Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Needed for accurate , ie order of 1cm absolute levels determination.
The benchmark of consideration is just one brick remaining in-situ after vehicle damage to a wall years ago. Reconstructing the mark from the remaining one 2 parts of the trident mark, taking a tracing off nearby ones, places the horizontal level mark about 2 cm above the centre of the replacement stretcher above. Looking around at other banchmarks in different towns and cities all have the level cut mark at the exact centre of stretchers. Anyone know what the criteria was, ie always without exception cut to the centre of a brick and then surveyed to that point, X,Y and Z? While at it ,as wwwland is no help. For flush bracket later forms is the level mark the centre of the shortened upper recess hole , in the styalised "blocky" form of the old War Dept trident arrow cut marks? -- Global sea level rise to 2100 from curve-fitted existing altimetry data http://diverse.4mg.com/slr.htm |
#2
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 12/06/2021 16:09, N_Cook wrote:
Needed for accurate , ie order of 1cm absolute levels determination. The benchmark of consideration is just one brick remaining in-situ after vehicle damage to a wall years ago. Reconstructing the mark from the remaining one 2 parts of the trident mark, taking a tracing off nearby ones, places the horizontal level mark about 2 cm above the centre of the replacement stretcher above. Looking around at other banchmarks in different towns and cities all have the level cut mark at the exact centre of stretchers. Anyone know what the criteria was, ie always without exception cut to the centre of a brick and then surveyed to that point, X,Y and Z? While at it ,as wwwland is no help. For flush bracket later forms is the level mark the centre of the shortened upper recess hole , in the styalised "blocky" form of the old War Dept trident arrow cut marks? If I have correctly understood what it says at https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/bus...et/legacy-data you ain't going to get an absolute accuracy of anything like 1cm anyway. -- Cheers, Roger |
#3
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 12 Jun 2021 18:47:43 +0100, Roger Mills
wrote: On 12/06/2021 16:09, N_Cook wrote: Needed for accurate , ie order of 1cm absolute levels determination. The benchmark of consideration is just one brick remaining in-situ after vehicle damage to a wall years ago. Reconstructing the mark from the remaining one 2 parts of the trident mark, taking a tracing off nearby ones, places the horizontal level mark about 2 cm above the centre of the replacement stretcher above. Looking around at other banchmarks in different towns and cities all have the level cut mark at the exact centre of stretchers. Anyone know what the criteria was, ie always without exception cut to the centre of a brick and then surveyed to that point, X,Y and Z? While at it ,as wwwland is no help. For flush bracket later forms is the level mark the centre of the shortened upper recess hole , in the styalised "blocky" form of the old War Dept trident arrow cut marks? If I have correctly understood what it says at https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/bus...et/legacy-data you ain't going to get an absolute accuracy of anything like 1cm anyway. The OS Blog https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/newsroom/blog/25-years-since-last-benchmark suggests that thanks to subsidence and other geological events, the old benchmarks can't be relied on for really accurate measurements. The one on the front wall of the house next-door-but-one has the line about 2cm down from the top surface of the stone it is carved into. Nick |
#4
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 12/06/2021 18:47, Roger Mills wrote:
On 12/06/2021 16:09, N_Cook wrote: Needed for accurate , ie order of 1cm absolute levels determination. The benchmark of consideration is just one brick remaining in-situ after vehicle damage to a wall years ago. Reconstructing the mark from the remaining one 2 parts of the trident mark, taking a tracing off nearby ones, places the horizontal level mark about 2 cm above the centre of the replacement stretcher above. Looking around at other banchmarks in different towns and cities all have the level cut mark at the exact centre of stretchers. Anyone know what the criteria was, ie always without exception cut to the centre of a brick and then surveyed to that point, X,Y and Z? While at it ,as wwwland is no help. For flush bracket later forms is the level mark the centre of the shortened upper recess hole , in the styalised "blocky" form of the old War Dept trident arrow cut marks? If I have correctly understood what it says at https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/bus...et/legacy-data you ain't going to get an absolute accuracy of anything like 1cm anyway. Fair enough for the optical-surveying sight lines of 1km or so. For this use with auto-level or laser-level with single-leg survey, over less than 100m, ie 50m sighting arms , 1cm is possible. OS benchmarks quoted on "National Grid" series maps to 1cm , Z-axis. As part of calibration routines my local group of benchmarks , checked both ways, are still within 2cm of the 1970 levels, over a total multi-leg span of about 400m. Using this fragment of benchmark as its the closest, so avoiding mult-leg surveying to the next nearest and the inherent inaccuracies, hence the query here as to validity of using of a partial mark. At least you did not say use d-GPS, nowhere near 1cm is possible there. The local archaelogists use their "total stations" for on-site surveying , but for the site reference points they cough up 20 quid a pop to OS for the details of the nearest old OS benchmark and optically they survey to that, having been seriously mis-placed by d-GPS for national placement -- Global sea level rise to 2100 from curve-fitted existing altimetry data http://diverse.4mg.com/slr.htm |
#5
