Compass Traversing Lab Report | Engineering Survey I
Compass Traversing and Detailing - Engineering Survey I

Lab 2: Compass Traversing and Detailing

Lab 2: Compass Traversing and Detailing

Experiment Information

Experiment: Compass Traversing and Detailing

Description: Complete lab report covering theory, procedure, observations and analysis of compass traverse survey

Complete Lab Report PDF

Compass Traversing and Detailing

THEORY AND KEY TERMINOLOGY

A foundational understanding of several surveying terms is essential for this lab.

Traversing

This is a branch of surveying where the directions of survey lines are established using a compass, and their lengths are measured, often through chaining or taping. A traverse is the path created by connecting the survey stations.

Open Traverse: A traverse where the starting point is known, but the endpoint is not.

Closed Traverse: A traverse where both the starting and ending points are known, forming a closed loop. This configuration is beneficial because it allows for an accuracy check of the fieldwork.

Key Concepts

Bearing: The bearing of a line is its direction relative to a given meridian.

Fore Bearing (FB): The bearing of a survey line taken in the direction of the traverse. For a line AB, it is the bearing measured from station A towards station B.

Back Bearing (BB): The bearing of a line measured in the opposite direction of the traverse. For a line AB, it is the bearing measured from station B towards station A.

Local Attraction: This refers to the influence of nearby magnetic materials (like transmission lines or transformers) on the compass needle, causing it to deflect from the earth’s magnetic field.

Closing Error: In a closed traverse, errors in angle and length measurements can cause the plotted endpoint to not coincide with the starting point. This discrepancy is known as the closing error.

OBSERVATIONS

The following measurements were recorded in the field.

Table 1: Distance Measurements

Line Forward Reading (m) Backward Reading (m) Average Distance (m)
AB 32.994 32.585 32.987
BC 45.780 45.760 45.770
CD 30.615 30.600 30.607
DE 29.725 29.712 29.718
EF 29.432 29.420 29.426
FA 51.681 51.671 51.671

Table 2: Bearing Measurements

Line Fore Bearing (FB) Back Bearing (BB) Difference |FB – BB|
AB 25°30′ 205° 179°30′
BC 289° 108°30′ 180°30′
CD 232°30′ 54°30′ 178°
DE 198°30′ 17° 181°30′
EF 147° 326°30′ 179°30′
FA 58°30′ 240°30′ 182°

CALCULATIONS

3.1. Interior Angle Calculation

The interior angles of the closed traverse were calculated as follows:

\[ \begin{align*} \angle A &= \text{FB of AB} – \text{BB of FA} = 25°30′ – 240°30′ = -215° + 360° = 145° \\ \angle B &= \text{FB of BC} – \text{BB of AB} = 289° – 205° = 84° \\ \angle C &= \text{FB of CD} – \text{BB of BC} = 232°30′ – 108°30′ = 124° \\ \angle D &= \text{FB of DE} – \text{BB of CD} = 198°30′ – 54°30′ = 144° \\ \angle E &= \text{FB of EF} – \text{BB of DE} = 147° – 17° = 130° \\ \angle F &= \text{FB of FA} – \text{BB of EF} = 58°30′ – 326°30′ = -268° + 360° = 92° \\ \end{align*} \]

3.2. Error Adjustment

\[ \begin{align*} \text{Sum of Observed Interior Angles} &= 145° + 84° + 124° + 144° + 130° + 92° = 719° \\ \text{Theoretical Sum} &= (2n – 4) \times 90° = (2 \times 6 – 4) \times 90° = 720° \\ \text{Total Angular Error} &= 719° – 720° = -1° \\ \text{Correction per Angle} &= +1° / 6 \text{ angles} = +10′ \text{ per angle} \\ \end{align*} \]

3.3. Corrected Interior Angles

The correction was added to each calculated interior angle:

