Accuracy Assessment of Height Difference Using Total Station and Levelling Instrument

ABSTRACT

Height observations are one of the most fundamental measurement types in surveying and geodetic science-related areas. This study aimed at analyzing and comparing heights of points obtained using total station and automatic level instruments. To achieve this aim, a field study was carried out within the Obanla campus of the Federal University of Technology, Akure. The total station was used to set out 20 metres of grid points over a total area of 200 metres by 100 metres within the study area. With the grid points serving as the station points, a total of 50 stations were established for this study. The data obtained from spirit levelling was reduced using the height of the instrument method. The computed accuracy for the levelling operation was 11mm, meeting the standard accuracy limits for third-order levelling. The maximum and minimum heights obtained using the automatic level instrument are 385.880m and 379.412m respectively, and 385.921m and 379.472m respectively using the total station instrument. The differences between the heights obtained using both instruments were 41mm and 60mm respectively. Statistical analysis using the independent-sample T-test at the 95% confidence level showed that there was no significant difference in the performance of the two instruments in fitting the height of points. Therefore, the Total station and spirit-level instruments can be used interchangeably for terrain height determination.

References

• Arora, M.K. and Badjatia, R.C. (2011), An introduction to Geomatics Engineering”, 1st Edition, published by Nem Chand and Bros., Roorkee, India.
• Albattah, M. M. S., Al Rawashdeh, S. G., Al Rawashdeh, B. S., & Sadoun, B. (2021). Assessment of geomatics engineering techniques for landslides investigations for traffic safety. The Egyptian Journal of Remote Sensing and Space Sciences, 24, 805–814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrs.2021.06.007
• Audu, H.A.P., Tijjani, M.Y. (2017). Comparative Assessment of the Accuracy of the Elevation differences obtained from different Geomatics Techniques and Instruments. Nigerian Journal of Environmental Sciences and Technology Vol 1, No. 1 pp 136 – 145
• Ayan, T. (2001). Geodetic Network Densification in Istanbul, IGNA (Istanbul GPS Network), IV. Turkish–German Joint Geodetic Days, Berlin.
• Badejo, O.T., Aleem, K.F., and Olaleye, J.B. (2016). Replacing Orthometric Heights with Ellipsoidal Heights in Engineering Surveys. Nigerian Journal of Technology 35(4), 761-768
• Beshr, A.A.A.; Abo Elnaga, I.M. ( 2011). Investigating the Accuracy of Digital Levels and Reflectorless Total Stations for Purposes of Geodetic Engineering. Eng. J. 50, 399–405
• Chaitanya, J.S.N., Chandramouli, K., Divya, K., Hussen, P. (2023) A review study on total station. International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science 12(2)
• Chella Kavitha, M.N.; Viswanath, R.; Kavibharathi, P.; Aakash, K.; Balajimanikandan, M. A (2018).Comparative Study of Conventional Surveying Techniques with Total Station and GPS. International Journal of Civil Engineering Technology, 9, 440–446
• Doma, M. I. & El Shoney, A. F. (2012). Arrangement of the redundant observations for establishment of a GPS network using “LP” method. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science, 59(4), 305-321
• Ehigiator-Irughe, R. and Konofua, S. (2016), Accuracy Standard of UNIBEN First order GNSS Geodetic Controls. Journal of the Nigerian Institution of Production Engineers, Benin City, Vol. 20, pp 145-149.
• Ehiorobo, J.O. (2002), GIS in Infrastructural Development and Management”, Technical Transaction, Journal of the Nigerian Institution of Production Engineers, Benin City, Vol.7, No 3, pp 136-146.
• Eteje S. O., Ono M. N., Oduyebo O. F. (2018). Practical Local Geoid Model Determination for Mean Sea Level Heights of Surveys and Stable Building Projects. IOSR Journal of Environmental Science, Toxicology and Food Technology 12(6), 30-37. DOI: 10.9790/2402-1206013037
