In a post [msg=150589]a few weeks ago[/msg] I pointed out that I had found the elusive .04'. Mr. Cow & Mr. Karoly then pointed out that it was silly to show your distance to .005 accuracy.
On another survey in the area, I have 2 lots adjoining a single lot and they share a single line (like a T). The 2 lots are labeled 88.96' and 89.13'; the single lot is labeled 178.10.
My question is, what is the length of the line; 88.96+89.13 or 178.10?
Dugger
> My question is, what is the length of the line; 88.96+89.13 or 178.10?
>
>
> Dugger
Correct. It is 88.96 + 89.13, or 178.10.;-)
you must have grey hair to be worried about 0.01'. do the lots even close by 0.01'?
I'd say the length is whatever you measure between the found corners. 🙂
You are probably dealing with that good ole cad magic and the way it rounds off numbers.
I ran into that my first Autocad year when labeling lots and then label the entire block line.
The lots hardly ever add up to the total length.
You gotta fudge your numbers somewhere to make it add up or simply show what prints out, as I do.
I've been called on segments not adding up to the total length and my answer has always been, "that is what the computer says it is and that is good enough for me".
It is within the tolerance level and usually 0.01 off.
The worst that I have seen is when your cad magic gives a different bearing for each segment of a block line.
You have totally lost your eccentricity when that happens.
B-)
That's what MAPCHECK is for.
The correct answer is
dependent on which line was set first. Was it the adjoining single lot with its two bars or the three bars set to define the two lots? Someone is an idiot if they can't add or substract something that simple correctly.
Yes
You are all missing the obvious. The Lot line has a width of .01' 😀
no no no NO!
There is an unlabeled Lot which is 0.01' wide.
