Do you traverse to set control and go back to get side shots or do you traverse and get side shots all at the same time. I have done it both ways. Sometimes I think the precision of the control traverse will be better if I focus just on that.
Historic boundaries and conservation efforts.
We pretty much always locate everything as we run the original traverse. On some projects you only want to go back into the wild so many times. 😉
Agreed. How about a city block. I should have mentioned that.
Historic boundaries and conservation efforts.
I believe that it is important to a) routinely adjust control, and b) map topo -at least to the point of running F2f - as soon as possible after collection. Also, I'm not running a solo operation here. For these reasons I'm generally going to run (and adjust) the control first before collecting topo.
There are exceptions, of course. Such as when the job is small enough that field work for both operations can be completed in a single site visit. Or when access is restricted.
With rare exceptions I run control at the same time I collect any mapping data I may need. The exceptions are usually based on time frame for control. On the rare occasion I will run the control in a separate fie collection file than the mapping. In the field I reset the instrument for each group of angles I turn, usually of five sets of D/R for as many tripods I have out. I then wrap angles to property corners as needed followed by mapping. Sometimes the order is reversed but I'm sure to reset the instrument freely.
In the office I Leica Infinity to process and adjust the control. Then I reposition the boundary and mapping setups using the adjusted values. Only then are the points and linework exported to C3D.
I'm generally going to run (and adjust) the control first before collecting topo.
I don't understand the advantage. Since Star*Net (and, I assume, other adjustment software as well) adjusts the topo shots to fit the adjusted control, I almost always pick up the topo as I go. Although I very rarely set corner monuments until the control is done and adjusted (i.e. I return to the site to set monuments), I can't see how picking up topo shots while running control affects anything.
You are quite right about StarNet. I prefer to map the data as it is collected for project management reasons. I can identify and fix any deficiencies as I go. If something is missed on day 1 it can be fixed on day 2 while still working on the same area of the site. I can adjust crew practices on the fly. This is especially important when one is working with less experienced staff. Facilitates mentoring. Every really big project benefits from the real time feedback to comes of staying up to date with the mapping.
There was a particular job early in my career that steered me in this direction. I wasn't directly involved but it was a big job in the office. Three crews were sent on an out of town job to map a Forest Service campground, including all the trees. I recommended that the data be processed daily but was ignored. The crews were sending in their data daily via emailed files, but these were merely being accumulated and not processed. At the end there was a large pile of data with overlapping point numbering in both the control and the topo collection that was very, very difficult to resolve. Plus there were areas that had been surveyed twice and some that were missed altogether. In short, a gigantic mess that took days to unwind. Project budget blown to kingdom come. It would have been a simple and profitable job if the data had been mapped as it went.
I've since done plenty of other jobs of similar size that went smoothly because I was able to brief/debreif on a daily basis as the project progressed. A side benefit is that everybody involved gets to see how things are progressing toward the goal, helping with crew morale and departmental management anxiety.
You are right. The software that I use will also adjust the traverse and the side shots if I choose to adjust the data.
Historic boundaries and conservation efforts.