I hope you upload more. You have a good way of explaining things, the videos are professionally done and are easy to understand. Double thumbs up Illinois Surveyor there are not many like you out there.
Just replace 848.86 with 846.86 and the rest of the calculations match. This standard format for field notes is made for dummies. The BS and the FS should be on the same line reflecting the new elevation from the previous line elevation, since both readings have the same instrument elevation. you can also go to the lines and audit. Take a look at pharmacies in Canada, they never changed dumping the pills from the big jar on the counter, counting the pills on the counter, dropping it in the small container, and returning the rest back in the jar attracting all sorts of bacterias in the jar and in the small container. this is called Resisting the change.
Actually,your method of teaching is very simply to learn what is leveling. I like so mush about your teaching sir.Thank you sir for create this videos for us.
This is a great tutorial and I love it, but there are two errors in numbers that throws out the calculations for BS and Elev. I would appreciate if you can correct these errors that started in previous video and are showing up in this video too. Please see the the other comments. Thanks again for great tutorial and hoping to see more.
All of the rest of the numbers work out. Unless it is assumed that (IH) not HI is 2ft. The first calculated number is 846..86 and not 848.86. What am I missing that adds an extra two units?
Excellent video. The only problem that I see (besides the math problem everyone else caught) was that you did not balance and adjust the final bench elevation. After closing the loop to within .02' (and without getting into balancing shot distances) you should've split the difference by adjusting the new BM by .01' making it 842.16' instead of 842.15'. Not too big of a deal, but on large level runs, or when multiple level runs are connected, or when other people are going to use it, not balancing can make a big difference.
these all videos are easy to understand, but sometimes i see when surveyors take intermidate sights with out shifting the leveling instrument . but here we see only taking readings only based on turning points only ... just i want to say how can we use the intermidate sights , or when can i take intermidate readings .
Very good, but not made clear that the Turning Points on the reverse run, though they have the same numbers, are not the same points. As was explained in an earlier video, the TP markers may be removed before moving on, so the position cannot readily be re-found.
At 12:53 a value of (840.48) gets put in the elevation column. Almost immediately it is crossed out and replaced with (840.78). What is up with the value that got crossed out? I understand that they are the results from the first half of the loop, I just don't get what happened there.
My old level book, lovingly preserved from the 1960's has columns that read Backsight, Intermediate sight, and foresight, then Collimation, and Reduced levels, among other things......
I was going to point out the BLUNDER calculations at the beginning of your video but I see you are all ready black and blue from others' comments. . . . . .
My field book setup is much easier to understand and makes more sense I know this is how it's always taught and everyone has their own preference.....+ Hi - elev. Remarks......I don't use the sta. Format... Mostly because my remarks are detailed descriptions and locations of permanent turn points even if I don't use them permanently...the STA. format... Becomes confusing if you happen to take multiple side shots along the way... Anyone I have ever showed my method to says that it's extremely easy to understand and read
When the PE says so. Honestly, when those considerations do have to happen, they are calculating using laser and satellite techniques all at the same time. If there is a project where the curvature of the Earth is a significant factor, it can be factored in. Also a quick google search explaining it more precisely - www.mathscinotes.com/2010/11/straight-level-and-the-curvature-of-the-earth/
Almost never. In 1000' the Earth's curvature is about a 1/4". It gets exponentially greater the further out you get. In 5000' it jumps to about 8 inches or 0.67'. In 200' it's less than .001'. Since most readings with a level are less than 200' and level loops are run traveling along the surface using gravity to level the instrument, there's no practical reasons to take the Earths curvature into effect when doing level runs. However, if you are using a total station to shoot grades and you are shooting greater distances (over 1000') you may want to do an adjustment. But then again, how important is .02' in a 1000'? It depends... The quick easy formula for calculating the approximate elevation difference from a level line of sight is to square the miles and then multiply it by 8 inches. So, in two miles the formula would be: 2 x 2 x 8 inches = 32 inches or 2.67'. For a half a mile it would be .5 x .5 x .67 = 0.167' or about 2 inches. Most job sites (including airports) are considered to be on a level plane (no curvature). The real question to be asked; Is what would be the difference in elevation while using a laser, when taking into consideration the curvature of "space and time" caused by Earth's mass? I have no friggin idea.
This is true... but the first mistake was actually in computing the first HI. That is 842.17+4.69 = 846.86 and NOT 848.86. So his second number was actually derived using the correct HI as 846.86-6.08 = 840.78
My boss had us watch this video for a lesson to the new guys. On the first reading I looked at my boss and said I saw that. He looked at me like I was rediculous. I thought he purposely blew the 1st reading for a later lesson. Never happened. This demonstration blew the math and ended with good math. I was called a know it all. Its surveying, I dont know it all, but I can see a bad demonstration
Nope...sitting here with calculator, books and notes wondering what I did wrong....then decided to look in the comments section. Please correct video so others won't do the same!!
@@Bobby14221234 But he didn't rectify the mistake, he just got lucky because his two arithmetic errors happened to cancel each other out. I kept watching the video thinking he'd come back to correct them, but he never did.
Decent enough explanation although it's a great pity that whoever produced this series of videos didn't measure twice and cut once. A basic calculation that was incorrect in the previous video is now repeated and continually referred to in this video turning all the dialogue about mistakes and blunders into real life fact. Tighten up and get your act together.
Wow! A whole video series has been made to explain surveying. There is a small math error. Instead of thanking the host and producers for the video, you bash them and America?
