Posted By Richard Abbott on 3/24/2009 at 8:15 PM

Andrew Johnson asked, can you use stringing for boundary work? A very valid Q.

The very short answer is generally NO. Because you are mainly locating feature points.

If you had a long wall or fence line then it would be prudent to string the line, especially if uphill down dale as sometimes fences at the end can be off the computed boundary line, yet occupy the boundary in say the middle portion as abutting surveys have defined the line and fences made along the line. Generally , well here in S OZ, we locate the boundary occupation at corners to show their relation ship to the defined corner.

I am surprised at the number of respondents that join the dots.

Some good quotes worthy of comment...

Also, when the shots are taken sequentially, the point numbers are a good clue.

I would suggest that good point gathering is efficiency in movement. An example is the location of the top of a Kerb (curb) and the watertable (gutter). I walk once down the that line concurrently locating K and W. So sequence is K,W,W,K,K,W,W,K,K,W. At end when dumped I would have points with level and two stung lines. Numbering sequence not a clue.

I'm not against stringing by any means, if the job warrants it and the crew is well-versed in it.

All engineering jobs that require lines to be joined should be strung in the field , no matter how big or small.

Surveying is about consistency of procedure !

I mean do you say you will use log tables because you only have a three station traverse and use your computer program for larger traverses. OF COURSE NOT ! How will a crew ever learn to be come proficient if they do not repeat the same procedure.

These string codes vary with software and require practice to become proficient.

It is the responsibility of the surveyor / proprietor to ensure the crew are well trained in efficient procedure. I once had an employee who thought because he was moving that he was productive.

When stringing a feature line and there is a a feature point , say a tree , then it is efficient to locate it and then move on with the feature line code, or locate other adjacent points before continuing with feature line code.

I am wondering if stringing in the field is not practiced because the soft ware used with the instrument and the computer software does not permit efficient stringing, multiple stringing, adding point codes and returning to a string line.

Field is for gathering data not digesting it.

Then line stringing is gathering the data! For example a shed does not consist of 4 points it has enclosed sides, therefore should be strung. Furthermore with a coded string line that prevents a the model program from contouring inside the shed.

While on a shed sometimes it is efficient to locate just three points , thus only stringing two sides and then compute the fourth point in the office and string those two missing sides with the appropriate line code. That is considered as editing .

I'm a born again stringer!

Next time we will take what we learned on this project and it'll be even better and faster.

This comment nails it!

If the guy in the field is going to go to the trouble of drawing it in the book and putting the #'s by the shot,

What is the purpose of duplicating.

By all means write down station occupied data, with HT and HI, and at points of clarification add a point number on sketch where need special comments. But not put point number on a hard copy plot for say every natural surface point.

there's is NO way an office person (without having been on site) can draft up the linework quickly enough or correctly enough without proper linework codes and software.

This comment nailed it.

Whoever draws the map, immediately, has a much clearer picture of the site.

It may or may not be practical for you.
It's no magic bullet; we do it because it's second nature.

This comment also nails it.

I am working toward using field to finish, now that I'm a little slow.

What a great way to invest in your business during down time !

Half the fun of the job is drawing the map

I am afraid it is more about efficiently making $$$, for me the fun is seeing the lines joining as the raw data is first loaded onto the screen.

wish I could get the other guys to learn it

Well it is time for a round table conference at your office. Simply put if your company is into topographical and detail surveying then it is an investment to string in the field. Especially for example break lines along a water course with top and toe of banks, change in grades and edge water.

It is false economy to believe that a soloist or a drafter can sit in the office joining dots. It is far easier to remember , by writing in field book to join just a few certain lines, like the shed example.

Miss a break line recorded as natural surface points and a contour model could be seriously wrong.

The savings on the back end (reduction) makes field coding a solid way to reduce errors and time spent doing the drudgery of connecting the dots.

A valid comment.

Must say I had an email from a prominent poster who was absolutely amazed at the percentage of office dot joiners in 2009.

...I must confess, so am I, especially when the technology has been available now for 20 years!