Question about EZ1965 (M 218)

[+outdoorsoccer]

Hi all,

 

  I recently recovered station EZ1965 (M 218) but am not sure how to report the condition to NGS.  From the NGS description it says the rod should be recessed 4 inches below NGS flange with access cover, but I found the rod tip approximately 1-2 inches above the flange.  The access cover was broken off and I could not put it back on due to the rod tip being above the flange.  
    Would I report it as being in poor condition?   Please let me know your  advice and suggestions.   Thank you in advance for your time and help.

 

  Take care,

 

   ODS

[Bill93]

I'd say POOR with the description of what you saw. A side view photo would be a good addition.

 

Has the location settled with the rod remaining at its original height? Is the cover surrounded by dirt or set in concrete?

 

I have seen a lot of USGS rods (short ones, I think) sticking above the surroundings in Iowa. A rod with no protective sleeve can get lifted by freeze-thaw cycles. But your area doesn't get deep frost, does it?

 

Is the rod bent or the ball scored by a pry bar? Did someone put something other than the original steel ball on the rod?

 

Just trying to consider all possibilities.

 

[+outdoorsoccer]

19 minutes ago, Bill93 said:

I'd say POOR with the description of what you saw. A side view photo would be a good addition.

 

Has the location settled with the rod remaining at its original height? Is the cover surrounded by dirt or set in concrete?

 

I have seen a lot of USGS rods (short ones, I think) sticking above the surroundings in Iowa. A rod with no protective sleeve can get lifted by freeze-thaw cycles. But your area doesn't get deep frost, does it?

 

Is the rod bent or the ball scored by a pry bar? Did someone put something other than the original steel ball on the rod?

 

Just trying to consider all possibilities.

 

Hi Bill,

 

  thank you for the response.  I believe you might be correct about the rod lifting by freeze-thaw cycles.  I reread the description and it does say rod w/ no sleeve.  We typically don’t have deep frost, but over the years we have had bouts of cold weather followed immediately by warm weather.   

    There didn’t seem to be any vandalism that I noticed, but I wasn’t looking for any, soI could have missed it.  The rod was still straight when I found it.  And it looks like the original steel ball.  The USPSQD  report from 2017 said they recovered in good condition.  I guess a lot can happen in 3+ years. 
 

   I thought about a picture with a side view after I got home.  There are some more stations I want to look for in the area, so I can go back and take more pictures.

 

   Thank you for your help.

 

   Take care,

 

   ODS

[Bill93]

The Power Squadron had a lot of volunteers with little training, and their reports are not to be taken as authoritative.  If they found something that looked like it could be the bench mark they usually reported GOOD.  A report of NOT FOUND could sometimes mean little effort was put in to looking for it. And rarely do their reports add or update the to-reach description.  So their reports are helpful but not great.

[+outdoorsoccer]

2 hours ago, Bill93 said:

The Power Squadron had a lot of volunteers with little training, and their reports are not to be taken as authoritative.  If they found something that looked like it could be the bench mark they usually reported GOOD.  A report of NOT FOUND could sometimes mean little effort was put in to looking for it. And rarely do their reports add or update the to-reach description.  So their reports are helpful but not great.

Yes.  I do wish they provided more details in some their recovery reports.  I wished they included pictures too of their recoveries especially the older monumented ones. I have tried to take decent pictures of the stations I recover. NGS has used some and not used some in the updated datasheets.  Pretty cool to see them.  I hope it helps future folks find the station. 
 

  Take care,

 

  ODS

[+outdoorsoccer]

I went back today and took a side view of the station to a get clearer picture of the raised rod for my recovery report to NGS.

Is this what you see too Bill?

Thank you for the help.

 

  Take care,

 

  ODS

  

[Bill93]

The ones I referred to are disk on rod set in a clay tile.  There is no sleeve on the rod.  The tile is partially filled with gravel to attempt to drain water away, but I doubt that is fully effective.

[kayakbird]

Hi All, 

I remember seeing the term 'driven to refusal' in the datasheets for the long rod with brass cap attached as Bill93 mentioned.  This newer style does have poured concrete supporting the hinged lid and an unknown length of PVC.  Don't see any tool marks on the one in question, but wonder if outdoorsoccer gave that 10ft + rod a slight tug?

EZ1965_SETTING: 49 = STAINLESS STEEL ROD W/O SLEEVE (10 FT.+

Found one placed in 1983 that had un-disturbed insulation still there in 2009.  QX0554  kayakbird

 

 

 

[+outdoorsoccer]

5 hours ago, kayakbird said:

Hi All, 

I remember seeing the term 'driven to refusal' in the datasheets for the long rod with brass cap attached as Bill93 mentioned.  This newer style does have poured concrete supporting the hinged lid and an unknown length of PVC.  Don't see any tool marks on the one in question, but wonder if outdoorsoccer gave that 10ft + rod a slight tug?

EZ1965_SETTING: 49 = STAINLESS STEEL ROD W/O SLEEVE (10 FT.+

Found one placed in 1983 that had un-disturbed insulation still there in 2009.  QX0554  kayakbird

 

 

 

Hi kayakbird,

 

  funny you should ask.  I actually tried to push the rod back down, but it wouldn’t budge.  Maybe the ground was frozen as it was pretty cold that morning when I recovered the station.  Maybe in the warmer months I will be able to push it back down?  What do you think?

 

   Thank you for the advice.

 

  Take care,

 

   ODS

 

  

[foxtrot_xray]

Honestly? Don't touch it. Don't try to push it down. Frankly, you don't know how FAR you should push it down.

