SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE, BUILDING AND DESIGN

BACHELOR OF QUANTITY SURVEYING (HONOURS)

QSB60103 SITE SURVEYING

FIELD WORK 1st REPORT

LEVELLING

Name Student ID

Juan Roy Collie 0329004

Karen Lim Shi Chee 0329431

Lau Wan Yee 0328947

Lee Lin Hui 0322797

CONTENTS
No. Topic Page

1 Objectives 1

Introduction to Levelling
2.1 Definition of Levelling
2. 2.2 Uses of Levelling 2-3
2.3 Definition of terms used in Levelling

3. Apparatus used for levelling 4-6

4. Field Data 7-8

5. Adjusted Data 9 - 11

6. Discussion 12

7. Summary 13

8. Group Members 13
1.0 Objective
To find the elevation of given points in respect to an assumed Datum.

To enable student to have a basic knowledge on how to set up the instruments.

To give definitions as a basis for the proper understanding of levelling.

To understand the methods used in levelling.

To allow students to experience and expose to the actual working environment in

site.

To determine the error of mis-closure in order whether is it acceptable or not in

the levelling calculation.

To allow us to understand how to distribute different types of error from the data

collected on field.

1|Page
2.0 Introduction to Levelling

2.1 Definition of Levelling

Levelling is a process of determining the height of one level to another. It is used in

surveying to establish the elevation of a point relative to a datum, or establish a point at
a given elevation relative to a datum.

2.2 Uses of Levelling

To act as a referencing point - benchmarks

To provide data for determining the shape of the ground for drawing topographic
maps.
To find out the height of level in different points

2.3 Definition of terms used in Levelling

Level surface: A level surface is defined as a curved surface which at each point is
perpendicular to the direction of gravity at the point. Any surface parallel to the mean
spheroidal surface of the earth.

Datum: Datum is any surface to which elevation are referred. The mean sea level
affords a convenient datum world over, and elevations are commonly given as so much
above or below sea level. It is often more convenient, however, to assume some other
datum, specially, if only the relative elevation of points are required.

2|Page
Bench-Mark: It is a relatively permanent point of reference whose elevation with
respect to some assumed datum is known. It is used either as a starting point for
levelling or as a point upon which to close as a check.

Reduced level: It is the vertical distance between a survey point and the adopted level
datum. There are two methods for calculating reduced levels, namely the rise and fall
method and the height of collimation method.

Back-sight: The first reading taken on a staff immediately after setting up the
instrument. A back-sight is always taken on a point of known or assumed height.

Foresight: The last staff reading taken before moving the instrument to another
location.

Intermediate sight: All readings or sight that are taken between a back-sight and a
foresight.

Change point (Turning Point): It is a point which shows the shifting of the level. It is a
point on which foresight and back-sight are taken.

3|Page
3.0 Apparatus Used for levelling

Automatic level

The automatic level is used in measuring, surveying, and setting horizontal and vertical
levels. The instrument is situated on a tripod and then aligned to a levelled position
using levelling screws. The operator of the automatic level then looks through the
telescope attached to the instrument, while another person holds a graduated staff or
tape measure at the position under measurement.

Adjustable leg tripod

A surveyor's tripod is a gadget used to support any one of several surveying

instruments, such as theodolites, total stations, levels or transits. The surveyor will
adjust on the legs' platforms to securely anchor the legs in soil or drive the feet to a low
position on uneven, pock-marked pavement.

4|Page
Leg lengths are adjusted to bring the tripod head to a convenient height and make it
generally level. The mounting screw is pushed up under the instrument to connect the
instrument's base and screwed tight when the instrument is in the right position. The
level surface of the tripod head is known as foot plate and is used to support the
adjustable feet of the instrument.

Positioning the tripod and instrument precisely over an indicated mark on the ground or
benchmark requires intricate techniques.

Levelling Staff

A level staff, also called levelling rod, is a graduated wooden or aluminium rod. It used
with a levelling instrument to determine the difference in height between points or
heights of points above a datum surface. It cannot be used without a levelling
instrument.

The staff is available in lengths up to 5 metres. There is locking buttons at the back
section which is to provide the accurate length is maintained during usage. The bold
pattern E is designed to make it easier for the observer to read the scale through a
telescope.

5|Page
Staff Bubble

This is an instrument designed to indicate whether a surface is horizontal level or

vertical. This bubble level is attached behind section of levelling staff that to check the
accuracy of a surface level by ensure the bubble is in the centre of black circle.

6|Page
7|Page
4.0 Field Data

These are the raw data we gathered:

Back-sight- 1.447, 1.455, 1.434, 1,405, 1.550, 1.310, 1.365, 1.447, 1.326, 3.779,
1.451

Foresight- 3.702, 1.424, 1.513, 1.487, 1.219, 1.439, 1.558, 1.284, 1.385, 1.427,
1.5151

Height of Collimation method

8|Page
Backsight Intersight Foresight Height of collimation Reduced level Remarks
1.447 101.447 100.000 BM101
1.455 3.702 99.200 97.745 C.P
1.434 1.424 99.210 97.776 C.P
1.405 1.513 99.102 97.697 C.P
1.550 1.487 99.165 97.615 C.P
1.310 1.219 99.256 97.946 C.P
1.365 1.439 99.182 97.817 C.P
1.447 1.558 99.071 97.624 C.P
1.326 1.284 99.113 97.787 C.P
3.779 1.385 101.507 97.728 C.P
1.451 1.427 101.531 100.080 C.P
1.515 100.016 BM101
17.969 17.953 100.016
17.953 100.000
0.016 0.016