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 12/06/2021 19:16, Nick Odell wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jun 2021 18:47:43 +0100, Roger Mills wrote: On 12/06/2021 16:09, N_Cook wrote: Needed for accurate , ie order of 1cm absolute levels determination. The benchmark of consideration is just one brick remaining in-situ after vehicle damage to a wall years ago. Reconstructing the mark from the remaining one 2 parts of the trident mark, taking a tracing off nearby ones, places the horizontal level mark about 2 cm above the centre of the replacement stretcher above. Looking around at other banchmarks in different towns and cities all have the level cut mark at the exact centre of stretchers. Anyone know what the criteria was, ie always without exception cut to the centre of a brick and then surveyed to that point, X,Y and Z? While at it ,as wwwland is no help. For flush bracket later forms is the level mark the centre of the shortened upper recess hole , in the styalised "blocky" form of the old War Dept trident arrow cut marks? If I have correctly understood what it says at https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/bus...et/legacy-data you ain't going to get an absolute accuracy of anything like 1cm anyway. The OS Blog https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/newsroom/blog/25-years-since-last-benchmark suggests that thanks to subsidence and other geological events, the old benchmarks can't be relied on for really accurate measurements. The one on the front wall of the house next-door-but-one has the line about 2cm down from the top surface of the stone it is carved into. Nick Yes one mark near me is useless as its on what is now a leaning wall. Another one I knew it was on the maps but had not seen until I was on a bus and the sun reflected off the mark. Carved ? cut mark into acid-etched blue granite aggregate concrete of a bridge pillar, so only some short segments of the 4 lines are sort of visible around the bits of granite. -- Global sea level rise to 2100 from curve-fitted existing altimetry data http://diverse.4mg.com/slr.htm |
#6
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 12/06/2021 19:26, N_Cook wrote:
On 12/06/2021 18:47, Roger Mills wrote: On 12/06/2021 16:09, N_Cook wrote: Needed for accurate , ie order of 1cm absolute levels determination. The benchmark of consideration is just one brick remaining in-situ after vehicle damage to a wall years ago. Reconstructing the mark from the remaining one 2 parts of the trident mark, taking a tracing off nearby ones, places the horizontal level mark about 2 cm above the centre of the replacement stretcher above. Looking around at other banchmarks in different towns and cities all have the level cut mark at the exact centre of stretchers. Anyone know what the criteria was, ie always without exception cut to the centre of a brick and then surveyed to that point, X,Y and Z? While at it ,as wwwland is no help. For flush bracket later forms is the level mark the centre of the shortened upper recess hole , in the styalised "blocky" form of the old War Dept trident arrow cut marks? If I have correctly understood what it says at https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/bus...et/legacy-data you ain't going to get an absolute accuracy of anything like 1cm anyway. Fair enough for the optical-surveying sight lines of 1km or so. For this use with auto-level or laser-level with single-leg survey, over less than 100m, ie 50m sighting arms , 1cm is possible. OS benchmarks quoted on "National Grid" series maps to 1cm , Z-axis. As part of calibration routines my local group of benchmarks , checked both ways, are still within 2cm of the 1970 levels, over a total multi-leg span of about 400m. Using this fragment of benchmark as its the closest, so avoiding mult-leg surveying to the next nearest and the inherent inaccuracies, hence the query here as to validity of using of a partial mark. At least you did not say use d-GPS, nowhere near 1cm is possible there. The local archaelogists use their "total stations" for on-site surveying , but for the site reference points they cough up 20 quid a pop to OS for the details of the nearest old OS benchmark and optically they survey to that,Â* having been seriously mis-placed by d-GPS for national placement Interestingly, the field next to my house has recently become a building site on which nearly 150 houses will be built. The developers have been using devices similar to https://leica-geosystems.com/en-gb/p...s/leica-gs18-t to mark out all the plots *and* to determine the levels for the foundations and all the drains. They claim that they can measure absolute altitude to an accuracy of a few mm. Seems magic to me because normal GPS equipment has a tolerance of tens of metres on altitude. -- Cheers, Roger |
#7
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 12/06/2021 22:16, Roger Mills wrote:
On 12/06/2021 19:26, N_Cook wrote: On 12/06/2021 18:47, Roger Mills wrote: On 12/06/2021 16:09, N_Cook wrote: Needed for accurate , ie order of 1cm absolute levels determination. The benchmark of consideration is just one brick remaining in-situ after vehicle damage to a wall years ago. Reconstructing the mark from the remaining one 2 parts of the trident mark, taking a tracing off nearby ones, places the horizontal level mark about 2 cm above the centre of the replacement stretcher above. Looking around at other banchmarks in different towns and cities all have the level cut mark at the exact centre of stretchers. Anyone know what the criteria was, ie always without exception cut to the centre of a brick and then surveyed to that point, X,Y and Z? While at it ,as wwwland is no help. For flush bracket later forms is the level mark the centre of the shortened upper recess hole , in the styalised "blocky" form of the old War Dept trident arrow cut marks? If I have correctly understood what it says at https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/bus...et/legacy-data you ain't going to get an absolute accuracy of anything like 1cm anyway. Fair enough for the optical-surveying sight lines of 1km or so. For