Jump to content

Advice On What To Call This...


ODragon

Recommended Posts

odragon -

 

If it were me logging it, I'd log it as destroyed.

 

What's pictured is not the correct marker.

 

The description says the "corner of the building". I'm wondering if the part of the building between the high tower and the street is an add-on since 1942. If that's the case, the corner area migh've been re-done.

 

If the disk pictured had met the NGS positioning criteria, there would be a "1370 RESET" disk there with a new PID in the database.

 

The item shown has no PID.

Link to post

In my opinion, this does not appear to be 4.3 feet SW of SE entrance or 3.5 feet above the ground. And it definitely is not a USGS disk unless it has been well sandblasted.

 

NA0594'CURB OF COURT STREET, 4.3 FEET SOUTHWEST OF THE SOUTHWEST EDGE OF THE

NA0594'FRONT OR SOUTHEAST ENTRANCE TO BUILDING, 3.5 FEET ABOVE GROUND. A

NA0594'U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BRONZE DISK SET VERTICALLY.

 

85fdaf47-3bd5-4f78-ae5e-ca6e8fa5ee46.jpged86bf44-f978-4c70-ad62-77ab6be044cd.jpg

Link to post
In my opinion, this does not appear to be 4.3 feet SW of SE entrance or 3.5 feet above the ground. And it definitely is not a USGS disk unless it has been well sandblasted.

Thanks. In that case, I will not log it as such. I did walk around the entire building and looked at the correct eye level and this was the closest thing I could find that is anything close. I couldn't find an old picture of the building or I'd know if there's been an addition and maybe that's who I can't find it.

Link to post

Well, here is an older photo of the court house.

 

http://www.dcnyhistory.org/delhi_courthouse.html

delhi_courthouse.jpg

 

It looks like the part of the building just to the left is new(er) as it looks like it was once two buildings, not one.

 

Not that this really means more than that there has been work done to the court house that would make the datasheet description inaccurate now. Though, looking at the old photo, where the remains of a disk was found would be the corner of the building.

Link to post

Another thing, if this is the SE entrance, then this must be the east wall and the mark is apparently in the south wall where the building has been expanded.

 

4.3 FEET SOUTHWEST OF THE SOUTHWEST EDGE OF THE FRONT

 

Edit: Noticed how the area to the left of the door is different with a different roof line. Mark was either destroyed during the expansion or else is an interior wall which could be a possibility. I found a mark at the old Colorado Springs Depot that was converted into a restaurant on an interior wall after the restaurant expanded. USPSQN had reported it as NOT FOUND.

 

Too bad that pole is lined up in the original picture with exactly where your mark is located in the new pic.

Edited by Colorado Papa
Link to post

Before declaring the disk destroyed you may want to actually measure from the 'curbs', the ground, and the entrance. The description does not say what if anything is stamped on the disk. I don't know what style of disk was in use in 1903 in Delaware by the USGS, but if the disk fits the measurements it is a good bet that it is the benchmark you were searching for. If it does not 'measure up' then it would be a 'did not find' I would think.

 

John

 

 

edited for speling and content.

Edited by 2oldfarts (the rockhounders)
Link to post

I took some of my own pictures I will post later tonight I hope with a much closer version of the disk. Although, like the description of the other 'finder', it is just a green-bronze looking dish with an X in the middle of it.

Link to post

Check when the south part of the building was built, check the curb distances, check the height above ground (might have changed a little), and see if 4.3 feet gets you to something that could be called the "edge" of the entrance. I'm betting that it turns out you found the right location and the disk fell (or was pried) off the shaft.

 

If I understand the directions, then the mark described would not be hidden by the building addition.

 

If this is the case, how you report it has been debated with no clear consensus. The position is clearly marked by the shaft so it isn't destroyed in the sense of becoming unusable. For GC purposes, I wouldn't object to a "Destroyed" but might consider a "Found Poor/Disturbed" for the NGS.

 

BH

Link to post
If I understand the directions, then the mark described would not be hidden by the building addition.

