Tips for avoiding big mistakes

Close your level loops.?ÿ Always.?ÿ?ÿ

Verify prism offsets (if applicable).

Something I've done for 40 years now (due to a mishap many years ago): Put your eyes on the equipment in the truck BEFORE you drive 110 miles to the jobsite...Sometimes the hired help's memory ain't so good. 😉

?ÿ

EDIT: Never, ever run a bench loop on a Friday afternoon.

?ÿ

I just stole this quote from someoneƒ??s recent post here somewhere:

One of the privileges of being alive is making mistakes.

Posted by: @fobos8

Checking in survey processing software that for critical measurements I have 0 target height for reflectorless measurements

fobos8,
Can you explain this one to me please??ÿ This may apply to a recent survey that I performed where I had to run some shots in reflectorless mode.

Thanks

?ÿ

Take good field notes, whether hardcopy and/or digital. It's one of the most basic skill sets of surveying and far too few crews can perform it adequately.

Measure and confirm critical/base rod heights in feet and meters, and write BOTH down. Note each rover/prism rod height change, either in the book or in the separate attribute field on the collector that is there for just that purpose. (I'll make you do both if you keep blowing rod heights.) Note what gear you are using - which prism kit? which instrument? What's the weather? Did it change significantly during observations?

Find a bad rod height or incorrect code while in the field? FIX IT IN THE FIELD. Don't just scrawl a note in the book. Modern field software allows for you to troubleshoot and sort out 99% of your problems right there in the field. The office tech is not there to fix all your screwups.

A sketch isn't necessary for every job, but it sure helps for anything that is complex or out of the ordinary.

And for Pete's sake, document anything and everything observed that might assist during processing and drafting. Site photos are invaluable when the drafting tech was not part of the field crew.

?ÿ

Posted by: @jflamm

Close your level loops.?ÿ Always.

I would add "Double-run your level loops, because a single observation to a critical point in control surveying is next to worthless."

@firestix

I remember on a survey once I measured some roof ridge heights for a topographical survey. I nearly had a heart attack when I saw in the survey processing software the target heights for the reflectorless shots was 1.8 metres (the typical target height when I use the detail pole). I don't know how this target height got into my reflectorless setting but it's something I check now.?ÿ I would have had the ridge heights out by 1.8 metres.

@fobos8

So to clarify to make sure I'm understanding the point.?ÿ If you set the reflectorless prism height to zero, the software would use the dist and vert angle to correctly calculate the height?

(I honestly just started using reflectorless shots)

Posted by: @paden-cash

Sometimes the hired help's memory ain't so good.

Thats who I always used to blame too! ?????ÿ

Posted by: @fobos8

Using contours in survey processing software to see if there were any gross errors on pole heights

I'm a real big fan of this and it's something I just sort of stumbled into by accident.

I've worked at places that wanted field crews to note all of their rod height changes in the field book.?ÿ I wasn't a fan of the idea because I knew I'd go from being chewed for missing a rod height change to being chewed for taking even longer to do the same amount of work, but I understood why they wanted it done.

I really wanted to see something integrated into the collector software that would help track this better.?ÿ I remember Carlson had a feature where you could hit a button switch to a preset rod height for exactly 1 shot and then it would automatically switch back, but that's the closest I've seen to something that would help minimize this error.

Anyway, if I had my own shop I think this is one of those things I'd feel more comfortable slowing down and doing since the person breathing down my neck about it would be... me. ???

?ÿ

Other suggestions:

Store check shots occasionally to verify your instrument hasn't shifted; especially during frozen ground conditions in the spring.

I had an instructor say a lot of surveyors are 'head down, ass up'.?ÿ You miss easy mistakes when you don't stand up and look at your work from time to time.

Take a HUGE amount of photos.?ÿ Most people have a smartphone now and the cameras on them are excellent.?ÿ It's fast and easy and I can't believe how many times pictures I've taken at a jobsite have been helpful to me later on.

@flga-2-2

Blaming the hired help for their oversight is a internal management technique. Running a crew is difficult enough.?ÿ Running 5 or 7 is an exercise in futility.?ÿ I used to tell people "being in two places at once is easy, three at once gets a little harder".?ÿ?ÿ

After I retired from being an employee and became and insane fool running my own show I used to get call now and again from folks wanting me to run their survey department.?ÿ I'd always tell them "the people that are good at managing multiple crews know how difficult it is.?ÿ Most of them avoid the position unless they're going through a divorce and need the money."?ÿ I should write some about running that many crews, but I can't decide if it would be a comedy or a tragedy.

I remember one place I had about 7 crews at one time.?ÿ At least I had enough vehicles and equipment for 7 crews.?ÿ The management had a strict policy to provide the lowest paying employment on the planet.?ÿ All this meant was that the field hands were all single, apathetic and generally hung-over.?ÿ It was like herding blind cats.

Twenty-something field hands just meant 3 or 4 weren't going to show up on any given day. "Who goes with who" was my daily morning scourge. When payday rolled around every two weeks I had a problem because EVERYBODY showed up.?ÿ I realized I had more employees that seats in vehicles.

