Vertical angle calibration of a theodolite

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Vertical angle calibration of a theodolite"

Brook Thornton
5 years ago
Views:

1 Test and Measurements Conference 2016 Vertical angle calibration of a theodolite Poloko Kuduntwane 27/09/016

Introduction Background As NMISA there is a need to calibrate specialized equipment and artefacts mainly used for calibrating the vertical angles of theodolites in the industry, with an accuracy of 0.

2 Introduction Background As NMISA there is a need to calibrate specialized equipment and artefacts mainly used for calibrating the vertical angles of theodolites in the industry, with an accuracy of 0.2 arc sec. Horizontal angles are currently calibrated. Collimator at 30 deg Collimator at 0 deg Contents Collimator at -30 deg General calibration methods found on literature Theodolite Errors NMISA proposed calibration methods for investigation Project Results

Trigonometric method (angle determination by means of linear

3 General Angle Calibration Methods 1. Solid angular gauge method using polygons (multiangular prisms) 2. Trigonometric method (angle determination by means of linear measurements) 3. Goniometric method (plane angle determination by means of a circular scale) Applications of these methods 1 2 3

4 Theodolite Errors Trunnion axis is not perpendicular to the vertical axis Line of sight is not perpendicular to the trunnion axis Vertical axis is not plumb The vertical angle collimation is out of adjustment

Two NMISA Proposed Vertical Angle Calibration Methods Method 1: Solid angular gauge method using polygons This method uses an auto-collimator against a 12 faces precision polygon with the pitch of

5 Two NMISA Proposed Vertical Angle Calibration Methods Method 1: Solid angular gauge method using polygons This method uses an auto-collimator against a 12 faces precision polygon with the pitch of the angle measurements (due to the angle between faces) of 30 The disadvantage of this method is that it can only check a few number of values or angles Autocollimator Polygon NMISA proposed calibration method/setup The polygon was attached to the theodolite telescope through a special aluminium shaft, which allows the telescope to rotate in conjunction with the polygon Aluminium Shaft Polygon

6 Method 2: Trigonometric method (angle determination by means of linear measurements) Proposed method is based on a comparison of the angle measured by the theodolite and the reference angle determined by measuring two distances the horizontal (the distance between the theodolite vertical axis and the vertically positioned target) and the vertical (the distance between the target and the vertically positioned reference EDM) Because it is difficult to measure the distance l from the rotation axis of the theodolite telescope, the vertical bar with the target is displaced and the target is also displaced upwards until it is in the centre of the telescope reticle. The new reference angle can be expressed as: φ = arctan( h l ) where h - the known calibrated vertical distance of the displaced target and l - the known calibrated horizontal distance of the displaced vertical bar.

7 NMISA Clinometer Used For Comparing Results Clinometer Theodolite

8 Experimental Results (Method 1) Averages and deviations from 5 measurements (Serial number: 1) Nominal Angle Measured Angle Theodolite Deviation Theodolite Measured Angle Clinometer Deviation Clinometer ,3128 3, ,254 0, ,0004 0,0004 0,704 0, ,6469 3, ,698 0,698

9 Averages and deviations from 5 measurements (Serial number: DAST 9434) Nominal Angle Measured Angle Theodolite Deviation Theodolite Measured Angle Clinometer Deviation Clinometer ,3093 3, ,484 0, ,0003 0,0003 0,530 0, ,6140 3, ,494 0,506

10 Experimental Results (Method 2) Averages and deviations from three measurements (Serial number: 1) Nominal Angle Measured Angle Deviation ,6175 3, ,0003 0, ,9825 3,0175

11 Averages and deviations from three measurements (Serial number: DAST 9434) Nominal Angle Measured Angle Deviation ,3980 3, ,0004 0, ,5219 3,4781

12 Conclusions The two methods results are in agreement with each other. The deviations of the average values from the nominal values is too big i.e. around 3.5 degrees for both the methods and both the theodolites, even though the repeatability of the measurement is good. This inaccuracy of the theodolites might be caused by the mounting of the attachment shaft for the polygon, which might have tampered with the angle-encoder/scale inside the theodolites. Another reason might be that the theodolites were simply inaccurate due to the previously discussed theodolite errors, as the measurements with Fujiyama Totalstation were better, within arc-seconds and minutes accurate. With method 2, there were many alignment challenges. The vertical distances from the base reference to the target, were measured by the EDM on a flat plane of the target. The flatness of this plane was also unknown. The vertical axis of the theodolite and its telescope could have not been parallel with the vertical axis of the vertical bar which the target is been adjusted on. The next step is to repeat the measurements with a new and high accuracy theodolite.

13 The End QUESTIONS???

CE 260 SURVEYING CHAPTER 5 THEODOLITES

CE 260 SURVEYING CHAPTER 5 THEODOLITES General Background: Theodolites or Transits are surveying instruments designed to precisely measure horizontal and vertical angles. 1 They are used to establish straight