SU3250

SURVEY MEASUREMENTS AND

ADJUSTMENTS
Course Notes

Prepared by
Indrajith D. Wijayratne
Associate Professor of surveying
Michigan Technological University
Houghton, MI 49931

Copyright 2002 by Indrajith Wijayratne

PROPAGATION OF RANDOM ERRORS

Propagation of random errors
Errors in computed values (indirect measurements)
Pre-analysis of planned surveys

Understanding error propagation is important in the following:

Combining two or more components of error in the same
measurement
e.g. pointing error and reading error in an angle measurement
Finding error in a sum or difference of two or more
measurements
e.g. adding several tape lengths
Finding error in a computed value from measurements using a
mathematical relationship
e.g. coordinates computed from distances and bearings

Unlike systematic errors, random errors cannot be simply added or

subtracted because the exact magnitude or the sign of the error is
not known
Even though the sum of several random errors tends to be zero it
is not quite zero, in general
Random errors belong to statistical distributions, and hence, follow
rules of propagation of variances

The variance of a random variable formed by combining two

random variables is given by

2comb = 21 + 22 + 2. 12
Where 12 = covariance between variable 1 and variable 2
If the two original random variables are independent, then 12 =
0, and therefore,
2comb = 21 + 22

For several independent variables

2comb = 21 + 22 + 23 + 24+ .. Etc.
Statistical independence means that any change in one variable
does not have any influence on the other variable(s)

This means that the variables are not statistically correlated or the
covariance between them is zero

In surveying, when combining different random error components

or in sums and differences of similar measurements, statistical
independence of individual components is assumed

This is also true for independent measurements such as distances

and angles, which are used for computation of other values

e.g. coordinates
Two values computed from the same measurements are correlated
e.g. latitude and departure of a traverse line computed from the
same angle and distance

When combining random errors, estimates of all errors must have

the same probability and the probability of the resulting error is
also the same

General guidelines for random error propagation:

clearly understand the measurement process
determine basic measurement
analyze each basic measurement to find sources of random
errors
compute combined random error in basic measurement
propagate the errors using rules of propagation to the final
measurements used in computations
propagate errors to computed values

Propagation in Distance Measurements:

Tape
Stadia
Subtense
EDM or GPS

Two main random errors in s distance measurement by taping are

marking of the end of the tape on ground and reading the tape
graduations.
Other random errors such as those due to fluctuations in teperature
or tension are generally small.
EDM measurements are subject to random errors introduced by
centering of the instrument and prism, and those due to random
variations in electronic center and frequency of transmission
The last two are generally supplied by the manufacturer and given
in the form (a + b ppm. ) in which 'a' is constant and 'b' is
proportional to the distance measured.
ppm. = parts per million
Since both 'a' and 'b' are random components of the error, the error
in a measured EDM distance can be given as
M = a2 + (b* 10-6 * distance)2
Now, the combined error in a distance measured by EDM can be
given as
D = ( 2i + 2r + 2M)
where i = instrument centering error
r = prism (reflector) centering error
Propagation in Angle Measurements

Single measurement
Multiple measurements
Electronic theodolites

Random errors in angle measurements are

instrument and target centering

plate bubble centering (leveling the instrument)
pointing to the target
reading (verniers, micrometers, scales)

The instrument/target centering errors and plate bubble centering

errors remain the same for each angle measured from the same
setup

Instrument/target centering errors and plate bubble centering errors

become random from setup to setup, and therefore, will have a
random effect on the angular closure of a triangle or a traverse

Above are discussed in sections 6.6, 6.7 and 6.8

An angle is made up of two directions, and therefore, each

direction is affected by all the errors stated above

Following discussion is limited to the effect of only the pointing

and reading errors in a measured angle

Multiple Measurements
Two basic methods based on the type of instrument

Direction method
Repetition method

Only difference is the effect of reading error

Direction method
Two pointings and two readings for each measurement of angle
Each angle measurement is independent
Standard deviation of the mean value of angle due to reading and
pointing is
= (2.2p + 2.2r)
n
= rp 2
n

