accuracy assessment of heights obtained from total station and level instrument using total least squares and ordinary least squares methods
Clicks: 88
ID: 248233
2016
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Improving Quality
0.0
/100
Combines engagement data with AI-assessed academic quality
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
24.9
/100
83 views
12 readers
Trending
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Abstract
Spirit levelling has been the traditional means of determining Reduced Levels (RL’s) of points by most surveyors. The assertion that the level instrument is the best instrument for determining elevations of points needs to be reviewed; this is because technological advancement is making the total station a very reliable tool for determining reduced levels of points. In order to achieve the objective of this research, reduced levels of stations were determined by a spirit level and a total station instrument. Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) and Total Least Squares (TLS) techniques were then applied to adjust the level network. Unlike OLS which considers errors only in the observation matrix, and adjusts observations in order to make the sum of its residuals minimum, TLS considers errors in both the observation matrix and the data matrix, thereby minimising the errors in both matrices. This was evident from the results obtained in this study such that OLS approximated the adjusted reduced levels, which compromises accuracy, whereas the opposite happened in the TLS adjustment results. Therefore, TLS was preferred to OLS and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was performed on the preferred TLS solution and the RL’s from the total station in order to ascertain how accurate the total station can be relative to the spirit level.
| Reference Key |
annan2016geoplanning:accuracy
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Richard Fiifi Annan;Yao Yevenyo Ziggah;John Ayer;Christian Amans Odutola |
| Journal | moneta e credito |
| Year | 2016 |
| DOI |
10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.87-92
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.