 

If this is the case, how you report it has been debated with no clear consensus.  The position is clearly marked by the shaft so it isn't destroyed in the sense of becoming unusable.  For GC purposes, I wouldn't object to a "Destroyed" but might consider a "Found Poor/Disturbed" for the NGS.

 

BH

I agree the addition wouldn't hide it but it would change it being on the corner. I've posted my pictures.

 

14df7716-7281-4201-ad8c-4834e88dd7ad.jpg

 

adec35db-2e2b-48b1-9e49-31594b185929.jpg

 

It looks like the area around the disk has been much more blasted than the rest of the wall.

440b6f89-e801-4a3f-9853-29e043530aa7.jpg

Link to post

For what it's worth, here is another mark that had been sandblasted for comparison:

53316_100.jpg

Edit: It appears your mark has been eatten away with some kind of acid, or a chemical reaction. Possibly something was used to clean the brick??? These views of the marks make things look closer to the description. The location is similar to what I have seen at other courthouses.

Edited by Colorado Papa
Link to post
For what it's worth, here is another mark that had been sandblasted for comparison:

 

Edit: It appears your mark has been eatten away with some kind of acid, or a chemical reaction. Possibly something was used to clean the brick??? These views of the marks make things look closer to the description. The location is similar to what I have seen at other courthouses.

Thanks for that. It's nice to know that they can stand up to some sandblasting.

 

I agree that chemical/acid reaction could have something to it. I was thinking the bricks looked really clean for the age of the building. The color and feeling that the metal is actually there makes me think it wasn't removed/stolen.

Link to post

Actually, that "sandblasting" to me looks suspiciously like someone chiseled the mark out. The stone is broken all around the mark, not blasted, as the edges are sharp and not smoothed at all like sandblasting would have done. The color could have been left over from the discoloration of the disk, and a bolt put into the hold and marked with the X. Also curious is the hole at the top of the circle, and the circular indent inside the circle, as if whatever was set in the stone had a raised area in the back, which is not typical of disks I have seen (but then again, I haven't seen the back of a USGS disk).

I agree that the building to the left is new, and the location seems to be the proper distance from the (left edge of) the door and the ground. Measuring the other distances would provide evidence as to if this is the described station or not. If it IS the location of the station it should be logged as "POOR/DISTURBED" and the center of the stem could be used.

Link to post

From your latest pictures,my guess is that it was chisled out ot the stone,you can see evidence in the reddish rock where it has been broken out to help to get the chisel or other tool under it to get it off.

 

The cross was probably added on a later survey to mark their exact point.

The acid eating was later after the mark had already been removed.

They do use harsh acid to clean brick and stone.

 

my $0.02

 

edit speeling

Edited by GEO*Trailblazer 1
Link to post

I agree that it looks like it was chisled out. It also looks like what remains (besides the pin) is just concrete. As for the distance, if those are standard 8" block, it's pretty close to 3.5 feet from the ground.

 

And if I am thinking of this layout right, as long as the 200ft and 69.5ft distances work out, that would be the mark.

 

bm.JPG

Link to post

I do.

I Get the original data sheets from the NGS,the azimuths(some azimuths have no distance) and reference marks are marked in angles and distance(convert meters to feet)from the station.

On just single benchmarks I make a sketch before looking.

I use for example: 90 meters X 3.2??? = 288.???,then divide by 12 = 24.??? feet.

I am sure that the 3.2??? is not exact but it gets me very,very close.

 

METERS TO FEET

Edited by GEO*Trailblazer 1
Link to post

Meters to Feet is taken by dividing the number of Meters by 0.3048 for Feet.

 

F= M / 0.3048

 

Feet into Meters is taken by using the same factor 0.3048 as a multiplier of Feet.

 

M= F x 0.3048

 

Often confusing, only when you think that a Meter has 3.2808 feet in it, but that number is not used in your formula. It also has 39.37 inches in it as well, but that number is not used in your formula either. Both of those numbers can be derived as a result of the formula.

 

0.3048 is the only factor you need.

 

Rob

Link to post

Google has a very useful calculator/conversion feature.

