GE 119: Land Surveying

2nd Semester, A.Y. 2016-2017

Comparison of Basic Lot Survey Data Using

Geodetic and Geocentric Datums in Varying Map
Projections

Submitted by:

Bueta, Gabriel Lorenzo A.

Madjus, Justin Frederick N.

Section 4A

Submitted to:

Engr. Louie P. Balicanta

Introduction

The geodetic datum is a reference ellipsoid used since old times as a basis for mapping
out the coordinates of different areas. However, as technology and other scientific advancements
improve, mathematicians and geodesists started on creating more reliable ellipsoidal models as
basis for reference in maps; these ellipsoidal models are transformed and realized into geocentric
datums. What differs these from the known geodetic datums is that it is Earth-Centered and
Earth-Fixed, meaning the center of the ellipsoid coincides with the center of gravity of the Earth.

Objectives

The objective of this research is to (1) prove if the differences in between the coordinates
of two (2) different datums commonly and widely used here in our country, specifically PRS92
(a geodetic datum) and WGS84 (a geocentric datum), and (2) to show significant changes in the
positions of the survey data between different lots. In line with this, the research also aims to
take into considerationthe future plans of NAMRIA in improving the overall reference system
used in the country, which is that of the use of a geocentric datum.

Review of Related Literature

NAMRIA STRATEGIC PLAN 2020

The National Mapping Resource Information Agency is currently proposing a plan for
the modernization of the Philippine Geodetic Reference System which aims to address the
problem of using an outdated static reference system for the purposes of mapping and surveying
in the country. One of its goals is to develop the Philippine Geocentric Datum of 2016 which will
become an upgraded version of the current PRS 92 reference system. It will be aligned to the
International Terrestrial Reference System (ITRF) which is earth-centered and earth-fixed and
wherein its realizations/models will consider the Earths geodynamic behavior. According to this
proposal, a geocentric reference system is deemed better to suit the positioning needs of our
country due to different occurrences and changes involving plate tectonics and actual crustal
deformations.

GEODETIC DATUM

The geodetic datum is a reference ellipsoid with a well-defined point of origin and
orientation. It is uniquely determined by specifying eight (8) parameters: two to define the
dimension, three to define the position of the origin, and three to define the orientation of the
three axes with respect to earth.

GEOCENTRIC DATUM

A geocentric datum is a datum with a natural Cartesian Coordinate System, in which its
three axes coincide with the principle axes of inertia of a rigid earth. Its center also coincides
with the Earths center of gravity, and thus, its minor axis also coincides with the Earths polar
axis of inertia.

2D CONFORMAL TRANSFORMATION

2D Conformal Transformation is a type of transformation that relies on 4 parameters to

maintain the shape of a figure; one scale, one rotation, and two translation parameters, one for
each axis.
X = Sxcos Sysin
Y = Sycos + Sxsin
where S is the Scaling Factor
is the angle of rotation

Equation 1. Scale and Rotation Parameters

X = ax by + c
Y = bx + ay + d
Where a, b, c and d are the translation parameters

Equation 2. Translation Parameters

CLOSED FORMULA METHOD

An additional method for coordinate conversion is the closed formula; which can be a
long and tedious method for converting grid coordinates to geographic coordinates.

= ()

The formula above is an efficient tool to convert any type of coordinates (either
geographic or Cartesian) into different specified datums whether geocentric, geodetic, or at any
rate of variation. In this research, however, this set of formulas was not used since the data
obtained was only limited to PRS 92 PTM grid coordinates, and since other specific parameters
or values are required (such as the height, etc.), results cannot be computed from here.

Methodology

The researchers obtained a simple subdivision plan (Lot 1-A, Psd-13-013832) and the
coordinates of its tie point from the technical department head of RASA Surveying, during their
on-the-job training at the said company.

Figure 1. Plot of Lot 1-A

 Figure 2. Technical description and tie line information of Lot 1-A

Using the lot data that was acquired, the PRS92 PTM grid coordinates of the corners
were computed. After that, a geoprocessing software (Global Mapper) was used to convert the
PRS92 PTM coordinates into WGS84 coordinates, and vice versa. This said program can convert
and reproject various types of coordinates given its corresponding datum and projection. Using
the software-computed coordinates, 2D Conformal Transformation with least squares adjustment
was used to calculate different sets of parameters to be applied and tested on some sample lots.

