FEU INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

Surveying Laboratory Date: May 26, 2021

Laboratory Report Number: 1 Engr. Mark Ondac/Engr. Ivan Karl Camacho

Group Number: 2
Members:
Bueno, Joshua Miguel Capucao, Valerie May Rose Juliano, Embry Jade

(PHOTO) (PHOTO) (PHOTO)

Signature: Signature: Signature:

Navarro, Anthony Linn Teodones, John Carlo

(PHOTO)

Signature: Signature:

A. Objectives

1. To obtain the pace factors to be used in surveying.

2. To estimate linear distance using the pace factor.

3. To determine the linear distance using the standard tape.

4. To compare the taped distance and paced distance.

Activity Guide:
1. Establish the points 1 and 2 as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Points for distance pacing and taping exercise.

2. Mark the points 1 and 2 as a line using the chalk. Make sure it is visible.

3. These indicative points serve as end points of the line to be used for pace factor determination. Try
to tape a distance of 30m. or any fixed distance nearest to 30m.

GUIDED QUESTIONS:

1. What is the length of the pacing line to get pace factor?

- The length of pacing line is 15 meters.

2. How many paces did each person take for each trial?

Pacer A Pacer B

Trial No. Of Paces

1 24 24

2 25 25

3 24 24
3. What is the corresponding pace factor of each person?

Pacer A Pacer B

Trial Pace Factor(m/pace)

1 0.625 0.625

2 0.6 0.6

3 0.625 0.625

▪ Both Pacers A and B have an average pace factor of 0.617 m/pace.

4. What is the length of the paced line from Gate 1 to Gate 2 using each of the pace factor?

Pacer A Pacer B

Trial Length of Paced line (m)

1 67.5 67.5
2 64.8 64.8
3 67.5 67.5

▪ Pacers A and B both have an average paced line length of 66.636m.

B. Data Capture: (screenshots from the video where data is collected, label the images properly)

Pacing Trial 1 = 24 Paces

Pacing Trial 2 = 25 Paces

Pacing Trial 3 = 24 Paces

 Taped Distance = 65.02 m.

Start of Pacing the Line End of Pacing the Line

Pacing the Distance GATE 1 to GATE 2 = 108 Paces

C. Calculations (handwritten)
D. Results and Discussion

3. Determine your pace factor using the table below. Make sure your pacing as you walk is as natural as
possible to achieve consistency in results.

No. of Taped Pace Factor Average Pace

Line Trial
Paces Distance (m) (m/pace) Factor (m/pace)
1-2 1 24 0.625
2-1 2 25 15 0.6 0.617
1-2 3 24 0.625
4. Using your average pace factor, count your pace count to measure Point 3 to 4 (FEU Gate 1 to Gate 2)
and fill-out the table below.

Name of Pacer Pace factor (m/pace) Number of paces Distance (m)

A 0.617 108 66.636
B 0.617 108 66.636
Average: 66.636

5. Now using the tape, measure the distance from Point 3 to 4. Compare the distance together using the
Taping method and Pacing method. Fill-out the table below.

Point 3 to 4 Paced Distance Taped Distance (m)

(m)
Gate 1 to Gate 2 66.636 65.02

6. Determine the precision of both measurements using the % Difference formula.

| Taped Distance – Paced Distance |

% Difference = ∗ 100%
Taped Distance

| 65.02 – 66.636 |
% Difference = ∗ 100%
65.02

% Difference = 2.485%
E. Observation
Based on the results of the distance computed using the subjects’ pace factors, the percentage
error of 2.485% from the taped distance may be deemed negligible. However, this percentage
was taken from the mean of three (3) trials conducted for the pace factor. If we based the pace
factor on the individual data gathered from the three trials, we would arrive at various
percentages. We have attributed this to human errors; most likely by the subjects’ change in
distance per stride for each trial. Albeit, the pace factors gathered from the trials were precise,
with only a tenth or a thousandth of a difference between each datum.

F. Conclusion
It has been found through this experiment that pace factor can be a useful tool when gathering
data for surveying, especially for when there is a lack of more accurate measurement tools.
Pace factor, which we have found by dividing the paced distance with the number of paces, will
deliver more accurate results with more trials so as to provide a mean that is close to the actual
measurement. However, the results show that there may still be some discrepancies with
actual measurement, but pace factor can provide a safe estimate for the distance of a straight
line. The experiment has also found taping to be the more accurate measurement tool, with
minute human errors compared to pace factor as it does not require the data to be blemished
with inefficiency from the test subject.
 G. Rubrics (Paste the rubrics in this section, make sure that the cells for the scores in criteria 3-5
are blank)
Criteria Ratings Pts
Activity 5 pts 4 pts 3 pts 2 pts 1 pts 0 pts
Conduct Excellent Very Good Good Fair Needs
Improvement No
Member Member Member Member Marks
follows good follows follows follows Member
and safe good and good and good and does not follow
laboratory safe safe safe good and safe
practice at all laboratory laboratory laboratory laboratory
times in practice at practice practice practice in the
the conduct of all times in most of the some of conduct of acti
activity and the conduct
5pts
time in the the time
encourages of activity conduct of in the
others to do the activity conduct
same. of activity

Instrument 5 pts 4 pts 3 pts 2 pts 1 pts 0 pts

Operation Excellent Very Good Good Fair Needs No
and Improvement Marks
Material Member is able Member is Member is Member
Handlin to operate the able to able to is able to Member is
equipment and operate the operate the operate unable to
instruments with equipment equipment the operate the
ease and and and equipmen equipment and
without instruments instruments t and instruments 5pts
supervision with ease with instrumen .
and with supervision ts with
minimum much
supervision supervisio
n

Data 5 pts 4 pts 3 pts 2 pts 1 pts 0 pts

Collection Excellent Very Good Good Fair Needs No
Improvement Marks
The group The group The group The
presents presents presents m group The group
relevant, more than minimum presents presents mostly
complete, and the required relevant irrelevant data.
accurate data in minimum data that but partial
an organized required are relevant and
and coherent data that and inaccurat
manner are relevant accurate. e data.
with visual and
representat ions accurate.
such as tables,
 graphs, etc.

Analysis and 5 pts 4 pts 3 pts 2 pts 1 pts 0 pts

Evaluation Excellent Very Good Good Fair Needs No Mark
Improvement
The group uses The group The group The group
appropriate uses uses attempts The group
tools and/or appropriate appropriate to analyze makes no
techniques and tools tools the data attempt to
arrives at and/or and/or but uses analyze the
correct results; techniques techniques inappropri data.
and validates and arrives and arrives ate tools
results with at correct at correct and/or
theories. results; and results. technique
Consequen validates s
tly, relates results with
results to other theories.
knowledge.

Interpretati on 5 pts 4 pts 3 pts 2 pts 1 pts 0 pts

and Excellent Very Good Good Fair Needs No
Conclusion Improvem ent Marks
The group The group The group The group
presents clear presents presents presents The group
and logical clear and clear and vague presents no
interpretati on of logical logical interpreta interpretati on
results and interpretati interpretati tion of of results and
arrives at correct on of on of results conclusion.
conclusion and results and results and and
relates these to arrives at arrives at arrives at
all of the correct correct incorrect
objectives. conclusion conclusion. conclusio
and n.
partially
relates
these to
the
objectives.

TOTAL 25pts.