Statement of positional accuracy on topographic map
- sako
- Posts: 323
- Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2005 9:40 am
- Location: Bay Area
Statement of positional accuracy on topographic map
Recently I was asked to add a statement of positional accuracy and error of closure limits on my topographic map. I would like to know your opinion and what would you include on the statement.
Thanks
Thanks
- land butcher
- Posts: 1615
- Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 7:26 pm
- Location: calif
-
Paul Goebel
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 1:47 pm
-
Anthony Maffia
- Posts: 530
- Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 4:52 pm
- Location: Contra Costa County, CA
- Jim Frame
- Posts: 1599
- Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:52 pm
- Location: Davis, CA
- Contact:
"THE COORDINATES SHOWN ARE THE RESULT OF A LEAST SQUARE ADJUSTMENT"
You might want to consider changing "least square" to "least squares," which is shorthand for the method of estimating values by minimizing the sum of the squares of the residuals.
"THE LARGEST STANDARD ERROR BASED ON THE ADJUSTMENT WAS 0.028 NORTHING, 0.025 EASTING AND 0.016 ELEVATION AT ONE SIGMA."
You also might want to consider dropping "at one sigma" as redundant, since the standard error is an estimate of the standard deviation (one sigma by convention). Another thought would be to state the range of the 2-sigma (a.k.a. 95%) errors, since about 1/3 of your points are likely to exceed the 1-sigma value.
.
You might want to consider changing "least square" to "least squares," which is shorthand for the method of estimating values by minimizing the sum of the squares of the residuals.
"THE LARGEST STANDARD ERROR BASED ON THE ADJUSTMENT WAS 0.028 NORTHING, 0.025 EASTING AND 0.016 ELEVATION AT ONE SIGMA."
You also might want to consider dropping "at one sigma" as redundant, since the standard error is an estimate of the standard deviation (one sigma by convention). Another thought would be to state the range of the 2-sigma (a.k.a. 95%) errors, since about 1/3 of your points are likely to exceed the 1-sigma value.
.
-
TTaylor
- Posts: 261
- Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 2:17 pm
NSSDA
You may want to state your accuracy according to the Geospatial Positioning Accuracy Standards published by the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) (http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/projects/ ... /accuracy/).
These standards replace the FGCC 1984 and FGCC 1988 standards and are a circular postional accuracy standard. Chpt. 2 deals with standards for Geodetic Networks, Chpt. 3 is the National Standard for Spatial Data Accuracy (NSSDA), Chpt 4. Architecture, Engineering, Construction, and Facilities Management, and Chpt. 5 deals with hydrographic surveys.
These standards replace the FGCC 1984 and FGCC 1988 standards and are a circular postional accuracy standard. Chpt. 2 deals with standards for Geodetic Networks, Chpt. 3 is the National Standard for Spatial Data Accuracy (NSSDA), Chpt 4. Architecture, Engineering, Construction, and Facilities Management, and Chpt. 5 deals with hydrographic surveys.
Tom Taylor
7512
7512
- land butcher
- Posts: 1615
- Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 7:26 pm
- Location: calif
Actually what I meant to say is read to the nearest 0.01ft but 1/2 way thru the typing realized most don't use or have a level rod anymore.
I always put third order level runs on my stuff. dirt read to +/- 0.1 concrete read to +/- 0.01 With trig elevs its a different story.
The biggest problem we have is dealing with those who have no clue. One place I worked the drafter had a plowed dirt field spot elevs on the map to 3 decimal places and could not understand why a water vault was 0.15 below the adjacent sidewalk.
I always put third order level runs on my stuff. dirt read to +/- 0.1 concrete read to +/- 0.01 With trig elevs its a different story.
The biggest problem we have is dealing with those who have no clue. One place I worked the drafter had a plowed dirt field spot elevs on the map to 3 decimal places and could not understand why a water vault was 0.15 below the adjacent sidewalk.
-
Anthony Maffia
- Posts: 530
- Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 4:52 pm
- Location: Contra Costa County, CA
- rmaher
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2011 4:27 pm
- Location: Lake Forest, CA
CF Elevation
Dave,
Should you include the elevation used to determine the CF?
I give the NEZ of the point that I used to determine the CF.
8815.5. When CCS83 coordinates are shown on any map, corner record,
or record of survey, a mapping angle, combined grid factor, and the
elevation used to determine the combined grid factor shall be shown
on the map, corner record, or record of survey for at least one
representative point.
Rich
Should you include the elevation used to determine the CF?
I give the NEZ of the point that I used to determine the CF.
8815.5. When CCS83 coordinates are shown on any map, corner record,
or record of survey, a mapping angle, combined grid factor, and the
elevation used to determine the combined grid factor shall be shown
on the map, corner record, or record of survey for at least one
representative point.
Rich
- rmaher
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2011 4:27 pm
- Location: Lake Forest, CA
Also from Post # 10:
ALL COORDINATES SHOWN HEREIN ARE GRID. ALL MEASURED DISTANCES SHOWN HEREIN ARE GRID DISTANCES. TO OBTAIN GROUND DISTANCES, DIVIDE GRID DISTANCES BY 0.99968465
So I wondered: What is the elevation used to calculate "that" CF?
Maybe that is shown on your map. I only had the statement to review.
ALL COORDINATES SHOWN HEREIN ARE GRID. ALL MEASURED DISTANCES SHOWN HEREIN ARE GRID DISTANCES. TO OBTAIN GROUND DISTANCES, DIVIDE GRID DISTANCES BY 0.99968465
So I wondered: What is the elevation used to calculate "that" CF?
Maybe that is shown on your map. I only had the statement to review.
Take care,
Rich
Rich
- rmaher
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2011 4:27 pm
- Location: Lake Forest, CA
I hear you loud and clear. Speaking strictly of my own work, I can't look at the PRC without starting to wonder what else I'm doing wrong.
When I decided to start adding the elevation of the CF to my datum statements I did away with averages and selected a specific point, preferably a monument and gave all information of that.
When I decided to start adding the elevation of the CF to my datum statements I did away with averages and selected a specific point, preferably a monument and gave all information of that.
Take care,
Rich
Rich