8 ERROR PROPAGATION TRAVERSE

Generally, observations in horizontal surveys (e.g., traverses) are independent. That is, the
measurement of a distance observation is independent of the azimuth observation. But the latitude and
departure of a line, which are computed from the distance and azimuth observations, are not independent.
Figure 8.1 shows the effects of errors in distance and azimuth observations on the computed latitude and
departure. In the figure it can be seen that there is correlation between the latitude and departure; that is, if
either distance or azimuth observation changes, it causes changes in both latitude and departure.

8.2 DERIVATION OF ESTIMATED ERROR IN LATITUDE AND DEPARTURE

When computing the latitude and departure of a line, the following well known equations are used:

𝐿𝑎𝑡 = 𝐷 cos 𝐴𝑧 (8.1)

𝐷𝑒𝑝 = 𝐷 sin 𝐴𝑧
where
Lat = latitude,
Dep=departure,
Az =azimuth, and
D=horizontal length of the line.

To derive the estimated error in the line’s latitude or departure, the following partial derivatives from
Equation (8.1) are required in using Equation (6.16):
𝜕𝐿𝑎𝑡 𝜕𝐿𝑎𝑡
= cos 𝐴𝑧 = −𝐷 sin 𝐴𝑧 (8.2)
𝜕𝐷 𝜕𝐴𝑧
𝜕𝐷𝑒𝑝 𝜕𝐷𝑒𝑝
= sin 𝐴𝑧 = 𝐷 cos 𝐴𝑧
𝜕𝐷 𝜕𝐴𝑧
Example 8.1 A traverse course has a length of 456.87 ±0.02 ft and an azimuth of 23°35’26” ±9”. What are the
latitude and departure and their estimated errors?

SOLUTION Using Equation (8.1), the latitude and departure of the course are

Lat = 456.87 cos(23°35’26”) = 418.69 ft

Dep = 456.87 sin(23°35’26”) = 182.84 ft

The estimated errors in these values are solved using matrix Equation (6.16) as
𝜕𝐿𝑎𝑡 𝜕𝐿𝑎𝑡 𝜕𝐿𝑎𝑡 𝜕𝐷𝑒𝑝
2 2
∑ = [ 𝜕𝐷 𝜕𝐴𝑧 ] [𝜎𝐷 0 𝜕𝐷 𝜕𝐷 ] = [ 𝜎𝐿𝑎𝑡 𝜎𝐿𝑎𝑡,𝐷𝑒𝑝
𝜕𝐷𝑒𝑝 𝜕𝐷𝑒𝑝 0 2 ] [𝜕𝐿𝑎𝑡 𝜕𝐷𝑒𝑝 2 ] (8.3)
𝐿𝑎𝑡,𝐷𝑒𝑝 𝜎𝐴𝑧 𝜎𝐿𝑎𝑡,𝐷𝑒𝑝 𝜎𝐷𝑒𝑝
𝜕𝐷 𝜕𝐴𝑧 𝜕𝐴𝑧 𝜕𝐴𝑧
cos 𝐴𝑧 −𝐷 sin 𝐴𝑧 . 022 0 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝐴𝑧 sin 𝐴𝑧
∑ =[ ][ ][ ]
𝐿𝑎𝑡,𝐷𝑒𝑝 sin 𝐴𝑧 Dcos 𝐴𝑧 0 (9"⁄𝜌)2 −𝐷 sin 𝐴𝑧 𝐷 cos 𝐴𝑧
 Entering in the appropriate numerical values into Equation , the covariance matrix is
0.9167 −456.87(0.4002) 0.0004 0 0.9167 0.4002
∑ =[ ][ 2] [ ]
𝐿𝑎𝑡,𝑑𝑒𝑝 0.4002 456.87(0.9164) 0 (9"/𝜌) −456.87(0.4002) 456.87(0.9164)

0.00039958 0.00000096
∑ =[ ]
𝐿𝑎𝑡,𝐷𝑒𝑝 0.00000096 0.00039781

Thus the standard errors are

𝜎𝐿𝑎𝑡 = √0.00039958 = ±0.020𝑓𝑡

𝜎𝐷𝑒𝑝 = √0.00039781 = ±0.020 𝑓𝑡

Note that the off-diagonal is not equal to zero, and thus the computed values are correlated.

