Geodetic Network

8 Optimal Design:
An Overview
8.1 Statement of the Problem
As discussed in the Introduction, network design is the first Step towards
establishing a geodetic network. In order to prevent the whole operation from faili
ng, the surveyors/engineexs in charge should know about the result of their work
cording to the pre-set objectives any rne&surement campaign is started. At the
design stage of a geodetic network, the fundamental problem that a surveying
engineer faces is how to decide on its configuration i.e., the point location, how to
choose the types of geodetic observations, and how to measure the networkå
Conc€ptually, the purpose Of network optimal design network optimization is in
Fneral understood to design an optimum network configuration and an
optimum observing plan that Will satisfy the pre-set network quality With the
minimum ef other words, after the network quality requirements, i.e., the quality
of the nal products (for instance, precision and reliability), are given, the
technique of network optimization allows for the finding or such an optimum
network configuration and an optimum set ofobservations that will satisfy tlrse
requirements with the minimum cost (cf. Grafarend, 1974; Cross, 1985', Schmitt,
-1985; Schaffrin, 1985', Kuang, 1991). Practically, the technique of network
optimization serves to help us make decisions on which insuuments should be
selected from the hundreds of available models of various geodetic
instmments and where they should located and how the network should
measured in order to estimate the unknown parameters and achieve the
desired network quality critelia derived from and determined by the purpose
of the network. An optimized surveying scheme will. therefore, ensure the
most economic field campaign. and it will help in identifying and eliminating
gross errors in observations as well as in minimizing the effects of
undetectable gross errors existing in the observatior. Of interest to surveying
engineers is that it enables surveyors to avoid observations. and
therefore may result in saving considerable time and effort in the field.
196 GEODETIC NETWORK DESIGN

In the main Of optimal design of a eerxletic• is

• The determination Of the optimal distribution Of

• Of and
• The op•imal distribution precisions anu»ng
observables.

me to the complesity of the probkm, in past it very difficult. if

 i...ssiblc- to all agectsof retw«k in a single cal prve•iure. Instead.
ttF divüd into
Igns in which some progress could mach The accepted classification
1970
• um referc

• First-Or&r
stations
• What
and With What to make
• Third•Order (THODHhoosing to improve an existing •
TO ix»ve &sign a fifth can called (COMO) et
al.. 1979) have solved simultaneously A &sigrrd satisfy
gecisi(L reliability. in such a way that (cf. Schmitt, 1985):

estimable quantities, if any. Can be realized

• is as for the Of in as small as v»ssible in
magnitude. and

• marking of am] are satisfying criteria.

It can said that have ten &signing XtW"s i'Ecpti& With the de•.elopment of
computer technology the CES ign evolved from formulae 1963, through Ashke
1979. analytical
Schaftrin, 1985; Schmitt. Wit-nnær. 1982: Jagerand
Kuang. 1991). arul an abundance of research parrß and articles have ap

Sive and 'Tactical to find analytical

'Bien great developments have

AN OVERVIEW 197

made de 09 offers the m»sibility of solving all ayeets of network •ßign

syoblems in a single in either oæ• twc». three•dinxns.ioaal (cf. , Ku.mg. 1991.
1992f).lAppIicutions of the new methodology to solving different
in two-.
elaborated by the author in a publications Kuang et al.. Kuang
1992a•f. 1993•-h. 1994: Kuang and Chrzanowskj 192a,b. A brief review hign
iteluding tvh criterion setup and solution is given and this review should
rexk-fs) unfamiliar with *Cts ur&rstand am]

The "Trial and Error" Method and

Computer Simulation
A primitive that is suited for FOD, SOD, arul THOD is the "trial and error'
nwthod, coupled with intuition and empirical formula. In this methxi. a solution to
die &sign problem is pstulated and the design and cost criteria computed_ Shcwld
either Of these criteria b. fulfilled, a new is by Slightly altering
original and the are recomputed, nie procedure is repeated until a
satisfactory (unlikely to the ogjmum) work is fLN1nd. With the &velopment of
modern computers, this 'trial and error" method Of the that may Featly
the and us by following steps (Cf. Cross,

Step I Specify and reliabiliu criteria

Step 2 Select an Observation (stations , observations. and weights)
scep 3 the covariance matrices Of the desired least estimates
and derive the values of the quantities specified as precisim
reliability criteria
Step 4 If these values are Close to those in Step then go to the next
stage: otherwise alter the observation scheme moving
observations or decreasing weights if selected
Or by adding observations •M weights it it is not
good eiwughj and return to Step 3. ard
Step 5 Compute the cost of the network and consider the possibility of
returning to Step 2 and mstarting the with a completely
different ope Of neIWOtk (e.g. a traverse Of
Stop whcn it is belicvcd that the optinuarn (minimum cost) net.
has found.

The method has been used for decades and is well established.
Some decsriptions of software include Mepham and Krakrysky (1983). Cross
(1981). Frank and Misslln (19SO)_ Some efficient interactive
Systems Were
 NETWORK DESIGN

instxre. in Nickervn (1979) al. With interactive

System With graphic hign Can
The advantage of tie simulation is *itrary &cisim cri*ria used nd together. in
order to find required design, There is to iMO a SCOng is one uses purely
analytical solutiorvs With discrete risk ftmctions. obvious d of tir •e that •mum a
very amcnjot ofwor* may involved. ,

e. 3 Analytical Methods
starting Bunt of analytical echn"pes with regard detic Was
to dissertation

of excepüonal geodesists have contritwted to tiüs subject. e

Schr&r Jung ( 1924). and WtAf •nry all to minim COSt. With
by a scalar v •loc, IYuuda (1962) provosed a complctcly
&alt with a secalled criteri«i m•ix tv
actual ruauix estimated
(in a has to Grafarend ( 1972)
intnxhxcd Taylor-Karman stnxturcd i&abmi vuixxe of
Cut—ian cardinaies in and netuorks on of
TK Were Studied With matrices i , a n distaxes
&rived general am] SIRiaI digersim matrices of ccxjrdinates
coordinate differences In a subsequent pblieation, Scuffrin (t 982) Of
critetion that using thx azimuths. an&s. or distances constructed under
the postul"te of ity md Molenaar (1981) of "MO three by
and

design we deßncknt both on the mathematical (orm to which the pre*'lem

bamght. the of objective function that is repreg'ntjng aim the In Contrast to
• •analytical" offer specific algorithms for the solution Of particular (he
in motion. such an alg«ithm will .uAomaticaIIy that will satisfy the gqei quality
requirenn•nts and that Will, in s•ogne n Of in purely analytical mettuxis favc
tren in finding solutions only for Order tk•Ggn (SOD) comprehensive review of
the methtmis used given in Fagir ( I the vuious and

AN OVERVIEW 199
Firstly. the for SOD Start With following CO matrix Q. or Of the

network
-l
Q, = (ATP A) above

equation, We obtain

(Grafarend, 1974) (8.2)

matrix A has teen assunrd to configuration
defects exist. P is the observation weight