After computing for the coordinates of the first lot, two additional lots were then also
used to compute for its coordinates. Afterwards, the parameters obtained from the previous
transformation equations were then applied, and their differences and effects on the overall
nature and description of the lot were checked and tabulated.

Results and Discussion

Point Northings Eastings

LM#3, Piedad Estate 1621990.518 501203.464
1 1621790.320 501560.943
2 1621865.202 501560.943
3 1621865.202 501672.385
4 1621811.096 501694.521
5 1621790.320 501699.121
Table 1. PPCS-TM/PRS 92 grid coordinates of the mother lot 1-A

Northings (WGS84/PTM) Eastings (WGS84/PTM)

LM#3, Piedad Estate 1621824.471 501228.8
1 1621624.278 501586.287
2 1621699.16 501586.286
3 1621699.164 501697.728
4 1621645.058 501719.867
5 1621624.281 501724.468

Northings (WGS84/UTM) Eastings (WGS84/UTM)

LM#3, Piedad Estate 1848367.712 504841.431
1 1848165.06 505200.923
2 1848240.482 505201.135
3 1848240.168 505313.379
4 1848185.61 505335.523
5 1848164.67 505340.098
Tables 2-3. Converted Cartesian coordinates of Lot 1-A using GlobalMapper 15 software

In comparing the grid coordinates in between different datums using similar

projections, the Northings of the PRS92-PTM coordinates are closer to the Northings of the
WGS84-PTM coordinates as compared to the Northings of the WGS84-UTM coordinates. The
same also holds true for the comparison of the Eastings.

2D Conformal transformation parameters Value

(PRS92 (PTM) WGS 84 (PTM))
Scale 1.000013562
Rotation -0.001692665
X-translation -202.8510301
Y-translation 66.45598947
 2D Conformal transformation parameters Value
(PRS92 (PTM) WGS 84 (UTM))
Scale 1.007213535
Rotation 0.16037788
X-translation 216096.3569
Y-translation -4548.396832
Tables 4-5. Transformation parameters obtained after sufficient iterations using least squares adjustment.

X (PRS92/PTM) Y (PRS92/PTM)
1 1621790.318 501560.9421
2 1621865.199 501560.9427
3 1621865.2 501672.3837
4 1621811.094 501694.5205
Table 6. Given PRS-92/PTM coordinates of Lot #2, a test lot with a relatively smaller area

X (PRS92/PTM) Y (PRS92/PTM)
1 1621790.318 501560.9421
2 1621865.199 501560.9427
3 1621865.2 501672.3837
4 1621811.094 501694.5205
5 1621790.317 501699.1209
Table 7. Given PRS-92/PTM coordinates of Lot #3, a test lot with a relatively medium-sized area

PRS 92 (PTM) to WGS 84 (PTM) Transformation)

N E
N E (WGS84/PTM) (WGS84/PTM)
(WGS84/PTM) (WGS84/PTM) applied 2D applied 2D dx (between dy (between
Gmapper - Gmapper Parameters Parameters methods) methods)
1 1610807.879 514092.289 1610807.891 514092.3448 0.055775377 0.012247917
2 1610811.308 514084.94 1610811.32 514084.9964 0.056428414 0.012395897
3 1610820.941 514090.103 1610820.954 514090.1591 0.056102882 0.013115788
4 1610817.582 514097.21 1610817.595 514097.2664 0.056366686 0.012789171
Table 8. Comparison of two methods (applied LSA parameters vs. GlobalMapper converter) used to
obtain the WGS 84 (PTM projection) coordinates of Lot #2.

