the end of the road (LCDWB)?
> the end of the road (LCDWB)?
Maybe 794.94. Maybe 794.76. Maybe something else. The engineer has to resolve that.
I agree with your first guess. Not a good way to label profiles, leaves room for errors. 🙁
what about 794.71?
Its kind of hard to read at that image resolution, but that is what it looks like to me as well.
The Bow Tie Surveyor
794.94 at centerline and that's what should be labeled on the profile.
794.71 in correct for 12' lt of cl per the image if normal crown of 2%.
Aww, but then I looked at the math.
PI sta looks to be 65+95.00, 791.23
Slope = 0.506%
End of the Road = 73+28.94 with what looks like the note 12' Lt (left)
7328.94-6595.00 = 733.94 * 0.00506 = 3.714 + 791.23 = 794.94
But if this is 12' left of the centerline, is there a drop of 0.03' to make the 794.91 that we read? That would be a 0.25% pitch which seems too flat for my tastes, though I've never worked on a road designed for 80 mph. If the Highway specs and the engineer state it's good, then go for it.
:good:
oh yeah, 794.71, good show up there.
Profile Elevations (Existing and Proposed) should be labeled perpendicular to the 750 line at each Station and at all breaks (VPC, VPI, and VPT, and at End of Project.)
But I agree it's either 794.94 (by straight stationing calculations) or 794.71 (by note implying the difference due to the 12' Lt label).
It's still a very poor way to illustrate a profile and grades.
Are there cross sections? What do they show?
The 794.71 is the elevation 12' to the left (2% cross-slope).