CHAPTER 1: PROJECT TWO

1.1 TWO PEG TEST ON THE DUMPY LEVEL USED ON RECONSTRUCTION

OF THE MAKERERE MAIN BUILDING

1.1.1 Introduction
A two peg test checks whether your dumpy level is capable of showing a true horizontal reading.
This is vital to ensure your measurements are accurate and reliable.
The two peg test tells you the measurement that your level is out over the distance you test over.
If the two peg test is showing an unacceptable error, then you must withdraw the equipment and
get it serviced by an appropriate company.

1.1.2 Objectives
i. To ensure that once temporary adjustments to the level have been made, the line of
collimation of the instrument is truly horizontal hence it caters for the collimation error of
the instrument.
ii. To ensure measurements are accurate and reliable

1.1.3 Instrumentation
i. Panga.
ii. Nails
iii. Hammer
iv. Dumpy level.
v. Tripod stand.
vi. Leveling Staff.

1.1.4 Methodology
On a fairly level ground, two point A and B were marked at a distance of L meter apart.
The dumpy level was set up midway between the points at C and leveled. The leveling staff was
placed at A and B in turn and staff readings, S1 at B and S2 at A were taken.
The two readings were as follows
S1 = (S11+x) and S2 = (S12+x)
 where
S1 and S2 are the staff readings that would have been obtained if the line of collimation was truly
horizontal as required.
x is the error in each reading due to the collimation error in each reading, the effect of which is to
tilt the line of sight by angle.
However much the figure below shows the line of collimation to be above the horizontal, it can be
above or below.
Since AC = CB, the error, x in the reading S1 and S2 was the same and the difference between
readings, S1 and S2 gives
S1- S2 = (S11+x) - (S12+x) = S11- S12
which gave the true difference in height between A and B.
This demonstrated that if the collimation error was present in a level, the effect of this cancels out
when height differences are computed provided readings were taken over equal sighting distances..
The level was moved so that it is (L/10) m from point B at D and readings S3 and S4 are taken as
shown in figure below. The difference between readings S3 and S4 gave (S3- S4) which was the
apparent difference in height between A and B.
See Appendix D Donor Requirements for further information.

Figure 1 Permanent adjustment to a level at point C

Figure 2 Permanent adjustment to a level at point D

 S1 1.346m
S2 1.183m
S3 1.339m
S4 1.174m
Table 1 Showing two peg test readings obtained

1.1.5 Analysis
If the level was in perfect adjustment then (S1- S2) would equate to (S3- S4). However there was
difference between the true and apparent heights and since this had been measured over distance
of Lm, the collimation error for the level was given by the equation below
Collimation error, e = (S1- S2) - (S3- S4) per Lm
If the collimation error, e was found to be less than about +/-1mm per 20 meters the level would
be assumed to be in adjustment
If the collimation error, e was found to be greater than about +/-1mm per 20 meters the level has
to be adjusted i.e. by loosening the adjusting screw and moving the reticule until reading S14 is
obtained for automatic and digital levels.
The collimation error, e is then calculated from the formula below
Collimation error, e = (S1 – S2) – (S3 – S4)
e = (1.346 – 1.183) – (1.339 – 1.174)
e = -0.002m per 30 meters
For the instrument in position D, S14 the reading that should have been obtained on the Staff when
held at A is
S14 = S4 – [Collimation error per meter * Sighting Distance]
S14 = 1.174 – [(-0.002 / 30)*33]
S14 = 1.1762
And
S13 = S3 – [Collimation error per meter * Sighting Distance]
S13 = 1.339 – [(-0.002 / 30)*3]
S13 = 1.3392
 CHECK
(S13– S14) = (S1 – S2)
(1.3392 – 1.1762) = (1.346 – 1.183)
0.163 = 0.163
Since the collimation error, e = -1.3333mm per 20 meters is within than allowable collimation
error of +/-1mm per 20 meters hence our instrument was in correct adjustments and continued to
use it for other exercises were it was required.

1.1.6 Challenges
i. The relatively steep slope terrain gave us a difficult time which took us longer to finish the
exercise.
ii. Wind kept on shaking the staff and this made it difficult to get correct reading because we
had to take more time to view the exact point on the staff.
iii. We were also affected by the rain and hot climate during the exercise which made us to
finish late.

1.1.7 Recommendation
I hereby recommended the following
i. The staff should be kept vertically for accurate reading using method of waving the staff
and taking the lowest reading.
ii. The bubble in the dumpy level should be central to obtain an accurate line of sight.
iii. To avoid errors, read the staff in the increasing direction of readings on the staff.
iv. Avoid work in very hot climate because it may harm the instrument so the instrument
should be protected from heat.
 CHAPTER 2: PROJECT TWO

2.1 SETTING OUT OF MAKERERE UNIVERSITY MAIN BUILDING

2.1.1 Introduction
Setting out is the process of surveying were the positions and levels of buildings, roads, drainages,
sewers, and all other engineering projects as already marked on a plan are transferred to the ground
by a variety of methods and by specifically manufactured instruments.
OR This the process by which information is taken from construction design drawings and then
pegs, profiles or other marks are set to control the construction work and to ensure that each
element is constructed in the right position and to the correct level. It is simply the physical transfer
of plan onto the ground.
The aim of the practical survey is to set out Makerere University main building, taking an existing
structure as a reference