Angle Calculated Value Correction Corrected Value
∠A 145° +10′ 145°10′
∠B 84° +10′ 84°10′
∠C 124° +10′ 124°10′
∠D 144° +10′ 144°10′
∠E 130° +10′ 130°10′
∠F 92° +10′ 92°10′

3.4. Corrected Bearing Calculations

The bearings were adjusted starting with line AB, which had the smallest deviation from the ideal 180° difference between its fore and back bearings. An initial correction of +15′ was applied to the bearings of line AB.

\[ \begin{align*} \text{Corrected FB of AB} &= 25°30′ + 15′ = 25°45′ \\ \text{Corrected BB of AB} &= 25°45′ + 180° = 205°45′ \\ \text{Corrected FB of BC} &= \text{BB of AB} + \angle B = 205°45′ + 84°10′ = 289°55′ \\ \text{Corrected BB of BC} &= 289°55′ – 180° = 109°55′ \\ \text{Corrected FB of CD} &= \text{BB of BC} + \angle C = 109°55′ + 124°10′ = 234°05′ \\ \text{Corrected BB of CD} &= 234°05′ – 180° = 54°05′ \\ \text{Corrected FB of DE} &= \text{BB of CD} + \angle D = 54°05′ + 144°10′ = 198°15′ \\ \text{Corrected BB of DE} &= 198°15′ – 180° = 18°15′ \\ \text{Corrected FB of EF} &= \text{BB of DE} + \angle E = 18°15′ + 130°10′ = 148°25′ \\ \text{Corrected BB of EF} &= 148°25′ + 180° = 328°25′ \\ \text{Corrected FB of FA} &= \text{BB of EF} + \angle F = 328°25′ + 92°10′ = 420°35′ – 360° = 60°35′ \\ \text{Corrected BB of FA} &= 60°35′ + 180° = 240°35′ \\ \end{align*} \]

Table 3: Final Corrected Bearings

Line Corrected Fore Bearing (FB) Corrected Back Bearing (BB)
AB 25°45′ 205°45′
BC 289°55′ 109°55′
CD 234°05′ 54°05′
DE 198°15′ 18°15′
EF 148°25′ 328°25′
FA 60°35′ 240°35′

DISCUSSION OF ERRORS AND DISCREPANCIES

Closing Error: The initial plot of the traverse did not close, indicating the presence of measurement errors, which is a common occurrence in surveying. The source attributes this to errors in both angle and length measurements.

Local Attraction: The report mentions the concept of local attraction, which are magnetic disturbances from sources like power lines that can affect compass readings. While it is stated that no magnetic effect was observed, the differences between fore and back bearings (ideally 180°) were not uniform, suggesting some uncorrected local attraction might have been present. For instance, the difference for line DE was 181°30′, while for CD it was 178°.

Data Inconsistencies: There are minor inconsistencies in the document’s tables. For example, in the “BEARINGS MEASUREMENT” table, the Back Bearing for line AB is listed as 205°, while the calculation for Angle A uses 240°30′ as the Back Bearing of FA. Additionally, some corrected bearing values in the final table do not precisely match the preceding calculations, likely due to rounding or minor calculation errors in the original document.

CONCLUSION

The compass traverse survey was successfully completed, and the data was processed to adjust for observational errors. The details of the surrounding area were mapped using the established traverse as a reference framework. The exercise provided valuable practical experience in compass surveying, data correction, and detail mapping. The final corrected data and the resulting map are considered to be within an acceptable range of accuracy for the methods employed.

×

Disclaimer

The educational materials provided on this website are intended as supplementary resources to support your learning journey. These lab reports are sample documents designed to help students understand proper formatting and content organization.

We have made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the content. However, we recommend students to perform their own experiments and prepare original reports. These samples should be used as references only.

We respect intellectual property rights. If you believe any content should be credited differently or removed, please don’t hesitate to contact us. We’re happy to make appropriate corrections or give proper attribution.

Scroll to Top