 

For metric-english conversions, in your Google toolbar or in any Google search box, enter the quantity you want to convert plus the phrase "in x" where x is the unit you want to convert into.

 

For example, enter "25 meters in feet," and the result is displayed as "25 meters = 82.0209974 feet"

 

It also does conventional calculations. More details at Google's help page

Link to post

Art, Even, et. al.

 

For a quick conversion from meters to feet in the field: one meter is roughly equal to one and one-tenth yards. Thus, if RM1 is 25 meters from the station, 25 meters = 75 feet + 7.5 feet = 82.5 feet (pretty close to the actual 82 feet and you can do it in your head in one and one-tenth seconds.)

 

Alternatively (for me, anyway), 25 meters is 25 strides plus 2.5 strides, or 27 strides plus one small step for a man.

 

Close enough when you add the word "about" to your recovery report of distances.

 

7

 

p.s. Regarding the suggestion that we do sketches before hunting marks - excellent idea. I have gotten into the habit of doing such quick, free-hand sketches and it has helped immensely. It's way easier to look at a sketch to determine on which side of the road the mark is located while approaching a mark in the car/truck than it is to try to read the words of the description.

Edited by seventhings
Link to post
one meter is roughly equal to one and one-tenth yards.

Yeah, that's the method I use and was going to suggest.

Sure wish this country would convert totally to metric!

Regarding the suggestion that we do sketches before hunting marks - excellent idea.

Some descriptions are so wordy that I find it takes awhile to decifer exactly where the mark is. Good point about a diagram. Quicker to draw a sketch than search on the wrong side of the road or end of the bridge.

 

Trouble is, I don't use a compass and occassionally loose my orientation on a cloudy day. I recall one snowy (and icy) day with poor visiblity was driving east parallel to I-70 when I thought I was heading north and would intersect it. A glance at the GPS turned me in the right direction.

Link to post

Radio shack has metric/english conversion calculators, less than $10 (I have one).

 

Its does look like the disk portion was removed or fell of from work on building etc and the bronze stem remains. These old USGS disks has a thiick stem (1/2-3/4 in) and was cast all in one piece.

 

In my opinion I would report it as, FOUND IN POOR CONDITION. Its still has some usefulness as evidenced by someone marking the approximate reference point. Maybe that was USGS, NGS or who knows. They are probably within mm of the true position. This would still good for many uses.

 

 

fyi

For those wondering about water tables sometime back. Thats the water table the disk in sit in. The purpose of the water table be to cause the water to shed off the building rather then seep into the foundation. Thats the only question I have about the description, it says its in the face of the building and to me that would be in the brick? I suppose it could be written in error. Is there any chance its behind the pillar in the main building? That does not appear to be the main building from the photo.

 

bldg.jpg

Edited by elcamino
Link to post
I don't use a compass and occassionally loose my orientation on a cloudy day.

 

Ditto. I gave up and bought a new compass. (My old one got demagnetized being too close the the mag-mount antennas I store in my car.)

 

If you have an analog wristwatch and the sun is visible to any degree, here's a quick and easy way to find directions:

 

Point the BACK of the hour hand at the sun. North will then be at 12 o'clock. (Picture a sundial.)

 

-Paul-

Link to post

Yes,no,yes,yes,yes.

There I answered all the questions!!! :D

 

On sketches,and log notes,I thought, and was given good ideas of this Idea here here:

d1c1592d-254e-4d3a-a817-d1da86b06774.jpg

I keep a record on the printout sheet,it doubles for the field note book,that way all notes can be done in the field.(field notes).

I like also to keep hard copies,you never know about electronic data.

I use to scribe (rubbings)of every benchmark in the beginning to this same field note,but that entails a whole bunch more work,I got the first 100 or so like this but have since figured (why????)

Thanks for all the input and I know it helps us all to see what standards and ways others do the same things we are doing respectively.

 

HD1359 OPAL TRIANGULATION STATION

 

This is my first one to do this way,bigdillo is a surveyor I happend to get intersted in benchmark recovery and geocaching.

So I thought I would start with this one.

Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...