Search USGSSearch

USGS · tm11D3

Procedures and best practices for trigonometric leveling in the U.S. Geological Survey

Abstract

With the advent of highly precise total stations and modern surveying instrumentation, trigonometric leveling has become a compelling alternative to conventional leveling methods for establishing vertical-control networks and for perpetuating a datum to field sites. Previous studies of trigonometric-leveling measurement uncertainty proclaim that first-, second-, and third-order accuracies may be achieved if strict leveling protocols are rigorously observed. Common field techniques to obtain quality results include averaging zenith angles and slope distances observed in direct and reverse instrument orientation (F1 and F2, respectively), multiple sets of reciprocal observations, quality meteorological observations to correct for the effects of atmospheric refraction, and electronic distance measurements that generally do not exceed 500 feet. In general, third-order specifications are required for differences between F1 and F2 zenith angles and slope distances; differences between redundant instrument-height measurements; section misclosure determined from reciprocal observations; and closure error for closed traverse. For F1 observations such as backsight check and check shots, the construction-grade specification is required for elevation differences between known and observed values. Recommended specifications for trigonometric-leveling equipment include a total station instrument with an angular uncertainty specification less than or equal to plus or minus 5 arc-seconds equipped with an integrated electronic distance measurement device with an uncertainty specification of less than or equal to plus or minus 3 millimeters plus 3 parts per million. A paired data collector or integrated microprocessor should have the capability to average multiple sets of measurements in direct and reverse instrument orientation. Redundant and independent measurements by the survey crew and automated or manual reduction of slant heights to the vertical equivalent are recommended to obtain quality instrument heights. Horizontal and vertical collimation tests should be conducted daily during trigonometric-leveling surveys, and electronic distance-measurement instruments should be tested annually on calibrated baselines maintained by the National Geodetic Survey. Specifications that were developed by the National Geodetic Survey for geodetic leveling have been adapted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for the purpose of developing standards for trigonometric leveling, which are identified as USGS Trigonometric Level I (TL I), USGS Trigonometric Level II (TL II), USGS Trigonometric Level III (TL III), and USGS Trigonometric Level IV (TL IV). TL I, TL II, and TL III surveys have a combination of first, second, and third geodetic leveling specifications that have been modified for plane leveling. The TL III category also has specifications that are adapted from construction-grade standards, which are not recognized by the National Geodetic Survey for geodetic leveling. A TL IV survey represents a leveling approach that does not generally meet criteria of a TL I, TL II, or TL III survey. Site conditions, such as highly variable topography, and the need for cost-effective, rapid, and accurate data collection in response to coastal or inland flooding have emphasized the need for an alternative approach to conventional leveling methods. Trigonometric leveling and the quality-assurance methods described in this manual will accommodate most site and environmental conditions, but measurement uncertainty is potentially variable and dependent on the survey method. Two types of closed traverse surveys have been identified as reliable methods to establish and perpetuate vertical control: the single-run loop traverse and double-run spur traverse. Leveling measurements for a double-run spur traverse are made in the forward direction from the origin to the destination and are then retraced along the same leveling route in the backward direction, from the destination to the origin. Every control point in a double-run spur traverse is occupied twice. Leveling measurements for a single-run loop traverse are made in the forward direction from the origin point to the destination, and then from the destination to the origin point, along a different leveling route. The only point that is redundantly occupied for the single-run loop traverse is the origin. An open traverse method is also considered an acceptable approach to establish and perpetuate vertical control if the foresight prism height is changed between measurement sets to ensure at least two independent observations. A modified version of leap-frog leveling is recommended for all traverse surveys because it reduces measurement uncertainty by forcing the surveying instrumentation into a level and centered condition over the ground point as the instrumentation is advanced to the objective. Sideshots are considered any radial measurement made from the total station that is not part of a traverse survey. F1 and F2 observations are recommended for sideshots measurements for projects that require precise elevations. Quality-assurance measurements made in F1 from the station to network-control points should be considered for surveys that require a high quantity of sideshots. The accuracy of a trigonometric-leveling survey essentially depends on four components (1) the skill and experience of the surveyor, (2) the environmental or site conditions, (3) the surveying method, and (4) the quality of the surveying instrumentation. Although components one and two can sometimes be difficult to evaluate and be highly variable, the objective of this manual is to disseminate information needed to identify, maintain, and operate quality land-surveying instrumentation, and to document procedures and best practices for preparing and executing precision trigonometric-leveling surveys in the USGS.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Michael L. Noll, Paul H. Rydlund. 2020-12-23. Procedures and best practices for trigonometric leveling in the U.S. Geological Survey. https://doi.org/10.3133/tm11d3