• Featherstone, W. E. (2002). Height systems and vertical datums: A review. Reports on Geodesy, 49(1), 97-107
• Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC), (1998), “Geospatial Positioning Standards”, Standards for Geodetic Networks of the Geodetic Control Subcommittee of FGDC, Virginia, USA
• Ghilani, C. D., & Wolf, P. R. (2014). Elementary Surveying: An Introduction to Geomatics (14th ed.). Prentice Hall.
• Henriques, M. J., & Casaca, J. M. (2001). The history of levelling in Portugal. Journal of Geodesy, 74(8), 672-677
• Hinton, P. (2004). Statistics explained. London: Routledge.
• Abdullahi and N. A. Yelwa, (2016). Structural Deformation Monitoring Surveys of New Administrative Building of Federal School of Surveying, Oyo – Nigeria, International Journal of Science and Technology, vol. 6, no. 1.
• Idoko, A. I., Sam, A. A., & Eboigbe, A. M. (2020). Comparison of Orthometric Heights Obtained Using Total Station and Differential Global Positioning Systems (DGPS) With Precise Levels Instruments. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, 11(9), 15-28. doi:10.9790/1813-0908011522
• Kumar, M. (2005). When ellipsoidal heights will do the job, why look elsewhere? Surveying and Land Information Science, 65(2), 91-94
• Lee, J., & Rho, T. (2001). Application to leveling using total station. In New Technology for a New Century International Conference FIG Working Week 2001. Seoul, Korea: FIG Conference Proceedings.
• Maembe, w. (2012). Potential application of Total Station Leveling as a Precise Geodetic Leveling. B.Sc. Thesis, Department of Geomatics Ardhi University, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
• Odumosu J. O., Ajayi O. G., Idowu, F. F., Adesina E. A., (2018): Evaluation of the Various Orthometric Height Systems and the Nigerian Scenario – A Case Study of Lagos State. Journal of King Saud University – Engineering Sciences, 30, 46-53
• Otakar, S. & Josef, W. (2004). Optimized Technology for GPS Height Determination. FIG Working Week 2004 Athens, Greece, May 22-27, 1-8.
• Otoo-Kwofie, M. (2015). Height determination and its applications in engineering surveying. International Journal of Engineering Research and Technology, 4(9), 262-272
• Putra, A. B., Arumsari, P., Cahyono, C., Sarigih, J. F. B., & Kosalim, V. (2023). Building infrastructure analysis using total station and unmanned aerial vehicle drone for surveying and modelling. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Eco Engineering Development 2022 (ICEED 2022) (p. 012006). IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1169. IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1169/1/012006
• Schofield, W., & Breach, M. (2007). Engineering Surveying (6th ed.). Butterworth-Heinemann.
• Iduma, R. E. O., & Emakoji, M. (2023). Statistical assessment of the difference between the height differences obtained by spirit and trigonometric leveling techniques. European Modern Studies Journal, 7(2), 222. https://doi.org/10.59573/emsj.7(2)2023.21
• Simbolon, A. B. S., Yuwono, B. D., & Amarrohman, F. J. (2017). Comparatory analysis of the accuracy of registration methods between combination methods and traverse methods using terrestrial laser scanner in modeling 3-dimensional objects. Undip Journal of Geodesy, 6(4), 285-294. https://doi.org/10.14710/jgundip.2017.18153
• Shrestha, N. N. (1988). Levelling Instruction Book. Survey Department, Geodetic Survey Branch.
• Tata, H., Olatunji, R. I. (2020). Comparative Analysis of Change between Ellipsoidal Height Differences and Equivalent Orthometric Height Difference. Ghana Journal of Geography, 12(1):132-144
• Uren, J., & Price, W. F. (2010). Surveying for Engineers (5th ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.
• Vaníček, P., & Krakiwsky, E. J. (1986). Geodesy: The concepts (2nd ed.). North-Holland.

Download all article in PDF

WSN 189 (2024) 87-101

ADVERTISEMENT