9|Page
Rise and Fall Method

Backsight Intersight Foresight Rise Fall Reduced level Remarks

1.447 100.000 BM101
1.455 3.702 2.255 97.745 C.P
1.434 1.424 0.031 97.776 C.P
1.405 1.513 0.079 97.697 C.P
1.550 1.487 0.082 97.615 C.P
1.310 1.219 0.331 97.946 C.P
1.365 1.439 0.129 97.817 C.P
1.447 1.558 0.193 97.624 C.P
1.326 1.284 0.163 97.787 C.P
3.779 1.385 0.059 97.728 C.P
1.451 1.427 2.352 100.080 C.P
1.515 0.064 100.016 BM101
17.969 17.953 2.877 2.861 100.016
17.953 2.861 100.000
0.016 0.016 0.016

10 | P a g e
5.0 Adjusted Data

After carrying out the necessary calculations we were able to produce a table containing
the reduced levels at each point, the correction per setup and thus the Adjusted
Reduced levels.

This is the table containing all of our data and performed calculations with Adjusted
Data

Height of Collimation method

BS IS FS Height of collimation Reduced level Distance Correction Adjusted RL Remarks

1.447 101.447 100.000 0 100.000 BM101
1.455 3.702 99.200 97.745 -0.00145 97.744 C.P
1.434 1.424 99.210 97.776 -0.00290 97.773 C.P
1.405 1.513 99.102 97.697 -0.00435 97.693 C.P
1.550 1.487 99.165 97.615 -0.00580 97.609 C.P
1.310 1.219 99.256 97.946 -0.00725 97.939 C.P
1.365 1.439 99.182 97.817 -0.00870 97.808 C.P
1.447 1.558 99.071 97.624 -0.01015 97.614 C.P
1.326 1.284 99.113 97.787 -0.01160 97.775 C.P
3.779 1.385 101.507 97.728 -0.01305 97.715 C.P
1.451 1.427 101.531 100.080 -0.01450 100.066 C.P
1.515 100.016 -0.01600 100.000 BM101
17.969 17.953 100.016
17.953 100.000 Arith
0.016 0.016 Checked

Accuracy check
Mis-closure:
The error of closure = 100.000 100.016
= 0.016m (16mm)

11 | P a g e
Number of setup, k = 11

Maximum allowable error of closure = 12

= 1211
= 39.80mm
Max allowable error > Mis closure, therefore the levelling is Acceptable

Correction Per Setup =

0.016
=
11

= 0.00145

Rise and Fall Method

12 | P a g e
 BS IS FS Rise Fall Reduced level Correction Adjusted RL Remarks
1.447 100.000 0 100.000 BM101
1.455 3.702 2.255 97.745 -0.00145 97.744 C.P
1.434 1.424 0.031 97.776 -0.00290 97.773 C.P
1.405 1.513 0.079 97.697 -0.00435 97.693 C.P
1.550 1.487 0.082 97.615 -0.00580 97.609 C.P
1.310 1.219 0.331 97.946 -0.00725 97.939 C.P
1.365 1.439 0.129 97.817 -0.00870 97.808 C.P
1.447 1.558 0.193 97.624 -0.01015 97.614 C.P
1.326 1.284 0.163 97.787 -0.01160 97.775 C.P
3.779 1.385 0.059 97.728 -0.01305 97.715 C.P
1.451 1.427 2.352 100.080 -0.01450 100.066 C.P
1.515 0.064 100.016 -0.01600 100.000 BM101
17.969 17.953 2.877 2.861 100.016
17.953 2.861 100.000 Arith
0.016 0.016 0.016 Checked

Accuracy check
Mis-closure:
The error of closure = 100.000 100.016
= 0.016m (16mm)
Number of setup, k = 11

Maximum allowable error of closure = 12

= 1211
= 39.80mm
Max allowable error > Mis closure, therefore the levelling is Acceptable

Correction Per Setup =

13 | P a g e
 0.016
=
11

= 0.00145

14 | P a g e
6.0 Discussion

During weeks 6 and 7 our group undertook a Vertical Control (Benchmark)

Survey around the Taylors University car park for our first site surveying assignment.
We were given a Bench mark point BM101 100.0m above the assumed Datum where
we commenced our levelling. The reduced levels of given points were required to be
found all around the car park. The level survey had to be looped back to point BM101
for completion.

In order to carry out our levelling we were required us to walk around the car park
with a levelling staff and Auto level to obtain Backsights and Foresights at the given
points. We did not find any Intersights as we setup in a different position for each point.
The maximum error of our levelling had to be calculated against number of setups since
the distance between setups was not being taken.

The levelling proved to be a challenge as our first attempt ended unsuccessfully.

A maximum allowable error of closure of 39.80mm was obtained against 11 setups.
After gathering our first readings we obtained a mid-closure of 2802 mm meaning we
were not able to close the loop successfully.

Our second attempt proved to be a success however. We were able to obtain a

Mid Closure of 16mm against a Maximum Error of 39.80mm.

15 | P a g e
7.0 Summary

After our first levelling attempt and failure we realized that more precaution and
accuracy was required if we wanted to obtain acceptable results. The failure proved to
be a good learning experience which enabled us to produce satisfying results on our
second attempt.

8.0 Group Photo

Group members:

From left to right: Lee Lin Hui, Karen Lim Shi Chee, Lau Wan Yee, Juan Roy Collie.

16 | P a g e