2.1.2 Objectives
i. To ensure that each element is constructed to the correct level.
ii. To position the works in their correct relative and absolute positions,

2.1.3 Instrumentation
i. Pegs: It was used to mark point on the ground.
ii. Profile Boards: It represented the setback and also take some markings on it as a guide.
iii. Hammer: It was used to drive nails in the wood and pegs in the ground.
iv. Marking Tools: It was used when marking and writing.
v. Rope/string: It was used as guide through the practical.
vi. Nails: It was used to create bonding between peg and profile broad.
vii. Measuring Tape: It was used to measure distances.
viii. Ranging Poles: It was used to extend and maintain a straight line by ranging .
ix. Total station
x. Tripod stand.
xi. Reflecting prism
2.1.4 Methodology
Field checks were carried out on the survey control already established on site. Many structures
in civil engineering consist of steel or reinforced concrete columns supporting floor slabs and the
new Makerere main building was to be built using Reinforced Cement Concrete (RCC) columns.
As the disposition of these columns is inevitably that they are at right angles to each other, the use
of a grid, where the grid intersections define the position of the columns, greatly facilitates setting
out. It was possible to define several grids as explained below.
i. Survey grid: This is the rectangular coordinate system on which the original topographic
survey is carried out.
ii. Site grid: This is the position and direction of the main building lines of the project. The
best position for such a grid were be determined by simply aligning the site grid over the
original plan using AutoCAD Civil 3D so that its best position can be located in relation to
the orientation of the major units designed thereon.
In order to set out the site grid, it was convenient to translate the coordinates of the site grid to
those of the survey grid using the well-known transformation formula:
E = Ediff + E1cosθ − N1sinθ
N= Ndiff + N1cos θ + E1sin θ
where
Ediff, Ndiff means difference in easting and northing of the respective grid origins
E1, N1 means the coordinates of the point on the site grid
θ means relative rotation of the two grids
E, N means the coordinates of the point transformed to the survey grid
Thus, selected points, say X and Y had their site-grid coordinate values transformed to that of the
survey grid and so set-out by polars and intersection from the survey control.
Now, using XY as the baseline, the site grids were set out using total station and steel tape, all
angles being turned off on both faces and grid intervals carefully fixed using the steel tape under
standard tension.
When the site grids had been established, each line of the grids were carefully referenced to marks
fixed clear of the area of work. As an added precaution, these marks were further referenced to
existing control or permanent, stable, on-site detail.
 iii. Structural grid: This is used to locate the position of the structural elements within the
structure and is physically established usually on the concrete floor slab. It may be used
where the relative positions of points are much more important than the absolute positions,
such as for the holding down bolts of a steel frame structure.
The advantages of such a grids are that the lines of sight are set out in a regular pattern and so can
be checked by eye even for small errors and that there is more check on points set out from the
grid than if those points were set out individually by bearing and distance or by coordinates from
a total station.
For buildings with normal strip foundations like Makerere main building, its corners of the external
walls were established by pegs located directly from the survey control and by measurement from
the site grids. As these pegs would be disturbed in the initial excavations, their positions were
transferred by FOIF total station onto the profile boards set well clear of the area of disturbance.
Prior to this, their positions were checked by measuring the diagonals.

Figure 3 Diagonal checks

 Figure 4 Structural grids aligned onto site grids using AutoCAD

Figure 5 Makerere main building basement floor plan showing structural grids
The profile boards were set horizontal with their top edge at some predetermined level such as
damp proof course (DPC) or finished floor level (FFL). Wall widths, foundation widths, etc., were
to be set out along the board with the aid of a steel tape and their positions defined by saw-cuts.
These were arranged around the Makerere main building.
Strings stretched between the appropriate marks were used to clearly define the line of
construction. Structural grid were established to an accuracy of about ±2 to 3 mm to ensure that
prefabricated beams and steelwork fit together without any distortion.
The position of the concrete floor slab were established in same manner described above. Due to
the accuracy required, the calibrated FOIF total station and standardized steel tape corrected for
temperature and tension were used.
Once the bases for the steel columns were established, the axes defined the center of each column
to be marked on.

See Appendix A for further information.

2.1.5 Conclusion
In conclusion, the setting out exercise was conducted professionally and successfully in
accordance with the updated architectural drawings as determined by the existing structure to be
retained and superimposed with the new structure as it was required.

2.1.6 Challenges
i. Bad weather conditions especially rainfall and sunshine that could not enable us to carry
out the exercise.
ii. Problem in finding the actual allocation of some control points
iii. Ignorance of the public about survey work, for example the people would dig out the pegs
which signified positions

2.1.7 Recommendation
I hereby recommended the followings:
i. Elevate control points above the ground to protect them from soil erosion and to safeguard
them from being tempered with.
ii. Clear signs should be placed next to control points.
iii. Cross check to specify any errors that have been made through computing the diagonals
prior to the works to determine errors during the work in the field.
iv. Begin setting out from the major control lines and then proceed to other parts of the
building to prevent accumulative errors
v. Establish secondary control points from the main control points instead of using other
secondary control point would be repeated for other points and might increase. .