8.3 DERIVATION OF ESTIMATED STANDARD ERRORS IN COURSE AZIMUTHS

Equation (8.1) is based on the azimuth of a course. In practice, however, traverse azimuths are
normally computed from observed angles rather than being measured directly. Thus, another level of error
propagation exists in calculating the azimuths from angular values. In the following analysis, con-sider that
angles to the right are observed and that azimuths are computed in a counterclockwise direction successively
around the traverse using the formula

𝐴𝑍𝑐 = 𝐴𝑍𝑃 + 180° + 𝜃𝑖 (8.4)

where

Azc is the azimuth for the current course,

Azp the previous course azimuth, and

θi the appropriate interior angle to use in computing the current course azimuth.

By applying Equation (6.18), the error in the current azimuth, Azc is

2
𝜎𝐴𝑍𝑐 = √𝜎𝐴𝑍𝑃
+ 𝜎𝜃2𝑖 (8.5)

In Equation (8.6) σθ is the error in the appropriate interior angle used in computation of the current
azimuth, and the other terms are as defined previously. This equation is also valid for azimuth computations
going clockwise around the traverse.

8.4 COMPUTING AND ANALYZING POLYGON TRAVERSE MISCLOSURE ERRORS

From elementary surveying it is known that the following geometric constraints exist for any closed
polygon-type traverse:
 ∑ 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑜𝑟 𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑒𝑠 = 180°𝑥(𝑛 − 2) (8.6)

For a loop traverse that begins and end at same control point:

∑ 𝑙𝑎𝑡 = ∑ 𝑑𝑒𝑝 = 0 (8.7)

For a loop traverse that begins at one control point and ends at opposite control point of the same
reference line, the coordinates at final point

Computed northing – fixed northing =0 (8.8)

Computed easting – fixed easting = 0

Deviations from these conditions, normally called misclosures, can be calculated from the
observations of any traverse. Statistical analyses can then be performed to determine the acceptability of the
misclosures and check for the presence of blunders in the observations. If blunders appear to be present, the
measurements must be rejected and the observations repeated.

Example 8.2 Compute the angular and linear misclosures for the traverse illustrated in Figure 8.2. The angles
were measured 4 times. The observations for the traverse are given in Table 8.1. Determine the estimated
misclosure errors at the 95% confidence level, and comment on whether or not the observations contain
blunders.

1
2 θ2
θ3

θ1
θ4 A

B
Fig. 8.2 Closed Polygon Traverse

Table 8.1 Distance and Angle Observations for Fig.8.2

BS Occ. FS Angle S(“) Distance(m) S(m)

B A 1 95-47-57 3.5” 124.666 ±0.003
A 1 2 87-09-09 3.1” 115.342 ±0.002
1 2 B 90-05-37 3.6” 130.250 ±0.003
2 B A 86-57-34 3.9”
Sum 360-00-17
AEC 17”
Note: Az(AB)=258-36-42
SOLUTION

Angular check: First the angular misclosure is checked to see if it is within the tolerances specified. From
Equation (6.18), and using the standard deviations given in Table 8.1, the angular sum should have an error
within 68.3% of the time. Since the angles were measured four times, each computed mean has three
degrees of freedom, and the appropriate t value from Table D.3 (the t distribution) is t 0.025,3, which equals
3.183. This is a two-tailed test since we are looking for the range that is statistically equal to zero at the level
of confidence selected. If this range contains the actual misclosure, there is no statistical reason to believe
that the observations contain a blunder. In this case, the angular misclosure at a 95% confidence level is
estimated as

𝜎∑ 𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑒𝑠 = 3.183√3.52 + 3.12 + 3.62 + 3.92 = 22.5" (95%)

And the actual angular error of closure is 17”. Thus, the actual AEC for the traverse of 17” is within its
estimated range of error and there is no reason to believe that a blunder exists in the angles.

Azimuth computation: In this problem, azimuth is given for the first course and assumed to be free of error.
For the data of Table 8.1, and using Equations (8.5) and (8.6), the values for the course azimuths and their
estimated errors are computed and listed in Table 8.2.

Table 8.2 Estimated Errors in the Computed Azimuths of Figure 8.2

From To Azimuth Estimated Error
A B 258-36-42 0”
A 1 354-24-39 ±3.5”
1 2 261-33-48 √3.52 + 3.12 = ±4.7"
2 B 171-39-25 √4.72 + 3.62 = ±5.9"
B A 78-36-59 √5.92 + 3.92 = ±7.1"

