Lab 1: Closed Compass-Traverse Survey

Introduction:
This lab had several objectives; the first was to become familiar with
the procedures and techniques necessary for surveying a closed
compass-traverse.The second was to learn how to reconstructing the
information into ArcMap. And the third was use COGO to gain an
understanding of the amount of error that can be expected using
differing measurement techniques. The following summarizes the methods
of data collection, a descriptive analysis, results and discussion.

Methods:
The techniques utilized in this lab included pace and tape measuring
of eight assigned points on the St. Mary’s University of Minnesota-
Twin Cities Campus.

For the foot traverse, the “pace” was determined working off of an
increment of paces. This was measured from a distance of 40 feet
marked with measuring tape. Student Willett did this by walking the
distance and counting the number of steps it took to walk the complete
distance. This was done three times and then averaged to determine a
bench mark to measure distances between points.

After establishing a point of origin (Point C) within the assigned

eight points, each point to point’s information was recorded in the
field book, noting the azimuth and paces from each point for the next
point, repeating the procedure to locate each next line and point
until returning to the origin.
That part of eight points between the Easterly side of Mother Teresa
Hall of St. Mary’s University of Minnesota- Twin Cities Campus and
Park Avenue North is described as follows: Commencing at the tree on
the southeast corner of said plot (Point C); thence moving N24˚E, 35.7
feet to the next tree along the curb on the Park Ave North (Point D);
thence pacing N46˚W, 46.2 feet to a ground outdoor light fixture
(Point E); thence travelling N12˚E, 94.5 feet to the northeast corner
of the plot where the sidewalk met the drive in (Point F), said point
also being the first point of triangulation for the front passenger
wheel rim of the maroon truck (triangulated point); thence moving
S52˚W, 48.3 feet to the flag pole (Point G), said point also being the
second point of triangulation for said triangulated point; thence
pacing S12˚W, 48.3 feet to the northeast corner of the sidewalk that
runs along the east side of Mother Teresa Hall (Point H); thence
continuing along the Easterly line of Mother Teresa Hall S2˚W, 54.6
feet to the corner or “elbow” indent in the sidewalk in front of
Mother Teresa Hall (Point A); thence moving along the said Easterly
line S14˚E, 46.2 feet, down the steps to where they meet the Southerly
sidewalk (Point B); thence returning S80˚E, 50.4 feet to the origin at
the said tree on the southeast corner of said plot (Point C).
Bearings are based on magnetic north.

Next the tape measuring was completed by Professor Ebert and one of
the lab groups to allow the class a comparison between tape measure
and pace measure. Both sets of data were then plotted into ArcMap and
analyzed using COGO.

Descriptive Analysis:
Table 1 and Table 2 show the results of converting the data into
closed loops. Table 3 and Table 4 show the direction and distance
each line was moved. The maps 'Pace and Compass' and 'Tape and
Compass' show the spatial comparision of the uncorrected versus
correct traverses. The map 'Triangulation' shows the uncorrected and
correct tranverses using the tape data, plus the intersection of the
two bearings starting from points F and G.

Table 1. Pace Corrected Closure

Number of Courses 8
Total Length 424.2
End Coordinates -420355236079.729,
328780116570.68
Calculated End Coordinates -420355236067.992,
328780116542.695
Misclosure As X/Y -11.737, 27.985
Misclosure As Direction/Distance 337.2466, 30.347

Relative Error Ratio 1:13

Table 2. Tape Corrected Closure

Number of Courses 8
Total Length 450.2
End Coordinates -420355236079.754,
328780116571.841
Calculated End Coordinates -420355236071.172,
328780116553.221
Misclosure As X/Y -8.582, 18.62
Misclosure As Direction/Distance 335.2543, 20.502
Relative Error Ratio 1:21

Table 3. Pace Adjusted Traverse

Adjusted Residual
Description Values Values
 24.0000 21.1561
1 35.7 37.496 -4.6399
314.0000 315.5176
2 46.2 49.254 1.5176 -3.054
12.0000 9.7942
3 94.5 100.129 -7.8348
232.0000 236.0238
4 48.3 47.508 4.0238 0.792
192.0000 194.4809
5 48.3 45.504 2.4809 2.796
182.0000 183.8349
6 54.6 51.079 1.8349 3.521
166.0000 166.6712
7 46.2 42.936 0.6712 3.264
100.0000 96.4186
8 50.4 48.544 -3.5814 1.856

Table 4. Tape Adjusted Traverse

Adjusted Residual
Description Values Values
24.0000 22.0963
1 38.2 39.369 -3.0727
314.9073
2 314.0000 51 53.171 0.9073 -2.171
10.4943
3 12.0000 104 107.832 -5.3377
232.0000 234.5648
4 52.1 51.608 2.5648 0.492
192.0000 193.6197
5 55.2 53.207 1.6197 1.993
183.2239
6 182.0000 54 51.816 1.2239 2.184
166.0000 166.5092
7 42.7 40.791 0.5093 1.909
97.7999
8 100.0000 53 51.662 -2.2000 1.338

Results/Discussion:
Completing the eight point closed traverse gives the impression that
the measurements would be accurate simply because the origin is also
the endpoint. Knowing fully well that human error exists, one can see
the gradual offset of points when comparing the Pace with the
Pace_corrected, as well as the Tape with the Tape_corrected. As can
be seen in the Closure data above, the Total Length of the
Pace_corrected measurement was 424.2 feet, while the Total Length of
the Tape_corrected measurement was 450.2 feet. Overall this resulted
in a Relative Error Ratio of 1:13 for the Pace and 1:21 for the Tape.
This means that the error associated with the Tape measurement method
was lower then with the Pace measurement method. This was the expected
result and comfirms that, if possible, you should use a tape to
measure a distance, rather then your feet!

Conclusions:
This lab was successful in that we became familiar with the procedures
and techniques necessary for surveying a closed compass-traverse and
reconstructing the data into map form. It emphasized the value of
knowing various techniques to measure a desired area and the
difference in accuracy between methods. It also allowed a chance to
see human error in a realistic setting.

References:
Notes from powerpoints, handouts, and discussions during Spatial Data
Methodology
classes on 3/16/10 and 3/23/10 with Professor John Ebert