If I was lucky I had enough skinny guys to cram 4 of them in a pickup for that day.?ÿ 😉

I'm glad those days are just memories.

?ÿ ?ÿ?ÿ

?ÿ

I review work done by others on a regular basis.?ÿ If you can think of a manner in which an error can end up on the final product, it has already happened, more than once, to others.?ÿ Things as simple as indicating the job was in the wrong county, city, section or subdivision on the wrong street or road.?ÿ Drafting errors, such as copying the same bearing/distance to ten places then only editting nine of them.?ÿ Distance is 60.0 feet and it appears as 6.00 or 600.?ÿ Scale says one inch equals 200 feet but it's more like 348 when you lay a scale on it.

Finding errors in the field can be very hard to ever discover.?ÿ Especially when a bearing is a very small angle to the left of north and it's really that angle to the right of north.?ÿ ?ÿThe distance in the DC is not the true distance by a large number.?ÿ It should never happen, but it does.?ÿ Everybody and everything hiccups from time to time.

Posted by: @bstrand

?ÿ I wasn't a fan of the idea because I knew I'd go from being chewed for missing a rod height change to being chewed for taking even longer to do the same amount of work, but I understood why they wanted it done.

Aside from that being a huge red flag that the leadership doesn't care about doing the job right, I've never seen a budget get blown by careful note taking. I have seen them blown by having to return to the jobsite because of a bad rod height that wasn't noted.

Of course, it's way, way faster to take advantage of the additional data entry options available nowadays. I have all my crews turn on descriptions in their jobs, and use one of the fields for a secondary rod height note, and the other for any miscellaneous notes. (This is in addition to the attributes already set for certain codes, like tree species, fence type, etc.)

Once the crews adjust to the workflow, it takes them all of an additional 5-10 seconds to enter the descriptor, check the rod height, enter it in the field, add any miscellaneous notes, and then check the height one more time before entering it in the actual height field.

It's all right there on the collector. No fumbling for field book and pencil, setting the gear down, etc. It's hard for some to get used to, but it's no different than noting it in the book.

That's for topo measurements. We still book control and monumentation setup (instrument/prism constant/measure-ups/etc), although we don't write down raw data such as horizontal angles or observed coordinates in the book. If the actual observed data is wrong, then we have bigger problems...

Posted by: @rover83

Aside from that being a huge red flag that the leadership doesn't care about doing the job right, I've never seen a budget get blown by careful note taking.

Whoa, whoa, the first part is a bit of a leap.?ÿ You can't stay in business going around not caring about that sort of thing.?ÿ I think they just wanted their cake and to eat it, too.

Posted by: @holy-cow

I was checking the description of my brother's irregularly shaped acreage, and found that it closed nicely IF you changed 201.1 to 210.1 feet. As a check, Google Earth shows the corner posts to be about 210 ft apart.

With regard to rod heights - use it all the way down most of the time. Then it can't slip lower. When you run it up, run it up quite a lot, and to the same number every time. So that there is a significant difference, and so you know what to change to if you find that there has been a problem. If forced to use an odd height, get it back to all the way down at the earliest opportunity.

Not all shots in a topo are good for DTM.?ÿ Any shots on utilities (ie. valve covers, MH rims, junction boxes, etc) for example. Frequently they may be used to check your surface, but not as data for the surface.?ÿ ?ÿCurbs and gutters, edges of pavement, breakline features, and ground shots.?ÿ That is your DTM data.?ÿ Nothing else. Make full use of field to finish to segregate the data appropriately.

Use the shots on utilities to test the DTM model.

If taking reflectorless shots on things that you know will have invalid elevation (ie/building walls, sign posts, poles, etc.) use a rod height of 99 feet. And you don't use that stuff in your DTM anyway. Only use zero rod height if the elevation is sought, and valid.

?ÿ

A topographic survey is not just a topographic survey. It is a collection of several different surveys,

1. Control survey?ÿ
2. Boundary Survey
3. Planimetric Features Survey?ÿ
4. Terrain Modeling Survey
5. Utility Survey?ÿ

Each of these categories can be further segregated. And some data from each class may be reused in another (ie/curb lines are both planimetric features and DTM data). Other than the control survey, you might exclude any of the others and still produce a valid map. Data for each category may be collected using different techniques. For instance you might double angles to boundary monuments, but you wouldn't do that to Terrain Model shots. You may?ÿ Forward/Reverse foresight critical utility shots, such as on manhole rims, to improve elevation precision but you would accept direct only on planimetric features.?ÿ?ÿ

Just assume mistakes are going to happen but if you catch them and fix them before they become someone else's problem, you are golden. So I will refer back to the advice I received too long ago,

"Assume nothing and trust nobody".?ÿ

Always be willing to question your assumptions and if your intuition tells you something isn't right, trust your intuition.

@paden-cash

I hear you Bud. When running 6 crews in West Palm Beach (1981) if the surf was up or a DC-10 "accidentally" threw out a bale `o weed that landed in someone's cousin's brother-in-laws backyard, half of them were no shows. ?????ÿ