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

dMODELS, a MATLAB software package for modeling crustal deformation near volcanic centers and active faults using Global Navigation Satellite System data—User guide

dMODELS is a MATLAB software package that implements the most common analytical models used to interpret deformation measurements near faults and active volcanic centers. This manual focuses on inversion of deformation data from the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS). The included case studies emphasize the GNSS inversion component of the software. Source models include pressurized spherical, spheroidal, and horizontal sill (penny-crack) magma reservoirs in a homogeneous, elastic, isotropic, flat half-space. A topography correction is available for the spherical source. Dikes and faults are described following the mathematical notation for the rectangular dislocations in a homogeneous, elastic, flat half-space. Equations have been reviewed for typographical errors present in the original literature and verified against finite-element method numerical models. GNSS data from the 2006 eruption at Augustine Volcano, Alaska; the 1998–2000 unrest at Taal Volcano, Philippines; and the 2009 earthquake in L’Aquila, Italy, are used to demonstrate the application of the software package.

Techniques and Methods

Aspergillosis (Avian) case definition for wildlife

Diagnostic laboratories receive carcasses and samples for diagnostic evaluation and pathogen/toxin detection. Case definitions bring clarity and consistency to the evaluation process. Their use within and between organizations allows more uniform reporting of diseases and etiologic agents. The intent of a case definition is to provide scientifically based criteria for determining: (a) if an individual carcass has a specific disease and degree of confidence in that diagnosis and (b) if there is evidence of a pathogen or toxin in a carcass or sample (for example, swab, tissue sample, skin scraping, blood/serum sample, environmental sample, or other). This case definition is specific to aspergillosis and applies to all avian species.

Techniques and Methods

Field sampling guidelines for developing and verifying satellite remote sensing chlorophyll a concentration and fluorescence models in inland waters

Harmful algal blooms are increasing in frequency in inland waters across the United States, resulting in a need to monitor phytoplankton bloom events to track ecosystem health and productivity. Remote sensing of chlorophyll a values offers a cost-effective and powerful method for early detection and characterization of bloom events and serves as an overall indicator of water quality and trophic state, with regular, repeated sampling of landscape-wide, high spatial resolution measurements. Field measurements are necessary for developing and verifying chlorophyll a retrieval models. For model verification, chlorophyll a concentration or fluorescence and light attenuation measurements are needed; for model development, turbidity and colored dissolved organic matter concentration measurements are additionally needed; and for model development and verification, radiometric measurements, taxonomic identification of phytoplankton, inherent optical properties, and cyanotoxin concentration are further measurements that can provide context. This report outlines detailed methods and priority considerations for collecting high-quality field data in inland waters (defined as rivers, lakes, reservoirs, estuaries, streams, and wetlands). The described methods include best practices for collecting and preparing discretely collected water samples and for calibration, maintenance, and quality assurance and quality control of field sensors. Whereas the priorities will vary between applications, some general guidelines are to collect field samples (1) as close in time to a satellite overpass as possible, (2) from representative areas of the waterbody to capture the range of spatial variability, and (3) near the surface to match remote sensing reflectance data.

Techniques and Methods