Computation of estimated linear misclosure: Equation (6.13) properly accounts for correlation in the latitude
and departure when computing the linear misclosure of the traverse. Applying the partial derivatives of
Equation (8 .2) to the latitudes and departures, the Jacobian matrix for a single line has the form
cos 𝐴𝑧 −𝐷 sin 𝐴𝑧
𝐽=[ ]
sin 𝐴𝑧 Dcos 𝐴𝑧
For the entire network
cos 𝐴𝑧𝐴−1 −𝐴1 sin 𝐴𝑧𝐴−1 0 0 0 0
sin 𝐴𝑧𝐴−1 𝐴1 cos 𝐴𝑧𝐴−1 0 0 0 0
0 0 cos 𝐴𝑧1−2 −12 sin 𝐴𝑧1−2 0 0
𝐽=
0 0 sin 𝐴𝑧1−2 12 cos 𝐴𝑧1−2 0 0
0 0 0 0 cos 𝐴𝑧2𝐵 −(12) sin 𝐴𝑧2𝐵
[ 0 00 0 0 sin 𝐴𝑧2𝐵 12 cos 𝐴𝑧2𝐵 ]
And the co-variance matrix
 2
𝜎𝐴1
𝜎𝐴𝑧𝐴1 2
( )
𝜌
2
𝜎12
∑ = 𝜎𝐴𝑧 2
𝐷,𝐴𝑧 ( 12 )
𝜌
2
𝜎2𝐵
𝜎𝐴𝑧 2
( 2𝐵 )
[ 𝜌 ]
The matrix solution is therefore

∑ = 𝐽∑ 𝐽𝑇
𝐿𝑎𝑡,𝐷𝑒𝑝 𝐷,𝐴𝑧

By taking the square roots of the diagonal elements in the ∑𝐿𝑎𝑡,𝐷𝑒𝑝 matrix the errors for the latitude and
departure of each course are found. That is, the estimated error in the latitude for course BC is the square
root of the (3,3) element in Equation (8.11), and the estimated error in the departure of BC is the square root
of the (4,4) element. In a similar fashion,the estimated errors in latitude and departure can be computed for
any other course.

The formula for determining the linear misclosure of a closed polygon traverse is

2 2
𝐿𝐶 = √(∑ 𝐿𝑎𝑡) + (∑ 𝐷𝑒𝑝)

2 2
𝐿𝐶 = √(𝑁𝑐 − 𝑁𝑓 ) + (𝐸𝑐 − 𝐸𝑓 )

where LC is the linear misclosure. To determine the estimated error in the linear misclosure, Equation (6.16)
is applied to the linear misclosure formula (8.12). The necessary partial derivatives from Equation (8.12) for
substitution into Equation (6.16) must first be determined. The partial derivatives with respect to the latitude
and departure of course AB are
𝜕𝐿𝐶 ∑ 𝐿𝑎𝑡 ∑ 𝐿𝑎𝑡
= 2 2 1⁄2
=
𝜕𝐿𝑎𝑡𝐴𝐵 [(∑ 𝐿𝑎𝑡) + (∑ 𝐷𝑒𝑝) ] 𝐿𝐶
𝜕𝐿𝐶 ∑ 𝐷𝑒𝑝 ∑ 𝐷𝑒𝑝
= =
𝜕𝐷𝑒𝑝𝐴𝐵 [(∑ 𝐿𝑎𝑡)2 + (∑ 𝐷𝑒𝑝)2 ]1⁄2 𝐿𝐶

Notice that these partial derivatives are independent of the course. Also, the other courses have the same
partial derivatives as given by Equation (8.13), and thus the Jacobian matrix for Equation (6.16) has the form
 ∑ 𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑠 ∑ 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑠 ∑ 𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑠 ∑ 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑠 ∑ 𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑠 ∑ 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑠
𝐴=[ ]
𝐿𝐶 𝐿𝐶 𝐿𝐶 𝐿𝐶 𝐿𝐶 𝐿𝐶

As shown in Table 8.3, the sum of the northings -0.006 m, the sum of the eastings 0.004 m , and LC = 0.007
m.

Line Latitude Departure Northing Easting

A 1,000.000 1,000.000
1 124.073 -12.142
1 1,124.073 987.858
2 -16.923 -114.094
2 1,107.150 873.764
B -128.872 18.899
B 978.278 892.663
Fixed 978.282 892.656
sum -0.004 0.007
LC 0.008

Substituting these values into Equation (8.14), which in turn is substituted into Equation (6.16), yields
−0.004 0.007
𝐴=[ … . . ] = [−0.5 0.875 − 0.5 0.875 − 0.5 0.875]
0.008 0.008
The estimated linear error of closure:

2
𝜎𝐿𝐶 = 𝐴 ∑ 𝐿𝑎𝑡, 𝐷𝑒𝑝 𝐴𝑇

2
At 95% confidence: 𝑡0.025,3 √𝜎𝐿𝐶 = 0.013 𝑚 > 0.008 Ok