 

If the rod has been shifted due to any reason, the station is no longer valid, and pushing it back wouldn't suddenly 'made' it valid any more.

[+outdoorsoccer]

38 minutes ago, foxtrot_xray said:

Honestly? Don't touch it. Don't try to push it down. Frankly, you don't know how FAR you should push it down.

 

If the rod has been shifted due to any reason, the station is no longer valid, and pushing it back wouldn't suddenly 'made' it valid any more.

Hi foxtrot_ray,

 

  yeah.  I’m not going to touch it anymore.    It was one of those discovery that  caught me by surprise.  First time I experienced it and I thought it had been vandalized so I gave it a slight push down, but it didn’t budge, so I didn’t try to move it anymore.   So thanks to Bill (and others) I know what to put in y recovery report and how to handle in the future. 
 

   Thank you for your advice too.

 

   Take care,

 

   ODS

[Bill93]

The only time a mark is worse than disturbed is when somebody puts it back "about where it was" so it doesn't look disturbed when a surveyor tries to use it.

[Z15]

I would not report it as poor.  The rod may be ok, the header may have sunk down. 

 

Her what NGS wrote one make here

Quote

HISTORY     - Date     Condition        Report By
 RL1503  HISTORY     - 1985     MONUMENTED       NGS
 RL1503  HISTORY     - 19890805 GOOD             NGS
 RL1503  HISTORY     - 19940628 SEE DESCRIPTION  NGS
 RL1503  HISTORY     - 20040808 GOOD             USPSQD
 RL1503  HISTORY     - 20090616 GOOD             MIDT
 RL1503  HISTORY     - 20120801 GOOD             WOOLPT

NOTE--EITHER THE ROD IS RISING OR THE CONCRETE HEADER IS SINKING. THE 'ROD IS NOW PUSHING THE LOGO CAP LID INTO THE OPEN POSITION. USE WITH 'CAUTION.

 

Edited February 4, 2021 by Z15

[kayakbird]

'Level Run' check?

Any nearby educational institutions teaching surveying?  Looks like several marks along a three mile reach of that road could be tied to.

EZ1183.The orthometric height was determined by differential leveling and
 EZ1183.adjusted by the NATIONAL GEODETIC SURVEY
 EZ1183.in June 1991.

'Nearby' out here in Montana =< 200 miles.  kayakbird

 

 

[foxtrot_xray]

6 hours ago, kayakbird said:

'Level Run' check?

Any nearby educational institutions teaching surveying?  Looks like several marks along a three mile reach of that road could be tied to.

EZ1183.The orthometric height was determined by differential leveling and
 EZ1183.adjusted by the NATIONAL GEODETIC SURVEY
 EZ1183.in June 1991.

'Nearby' out here in Montana =< 200 miles.  kayakbird

 

 

 

Frankly, I would love to learn the process and equipment needed to run a level check. Every time I come by a vertical monument that I THINK is disturbed, or is questionable, I wish I had the knowledge and know-how to check and verify.

[kayakbird]

All (hoping some of the professionals jump in.  20 + years since I learned and almost that long since practiced)

Basics:

 Equipment:  1]  Level instrument on tripod (three wire is best for accuracy, but time consuming)  2]  Graduated Rod  3]  Note book

Crew:  4]  Instrument person   5] Rod person  6] Note taker & calculator  or a pre-programmed device operated by the instrument person

Need to know the starting elevation    -  can be a job site reference number large enough to avoid getting into minus territory. 

Technique:  

A]  Rod on starting point, read a plus number up to the tube, rod moves to a turning point (rock, temporary pin) read a minus #, instrument moves (intervals should be balanced - try to not have to go up & down over hummocks), read another plus (back up to the tube), etc,etc,etc to the new (to-be-determined point).

Note: The rod should be waved gently straight at the instrument and back.

B]  Go back to the starting point, using different turning points.

C]  Do the math - hopefully within the project error of maybe 2 or 3/100's.

D]   Check for calculation errors, or do it again.  Imagine doing that to establish a point every few miles on both banks in the Missouri River Breaks.   MEL

  

 

 

[Bill93]

I did this once some years ago. See the first log for MH0134. 

 

The ties hadn't checked out, which I later blamed on changes to the RR, grading of the adjacent lot, and widening of the street. The mark was beside a RR signal building and I thought it likely construction would have disturbed it.

 

On a hot Sunday I did a 1-way run with my wife holding the rod. I wasn't up to closing the loop in the heat. Calculations showed it checked better than I had reason to hope, so reported GOOD.

 

Sadly, in 2018 i went back to it to do a GPSonBM session and found fresh tracks where equipment had hit the post, breaking it and possibly driving the base deeper. DESTROYED.

 

That session would have filled a big gap in the GPSonBM coverage, and every other mark in the neighborhood has poor sky and/or would risk trouble with the RR.

[foxtrot_xray]

Thanks guys -

That helps, but I'm the type that still needs to watch and help. (What you old me is like telling me the coordinates of a station, while I need the directions and how-to-reach. :D)

[Z15]

It all depends on what you are trying to accomplish on whats involved in a level run check.

See this pdf doc, page 12 Network Geometry for Replacing One or Two 1st Order Bench Marks. Can also be used to check a mark ►https://transportation.ky.gov/Highway-Design/Documents/NGS Benchmark Reset Procedures 2007.pdf

 

Using just one mark assumes the mark used is accurate but no way to prove it.

 

 

Edited February 8, 2021 by Z15