INTRODUCTION

Whenever there are roads, railways, pipeline, bridges, residential areas and etc to be built,
site surveyors are involved. Surveyors play an important role in making precise
measurements to determine property boundaries. They provide data relevant to the shape and
contour of the Earths surface for Engineering, mapmaking, and construction projects.

Surveying is the art of determining the relative positions of different object on the surface
of the earth by measuring the horizontal distance between them and by preparing a map to
any suitable scale. Thus, in this process, the measurements are taken only in the horizontal
plane. Whereas, levelling is the art of determining the relative vertical distance of different
points on the surface of earth. Hence, in levelling, the measurements are taken only in the
vertical plane.

On 29 June 2017, the students are required to survey and measure the land within the
University College campus by using Rise and Fall method. The equipments needed are
provided by the site surveying lab: digital auto-level, tripod, two 5 metres-high staffs, and
two balancing bubbles. Along with these tools, the students are expected to come out with
upper stadia, intermediate stadia, lower stadia readings, and the values of heights and
distances for each station comprising back sight and foresight. The measurements
commencing from nearby benchmark toward reduced level (MH1), reduced level (MH2), and
lastly reduced level (MH3).
EQUIPMENT

Figure 1. shows the tripod used for supporting the automatic

level to measure the height and distance.

Figure 2. shows the bubble used for measuring 90 degrees of

the staff.
 Figure 3. shows the staff used for measuring the upper stadia,
horizontal hair and lower stadia.

Figure 4. shows the staff which contain the barcode for

measuring the height (h) and distance (d).
Figure 5. shows a digital automatic level
which used to measure height and distance.
PROCEDURE
(MH3)
G
F
E
(MH1) (MH2)
(TBM) C D S6
S5
A B
S4
S2 S3
S1

Figure 6. Section view of the position

1. At Station 1 (S1), the levelling instruments (automatic level and tripod) were set up in
position, which was located between Point A and Point B.

2. A staff was held and placed at Point A (TBM), where the reduced level was indicated
earlier. The reading on Staff A was taken from S1. This reading was known to be the
Back Sight (B.S) for S1.

3. A staff was held and placed at Point B. The reading on Staff B was taken from S1 and
this reading was known to be the Fore Sight (F.S) for S1 as we measured through
point B and moving towards our targeted location (MH1).

4. The levelling instruments were moved from S1 to S2.

5. Without altering the position of Point B, the reading on the staff was taken from S2.
This reading was known to be the Back Sight (B.S) for S2.

6. A staff was then held and placed at Point C. The reading on Staff C was taken from
S2. This reading was known to be the Fore Sight (F.S) for S2.

7. By repeating Step 5 until Step 6, the location of levelling instrument and staff moved
and positioned towards targeted place (MH3). The levelling instrument at S2 was
subsequently being moved to S3, S4, S5 and S6. Likewise, the staff at Point C was
moved subsequently to D, E, F and G as shown in Figure 1.

8. The reduced level at MH1, MH2 and MH3 was calculated with the data recorded at
each station.
RECORD

Station 1 Station 2 Station 3

BS IS B. S FS F. RISE
S FALL
B. S RLS
F. REMARKS
B. S F. S
1.375
Upper 1.455 1.330 4.440 200
1.057 Benchmark=RL
1.632 1.343
4.320
Stadia 1.290 0.085 200.085 Point A
1.583 0.930 3.390 203.475 MH1
Intermediate
4.320 1.3751.309 1.290
0.274 4.320 0.930
203.749 1.583
MH2 1.309
Stadia
3.350 0.300 4.020 207.769 Point B
2.235
Lower 1.2850.597 1.2352.753 4.215 210.522
0.810 Point C
1.531 1.278
Stadia 0.190 2.045 212.567 MH3

Height 1.37 1.29 4.32 0.93 1.58 1.309

Distance 16.49 7.79 23.60 24.61 10.20 6.540

Station 4 Station 5 Station 6

B. S F. S B. S F. S B. S F. S
Upper
4.455 0.307 3.430 0.668 2.249 0.253
Stadia
Intermediate
4.320 0.300 3.350 0.597 2.235 0.190
Stadia

Lower
4.190 0.287 3.280 0.527 2.210 0.127
Stadia
Height 4.324 0.299 3.353 0.595 2.224 0.188
Distance 27.01 2.11 15.30 14.12 3.55 12.59

