So, time once more for a Friday venting session.
I've been at this endeavor for about a year and a half now, and thinking about the process made (or lack thereof), I've concluded that I'm in for a major "reset" on how I do things. I've been asking myself: "What is the greatest challenge to further progress, learning this art?"
The conclusion I've come to is: PROCESS...The steps one takes to observe, record, draft, adjust, etc. survey data. I've been doing only a single project, albeit, traversing the same ground again and again. As familiar as I've become with various stations, and other landmarks, I find that, if I go back even just one month to do over a problem traverse, I can't figure out what I did without a lot of thought. Good field notes? Check; Print outs? Check; As much annotation in Star*net data files as possible? Check. But I still find it very challenging to keep track. I've got .rw5's by the hundreds now; some with the raw data edited and saved with such descriptive names as "Southwest line from 500-600, with point 551 error corrected 24 july 15.rw5". But where did those coordinates come from? Which Control File was in the Data Collector on the day I created the file? Were the points therein previously adjusted? Which Star*net file did I use to do that, and when did I adjust them? If I find a discrepancy, where did it originate? The raw data? something I did in CAD? Star*net? Both? All three?
In a recent thread on Star*net Project files, Norman Oklahoma mentioned a small routine he follows (renaming an .lst file with the .txt suffix, so subsequent adjustments don't overwrite previous ones). It's the little "tricks of the trade" like that, that years of experience bring that probably add up to being able to keep track of what you're doing every step along the way.
I've come to gain the greatest respect for those that do this for a living SOLO. It's one thing if you have people around to do the field work do the CAD work, the IT stuff, research, meeting clients etc. But the solo guy (girl), doing this all seems crazy! I don't know how it can be done.
It could just be my ADD that's impacting the ability to plod slowly and methodically through these measurements and coordinate data, so it might be a good thing that this is forcing me to learn the hard way. Not sure yet.
I do wonder sometimes if using an "integrated solution", such as those from MicroSurvey or Carlson (i.e. DC, DC software, CAD software, LSA tools all from the same company), would make the process any easier, but wouldn't know.
I'll just carry on carrying on, and enjoy the ride.:stakeout:
Happy Friday!
An "integrated solution" would certainly help, but so would a full license of StarNet:-). You might consider keeping a chronological record of your calcs in a word processor application. Having a digital record rather than a paper pad allows you to search it easily. Depending on the input/output format of your calculation software, you could potentially paste every input/output record into the doc, giving you 1 file that show every step and iteration.
Yes, Grasshopper, take lots of good notes. As another Grasshopper, I tinker around with measurements and too often find that I'm not completely sure what I did before.
I strongly encourage keeping a lot of notes about the processing you do-assumptions, changes, file names, etc. If that's too much for the field book, then start a spiral notebook for the office work.
My big practice project is a network across the north end of this small city that I started working on to learn about angle measurements and triangulation, motivated in part by learning about the C&GS/NGS triangulation stations. I have some "known" points from which I took angles to the red lights on radio towers, etc. and filled in with observations at some additional points to end up in front of my house. Also some Polaris sights. I started with a brass transit long ago, so wasn't expecting super good results. Then I got the semi-total station and re-observed some of those and more points, and with better standard errors got tighter results. Now I've been playing with the antique Trimble GPS and trying to refine further.
But I keep finding discrepancies. My notes say "the light on xxx tower" but I notice there is a red dome-shaped light fixture AND a red light/white strobe assembly. Did I notice when they added the strobe or did I take some measurements to the wrong one? Recent measurements don't fit yyy tower - did that light change (insufficient notes to know), or did I blunder something? There are more antenna masts on zzz tower. My notes don't tell me which one (if any of them) was there when I started.
I find that the "SPC" numbers I took from a construction stake by a nail along a major street don't fit my network. So did I copy a digit wrong? Assuming a 1 or 2 foot integer blunders doesn't fix it. Ok, I've since learned about "DOT modified SPC ground coordinates", but no scale factor will make both the easting and northing fit within 0.7 ft. What the heck? Their numbers should have been very much better than that and mine quite a bit better.
And other frustrations: a lot of my intermediate points are gone - new sidewalk here, street widened with new storm drain there, new building with major dirt work over there. And while I was thrilled to have "professional coordinates" on some points to start, now I realize that I don't know the NAD83 realization of most of them, so some probably won't match what I get with the GPS even to the repeatability of that noisy old beast.
Then a couple days ago I notice my tribrach bubble doesn't match the total station bubble, so my GPS positions have been off by 5 millimeters since I don't know when (checked once upon a time), and I didn't record the orientation of the tribrach at each site so I can't apply a correction.
So maybe more of the learning process has been learning what goes wrong than how it works when it goes right. I still enjoy the ride.
I used to be better at it, but I keep a 3 hole punch binder for every job. It has binder tabs that organize the data. Examples...Contact Info, Coordinates, Breaklines, Alignments, Sections, Profiles, Survey Notes, Control, Level Loops, Reference Maps, Deeds, Photos. Every time I work on the project, the binder gets updated and a note is placed on the cover that states the "To Do List" and where I left off.
The idea being that if 10 years down the road, all you were able to recover was this binder, you would have all the info you needed to recreate the project.
Welcome to my world. Try keeping track of thousands of surveys, any one of which you may be called on to pick up and run with at a moments notice.
The secret? For me there is none. The better organized you are, the more distinct the tracks you leave, the better chance you have for a smooth and stress free day. I find what helps me is
1/ Keeping good notes and adding date extensions to crd files.
2/ Keeping a survey log at the end of each day and/or job. Little details, big details, FB# and Pg information that will allow my memory to quickly pick up where I left off, maybe many years later. At the end of every survey I complete, paper print outs of all the salient points and processes go in a file along with notes and then while the job is still fresh in my mind, the details and quirks go into a geo-referenced Access database. The database is for me the secret. Allows me to locate any survey done here in the last 20 years in a matter of seconds when integrated with CAD base maps.
I think with where you're at, just streamlining and perfecting your work flow will make you more comfortable with tracking the details. Develop a system and stick with it. That, takes time, trial and error and every now and then a little good coaching. Learn from your mistakes Grasshopper. That is the secret.
You will never run out of potential mistakes and potential lessons, and that is what keeps it interesting. Once you do, hang it up. The party is over. :party:
