> > The record distant was 334.640 ft.
> > Field measured result average was 334.585
> >
> > [msg=216373]Original post[/msg]
>
> The difference in distance is why the rotation and translation is best in this case than resection. I suppose most of us were just skipping a step in the calculus problem in our head when we didn't say you NEVER find the call distance between others corners. I don't think what you found was bad, but, if you hold their values as absolutes then the only thing that can change is where your true value is. We all know it and that's why we don't do it.
>
> Now, from my control networks, I'm a BIG fan of resection, but to resect into anothers set corners, not so much.
>
> Glad it all worked out dude. 🙂
Aloha, Kris:
One of the statement that stood out in mind from various post was the "strength of figure." Could you (or anyone else) post a simple sketch with points, bearing and distance showing an exmple of good strength of figure?
Thanks for the explanation above!
Yswami, Strenght of figure was a large consideration when setting up Traingulation stations to be measured by using known baseline lengths and measuring the angles for the computed results, it took into account the rate of change of angles when using the laws of sines as it relates to angles from 0° to 180°. Few even consider it today even thought it effects every computed position they work with. Don't need to go very deep into it if you just learn to avoid small angles and large differences in the Back sight lengths and Forsight distances. A class in mechanical drawing covering how end points and intersections are obtained by using the compass and scales will provide the best general understanding of why Strength of figure should be considered, even in the everyday surveying that we do. As quriky as it sounds, good drafting practices are often good surveying practice, just drafting on a different scale. Strength of figure explanations can be found in text books that cover Triangulation.
jud
jud has explained it.
simply have the interior angles and distances be in harmony with each other respectively of the figure.
I think you can picture this without a diagram. Best strength of figure could be a triangle with 3-60 degree angles. Then heading towards a right triangle with 2-45 degree angles. Those would be extremely good "strength of figure" models. The concept is that you must reduce long flat angles where a small error can make a huge error on a long line.
Also keep in mind that two points that agree are just two points that agree , you need three points to give you the angle agreement that you are in the right place . How did the third point check .
Aloha, Jud: Thanks for the explanations!
> Also keep in mind that two points that agree are just two points that agree , you need three points to give you the angle agreement that you are in the right place . How did the third point check .
Aloha, Djames:
From the second point to third point
Record
Az. 199 33 21
HD 39.510 ft.
Measured:
Az. 199 39 12
HD 39. 631 ft.
I have to add that the pipe at the second point is right next an old fence post and not very stable. It has at least 1/2" or so movement.
> I think you can picture this without a diagram. Best strength of figure could be a triangle with 3-60 degree angles. Then heading towards a right triangle with 2-45 degree angles. Those would be extremely good "strength of figure" models. The concept is that you must reduce long flat angles where a small error can make a huge error on a long line.
Aloha, Don: This is what you had in mind. I can place the station at any one of these corners and able to sight two other points, then I have the strength of figure?