The difference of the position of the points of the two sets of coordinates is in the centimeter
level, which is favorable in terms of accuracy.

dx (pt shift) dy (pt shift) dd (pt shift)

1 -25.3449 166.04 167.9632268
2 -25.3433 166.039 167.9619968
3 -25.3443 166.036 167.9591821
4 -25.3465 166.036 167.959514
5 -25.3471 166.036 167.9596046
 dx (pt shift) dy (pt shift) dd (pt shift)
1 25.83408202 -165.8180075 167.8183882
2 25.83437467 -165.8181761 167.8185998
3 25.8342422 -165.818603 167.8190012
4 25.83423411 -165.818792 167.8191867
5 25.83373991 -165.8184535 167.8187762

dx (pt shift) dy (pt shift) dd (pt shift)

1 25.83432045 -165.8174305 167.8178547
2 25.83411948 -165.8176011 167.8179923
3 25.8339049 -165.8173179 167.8176795
4 25.83410052 -165.8173635 167.8177546
Tables 9, 10 and 11. Shift in position of points of lots 1-A, 2 and 3 respectively.

The tables above show the shift of the points from PRS92 (PTM) to WGS84 (PTM). All of the
points have shifts in their Northings and Eastings that are near in value, resulting to all of them having
almost similar shift in positions which surmount to around 168 meters.

ddx (length change) ddy (length change) dd (length change)

1-2 0.001 -0.0016 0.001886796
2-3 0.003 0.001 0.003162278
3-4 -2.32831E-10 0.0022 0.0022
4-5 0 0.0006 0.0006
5-1 -0.004 -0.0022 0.004565085

ddx (length change) ddy (length change) dd (length change)

1-2 -0.000200961 -0.000170581 0.000263597
2-3 -0.000214586 0.000283167 0.00035529
3-4 0.000195623 -4.55554E-05 0.000200857
4-1 0.000219924 -6.70303E-05 0.000229913

ddx (length change) ddy (length change) ddd (length change)

1-2 0.000292656 -0.000168564 0.00033773
2-3 -0.000132472 -0.000426904 0.000446985
3-4 -8.09296E-06 -0.000189009 0.000189183
4-5 -0.000494195 0.000338493 0.000599005
5-1 0.000342105 0.000445984 0.000562083
Tables 12, 13 and 14. Shift in position of lines of lots 1-A, 2 and 3 respectively.

The tables above show the shift in the position of the lines from PRS92 (PTM) to WGS84(PTM).
Lots 2 and 3 have their shifts near the sub-millimeter level, while Lot 1-A has almost all its shifts in the
millimeter level.
Known Area (PRS92/PTM) Computed Area (WGS84/PTM)
Lot #2 86.99504549 86.99717562
Lot #3 233.0603475 233.0654837
Table 15. Comparison of Areas of Lots 2 and 3.
 PRS 92 (PTM) to WGS 84 (UTM) Transformation
N E
N E (WGS84/UTM) (WGS84/UTM)
(WGS84/UTM) (WGS84/UTM) applied 2D - applied 2D dx (between dy (between
Gmapper - Gmapper Parameters Parameters methods) methods)
1 1837235.075 517765.424 1837235.211 517766.156 0.732005559 0.135868739
2 1837238.55 517758.033 1837238.686 517758.7646 0.731550757 0.135627979
3 1837248.237 517763.261 1837248.374 517763.9918 0.730821756 0.136962032
4 1837244.833 517770.409 1837244.97 517771.1407 0.731658122 0.137424906
Table 16. Comparison of two methods (applied LSA parameters vs. GlobalMapper converter) used to
obtain the WGS 84 (UTM projection) coordinates of Lot #2.

The difference of the position of the points of the two sets of coordinates is in the sub-centimeter
level, which slightly differs from that of the previous different-datum yet same-projection conversion.

dx (pt shift) dy (pt shift) dd (pt shift)

1 -226374.742 -3639.9809 226404.0046
2 -226375.283 -3640.1923 226404.5489
3 -226374.968 -3640.9953 226404.2468
4 -226374.516 -3641.0025 226403.795
5 -226374.353 -3640.9771 226403.6316

dx (pt shift) dy (pt shift) dd (pt shift)

1 3699.645551 226261.5022 226291.747
2 3699.602242 226261.5476 226291.7917
3 3699.666624 226261.6025 226291.8476
4 3699.708392 226261.5583 226291.8041

dx (pt shift) dy (pt shift) dd (pt shift)

1 3699.505096 226261.551 226291.7935
2 3699.430412 226261.4769 226291.7181
3 3699.36572 226261.5047 226291.7449
4 3699.320672 226261.5041 226291.7435
5 3699.394377 226261.6262 226291.8669
Tables 17, 18 and 19. Shift in position of points of lots 1-A, 2 and 3 respectively.