this use with auto-level or laser-level with single-leg survey, over less than 100m, ie 50m sighting arms , 1cm is possible. OS benchmarks quoted on "National Grid" series maps to 1cm , Z-axis. As part of calibration routines my local group of benchmarks , checked both ways, are still within 2cm of the 1970 levels, over a total multi-leg span of about 400m. Using this fragment of benchmark as its the closest, so avoiding mult-leg surveying to the next nearest and the inherent inaccuracies, hence the query here as to validity of using of a partial mark. At least you did not say use d-GPS, nowhere near 1cm is possible there. The local archaelogists use their "total stations" for on-site surveying , but for the site reference points they cough up 20 quid a pop to OS for the details of the nearest old OS benchmark and optically they survey to that, having been seriously mis-placed by d-GPS for national placement Interestingly, the field next to my house has recently become a building site on which nearly 150 houses will be built. The developers have been using devices similar to https://leica-geosystems.com/en-gb/p...s/leica-gs18-t to mark out all the plots *and* to determine the levels for the foundations and all the drains. They claim that they can measure absolute altitude to an accuracy of a few mm. Seems magic to me because normal GPS equipment has a tolerance of tens of metres on altitude. I would not trust the American military as far as I could see them using high power binos. These days d-GPS tends to use a base station connected by cell-phone network to the surveyors station. The base station is fixed in position and then your outlier is deemed fixed to the base station receiving the same satellite signals and timing comparison and adjustment also deemed fixed for each usage. Forgetting about the about 50 types of routine corrections to any sort of GPS reading , from oxygen content and ionisation levels in the upper air , to relativistic effects of fast space craft, the local effects of the likes of trees and steelwork gives an incalculable to mess things up and cm accuracy is impossible, especially in the z sense. This is how the local archaeologists went wrong, previously using d-GPS, they had an important site that was not only entirely wrong in the z sense but was placed x,y sense in someone elses grounds. Since then they've coughed up 20 quid a time to OS for traditional optical surveying into the national grid structure. -- Global sea level rise to 2100 from curve-fitted existing altimetry data http://diverse.4mg.com/slr.htm |
#8
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 12/06/2021 18:47, Roger Mills wrote:
On 12/06/2021 16:09, N_Cook wrote: Needed for accurate , ie order of 1cm absolute levels determination. The benchmark of consideration is just one brick remaining in-situ after vehicle damage to a wall years ago. Reconstructing the mark from the remaining one 2 parts of the trident mark, taking a tracing off nearby ones, places the horizontal level mark about 2 cm above the centre of the replacement stretcher above. Looking around at other banchmarks in different towns and cities all have the level cut mark at the exact centre of stretchers. Anyone know what the criteria was, ie always without exception cut to the centre of a brick and then surveyed to that point, X,Y and Z? While at it ,as wwwland is no help. For flush bracket later forms is the level mark the centre of the shortened upper recess hole , in the styalised "blocky" form of the old War Dept trident arrow cut marks? If I have correctly understood what it says at https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/bus...et/legacy-data you ain't going to get an absolute accuracy of anything like 1cm anyway. They haven't used benchmarks for donkey's years anyway. Bill |
#9
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 15/06/2021 01:08, williamwright wrote:
On 12/06/2021 18:47, Roger Mills wrote: On 12/06/2021 16:09, N_Cook wrote: Needed for accurate , ie order of 1cm absolute levels determination. The benchmark of consideration is just one brick remaining in-situ after vehicle damage to a wall years ago. Reconstructing the mark from the remaining one 2 parts of the trident mark, taking a tracing off nearby ones, places the horizontal level mark about 2 cm above the centre of the replacement stretcher above. Looking around at other banchmarks in different towns and cities all have the level cut mark at the exact centre of stretchers. Anyone know what the criteria was, ie always without exception cut to the centre of a brick and then surveyed to that point, X,Y and Z? While at it ,as wwwland is no help. For flush bracket later forms is the level mark the centre of the shortened upper recess hole , in the styalised "blocky" form of the old War Dept trident arrow cut marks? If I have correctly understood what it says at https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/bus...et/legacy-data you ain't going to get an absolute accuracy of anything like 1cm anyway. They haven't used benchmarks for donkey's years anyway. Bill Ah, over-reliance on hi-tec. The last couple of days , back to normal now, major port Southampton VTS (Vessel Traffic Services) had been outputting the bubbler tide-gauge levels as being 0.3m too high for 2 days (think "Ever Given"). No one could be bothered looking out a window to a tide pole for mark1 eyeballs to check if there there was a major problem with the hi-tec tide gauge output. Then pull the plug on the dangerous hi-tec output, no output is safer than erroneously high output. -- Global sea level rise to 2100 from curve-fitted existing altimetry data http://diverse.4mg.com/slr.htm |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
What free cross-platform benchmark tools do you use to benchmark phones? | Electronics Repair | |||
Unisaws...Are the Old Ones "Better" than the New Ones? | Woodworking | |||
What's the grid size for ordnance survey maps 1:1250? | UK diy | |||
Benchmark AC Coils - Any good? (nt) | Home Repair | |||
BENCHMARK - HARD MAPLE WORKBENCH | Woodworking |