EYESIGHT
RISE AND FALL TABLE

HPC TABLE

BS IS FS HPC/HI RL REMARKS
1.375 201.375 200 Benchmark=R
 L
4.320 1.290 204.405 200.085 Point A
1.583 0.930 205.058 203.475 MH1
4.320 1.309 208.069 203.749 MH2
3.350 0.300 211.119 207.769 Point B
2.235 0.597 212.757 210.522 Point C
0.190 212.567 MH3

MACHINE
RISE AND FALL TABLE

BS IS FS RISE FALL RL REMARKS

1.370 200 Benchmark=R
L
4.320 1.290 0.080 200.080 Point A
1.580 0.930 3.390 203.470 MH1
4.324 1.309 0.271 203.741 MH2
3.353 0.299 4.025 207.766 Point B
2.224 0.595 2.758 210.524 Point C
0.188 2.036 212.560 MH3

HPC TABLE

BS IS FS RL HPC/HI REMARKS
1.370 200 201.370 Benchmark=R
L
4.320 1.290 200.080 204.400 Point A
1.580 0.930 203.470 205.050 MH1
4.324 1.309 203.741 208.065 MH2
3.353 0.299 207.766 211.119 Point B
2.224 0.595 210.524 212.748 Point C
0.188 212.560 MH3
DISCUSSION

The task given is to calculate the reduced level for MH1, MH2 and MH3. In fact, the result of
reduced level for a certain point (MH1, MH2 and MH3) is constant regardless the method of
measuring because the position can never be changed.

Table below shows the results of reduced level when the method of measuring is different:

Position Reduced level

Rise and Fall method HPC method
MH 1 203.475 203.475
MH 2 203.749 203.749
 MH 3 212.567 212.567
However, our group gets different result when the value of height is obtained from different
method. The comparison of results is tabulated as below:

Scenario 1: The value of height is taken from the eyesight (read from the automatic level)

Scenario 2: The value of height is taken from the automatic level machine automatically

Position Reduced level

Scenario 1 Scenario 2
MH 1 203.475m 203.470m
MH 2 203.749m 203.741m
MH 3 212.567m 212.560m

The results are not exactly the same but it is similar. This is because the value of height is
different between two scenarios. When we read on the staff, we only can get the accurate
reading up to 2 decimal points (Example: 1.23m). However, the stadia will sometimes locate
between two accurate reading (Example: between 1.23m and 1.24m). In this case, we need to
do our own assumption for the third decimal point (Example: 1.233m). The assumption we
make is not always accurate. Besides, the reading would not be accurate if the staff was hold
stably. In short, different people may read different reading due to the differences in angle
and assumption.
The results of reduced level for MH1, MH2 and MH3 are compared between two different
groups to check the accuracy. The comparison of results is tabulated as below:

Group 1: Results from own group

Group 2: Results from another group

Position Reduced level

Group 1 Group 2
MH 1 203.470m 203.055m
MH 2 203.741m 203.262m
MH 3 212.560m 211.986m

From the table, we can conclude that the reading between two groups is not exactly the same
even though the reduced level for certain point supposed to be the same. There are different
factors that lead to this situation. For example, it is because of the differences in assumption
(as discussed earlier). Besides, it was not guaranteed that two groups were measuring the
same point. For instance, our group had misunderstood the location of the position MH1 and
MH2. Our staff was not placed exactly at the middle of the appointed location but we placed
the staff at somewhere else beside the exact location of MH1 and MH2. As a result, we get
different reduced level as compared to other group who placed the staff accurately.
 CONCLUSION
After thorough studies and understandings from our practical experiences on measuring a
certain terrain in the campus by applying our practical and theoretical knowledge and
judgements, we came to a few conclusions that explain the uncertainties and discrepancies
found in the practical tasks.

The method of calculating data obtained does not affect much on the final results.
However, there may be variations on the method of obtaining the data as for the height values
and reduced level for each station in comparison with another group of students.

To obtain the height values, different methods were used. Primarily, the height value was
taken by using our eyes to view the readings on the staff via automatic level. The
differentiations were expected and trivial assumptions were needed. After that, the readings
of height values were obtained via digital readings on the automatic level, as it may be far
more accurate than manual readings.

The measurement for each reduced level was found out to be flawed due to the fact we
had mistaken the precise or supposing position of the staff. Hence, the final results are
entirely wrong given by the carelessness of ours. The accurate values are then acquired from
another group for amendment purposes and to concluding the report.