Repetition Method

Only two readings regardless of number of repetitions

Same number of pointings as before

Standard deviation of the mean angle due to reading and pointing

is
= 2.2p + 2.2r
n
n2
Note that reading and pointing errors need to be known separately
in the case of repetition method
Angle Measurements Using Total Stations (Digital Theodolites)
It is not possible to assess the reading error in digital theodolites as
there is no human influence on reading
A standard, called DIN18723, has been developed that gives the
estimated error of the mean of two direction measurements, one
with telescope direct and one telescope inverted
Each direction measurement include both pointing and reading
Assume two direction measurements are indicated by d1 and d2,
and therefore, the mean direction is given by
d = d1+ d2 = 1/2 d1+ 1/2 d2
2
By rules of random error propagation
2d = (1/2)2 2pr + (1/2)22pr

= 2. 2pr = 2pr
4
2
DIN = pr/2

DIN value has been estimated in the factory using a specific set of
targets. Since the targets used in the field are different, one could
get a realistic estimates of an angle measurements error by field
testing.

Self-study Problems
1. A distance of 334.56 feet was measured with a 100 ft. steel tape.
The uncertainty in one tape measurement due to random errors
has been estimated to be 0.03 feet. Find the unceratainty of the
total distance measured.
2. If the above distance was measured with an EDM with a
manufacturer specification of (3 mm. + 3 ppm), what would be
the uncertainty of the distance ?
3. If the above distance was added to another distance of 567.98
feet measured with the same EDM, what would be the
uncertainty of the sum of two distances ?
4. What would be the expected uncertainty of an angle, with 95%
confidence, measured with a theodolite that has a pointing error
of 1.2" and a reading error of 1.5". Disregard other errors.

Error propagation in Traverses

Expected angular closure in a traverse
Estimated error in azimuths/bearings
Expected error in linear closure of traverses

Once the combined error in each angle has been estimated as

discussed previously, the expected angular closure of a traverse
can be computed (See sec. 6.9, page 110)

Angular closure in a polygon traverse is computed by adding all

interior angles, and then comparing this sum with a theoretical
value

The random error propagation is done assuming each angle was

measured independently

This is the error propagation in a sum as given by equation 5.18 on

page 86 (See Example 6.8 on page 110)

Expected angular closure is computed at a higher level of

probability, e.g. 95%, and then compared with the actual angular

closure to ensure that measured angle do not contain blunders (see

Example 6.9 on page 111)

Expected error in a link traverse could be computed by first

computing the estimated errors in azimuths/bearings

Propagation of errors in computed azimuths is discussed in sec. 7.3

on page 125 and is given by equations 7.5/7.6 on page 126 (Also
see example )

Expected Linear Closure in Traverse (Sec. 7.4, page 126)

Distance and angle measurements are independent
Computed latitudes and departures are correlated
Coordinates are correlated

Latitude and departure of a traverse line computed from the same

distance and azimuth/bearing are correlated even though the
distance and azimuth/bearing are independent

Northing and Easting of a point are correlated with each other as

they are computed from latitude and departure that are correlated

It could be seen that, through the process of computing

azimuths/bearings, each computed azimuth/bearing has an
influence not only from the angle used in computing that azimuth
but also from angles used for the computation of previous azimuths

This in turn results in coordinates of all points in the traverse or

network being correlated with each other

The error propagation in horizontal surveys such as traverses is

much complicated and an approach using matrices is often used

Propagation in elevation measurements

Differential leveling
Trigonometric leveling
Random Errors in differential leveling

Rod reading
Instrument leveling
Rod leveling
Residual errors in instrument collimation, refraction and
curvature, etc. due to unequal sight distances

Random Errors in Trigonometric leveling

 Instrument and reflector heights

Vertical or zenith angle
Distance
Refraction and curvature

Specifications for surveys

Analysis of errors in measurements is a useful tool when
writing specifications for surveys
Knowing the required accuracy/ tolerance in the final
coordinates/ elevations, detailed specifications for
equipment/methods can be developed