Compared to the previous tables of position shifts of points, the shifts from PRS92(PTM) to
WGS84(UTM) give off results in which only the differences in Lots 2 and 3 are near in value, while the
differences in Lot 1-A have values that are far from the differences of the other two lots.

ddx (length change) ddy (length change) dd (length change)

1-2 0.541 0.2114 0.580836431
2-3 -0.315 0.803 0.862574055
3-4 -0.452 0.0072 0.452057342
4-5 -0.163 -0.0254 0.164967148
5-1 0.389 -0.9962 1.069455675
 ddx (length change) ddy (length change) ddd (length change)
1-2 -0.0433088 0.045440678 0.062773461
2-3 0.064381944 0.054897329 0.084609405
3-4 0.041768185 -0.044256063 0.060853763
4-1 -0.062841329 -0.056081943 0.084227175

ddx (length change) ddy (length change) ddd (length change)

1-2 -0.074684202 -0.074113657 0.105216748
2-3 -0.064691936 0.027871183 0.070440396
3-4 -0.045047481 -0.000665751 0.045052401
4-5 0.07370436 0.122131843 0.142648238
5-1 0.110719259 -0.075223619 0.133855695
Tables 20, 21 and 22. Shift in position of lines of lots 1-A, 2 and 3 respectively.

Compared to the previous set of position shifts of points, the shifts in the dataset of PRS92(PTM)
to WGS84(UTM) have differing values, with most having values in sub-meter and centimeter level.

Known Area (PRS92/PTM) Computed Area (WGS84/UTM)

Lot #2 86.99504549 88.25465578
Lot #3 233.0603475 236.4348526
Table 23. Comparison of Areas of Lots 2 and 3.

Excel plots of Lot 1-A (used for parameter determination), Lot 2 and Lot 3; with different
datums but with the same projection (PTM):

Figure 3. Plot of Lot 1-A in both PRS 92 and WGS 84 datums and with same map projection (PTM)
Figure 3. Plot of Lot 2 in both PRS 92 and WGS 84 datums and with same map projection (PTM)

Figure 3. Plot of Lot 3 in both PRS 92 and WGS 84 datums and with same map projection (PTM)
Conclusion and Recommendation

Based from the values computed, it can be concluded that there are considerably small
differences in the shift in the position of the points when performing datum transformation while
using the same projection, as compared to when converting coordinates while also changing the
projection. This is due to the fact that when laying out the coordinates on the map, using the
same projection performs the same laying out of coordinates that came from different datums.

It is recommended to use more accurate and precise coordinate transformation methods

(with more acceptable parameters) in order to yield more reliable results of coordinates in
between datums. Using different coordinate transformation methods may also be useful. Also,
results can better be tested by using varying sizes of sample lots to obtain more reliable lot
information so that differences and other discrepancies can be determined.

It is also better to use 3D data to have more accurate and precise results as compared to
2D data, since it takes into account more aspects (z-axis, height, etc.) when computing and
analyzing the differences of the datums.

References

Survey and Mapping Office Lands Department. (1995.) Explanatory Notes on Geodetic Datums
in Hong Kong. Retrieved from: http://www.geodetic.gov.hk/data/pdf/explanatorynotes.pdf

Esri. (n. d.) Datums. Retrieved from: http://desktop.arcgis.com/en/arcmap/10.3/guide-

books/map-projections/datums.htm#GUID-E49F0E1B-8F0D-4704-8384-735EA002FDDC

Van Sickle, J. (n. d.) Geocentric Datum. Retrieved from: https://www.e-

education.psu.edu/geog862/node/1798

Geodesy Division Mapping and Geodesy Branch. (n. d.) Modernization of Philippine Geodetic
Reference System Strategic Plan 2016 2020. Retrieved from:
http://www.namria.gov.ph/jdownloads/Others/StratPlan_Modernization.pdf

Vanicek, P. (February 1975.) Report on Geocentric and Geodetic Datums. Retrieved from:
http://www2.unb.ca/gge/Pubs/TR32.pdf