I nternational J ournal of Engineering Trends and Technology (I J ETT) Volume 5 number 1 Nov 2013

ISSN: 2231-5381 http://www.ijettjournal.org Page 32

Comparison of the Regression Equations in
Different Places using Total Station

Ali K. Hussein
1, *
, H. A. Alshamarti
2
, B.A. Almayahi
3
1
College of Dentistry, University of Kufa
2
Department of Physics, College of Science, University of Kufa
3
Department of Environment, College of Science, University of Kufa


Abstract There are many applications for total station in the
civil and survey engineering, such as the observation of buildings
and moves Earth layers, therefore must be selected best
observation for the GPS\DGPS or total station using statistically
observation or using the Least-Squares Estimation Method
(LSEM) for the adjust of observation. In this study, twenty
points for two different stations in University of Baghdad, Iraq
are surveyed. The regression equations for these stations are
compared using LSEM. The results are found using MATLAB
language.

Keywords total station, regression equations, Least-Squares
Method, GPS, MATLAB
I. INTRODUCTION
In this study the points for two different stations in
University of Baghdad in straight line are surveyed as shown
in Fig.1. The coordinates for these points are found using the
Garmine GPS (UTM projection, WGS-84 Datum) [1] and
total station Leica TPS 1200 [2]. In each station, the process
of mathematical and graphs for the configuration of points or
data may be not on the line exactly due to the experimental
errors. The points have been tested for each stations by
estimate the errors using LSEM then the prediction of
regression equations for each station. The adjustment of
observation is important in the geodesy and remote sensing
applications, therefore some time LSEM is used to the test of
values errors or to estimate best observation [3, 4].

Fig. 1 The study area

II. MATERIALS AND METHODS
The position of the sites was determined using a handheld
Global Positioning System (GPS) (Etrex vista Garmin
Navigator) with accuracy of 15 m to 100 m as shown in Fig. 2.
Total Station Leica TPS 1200 is used for extract the
coordinates of targets as shown in Fig. 3. The GPS was used
to navigate the total station coordinates and to measure the
point in the TS, where the TS used to estimate the target
coordinates. Tables 1 and 2 show the GPS and TS
specifications.











Fig. 2 Global Positioning System

Fig. 3 The Total Station Leica TPS




I nternational J ournal of Engineering Trends and Technology (I J ETT) Volume 5 number 1 Nov 2013

ISSN: 2231-5381 http://www.ijettjournal.org Page 33


TABLE I
SPECIFICATIONS OF THE GPS [1]

TABLE II
SPECIFICATIONS OF THE TS [2]


The mathematical model used for linear regression
equation model in each station is
Y = bX + a (1)
where Y is Northing coordinate, X is Easting coordinate, b is
the slope of the linear regression equation of Northing
coordinate and a is the intercept. LSEM is estimated the
parameters (a and b) as the values which minimize the sum of
the squares between the measurements and the model. These
amounts to minimize are expressed to [5]

(2)

where is standard errors.


The estimation of the parameters is obtained using
basic results and the property of a quadratic expression
reaches its minimum value when its vanish derivatives.
The derivative of with respect to a, b and set it equal to
zero gives the following:

=2Na +2b 2 = 0 (3)
=2b +2a 2 = 0 (4)

Solving the normal equations give the following
least square estimates of a, b as:

a =MY b MX (5)

with MY and MX denoting the mean of X and Y and

(6)

where, i represents the number of points and N is the
number of points captured by total station [6, 7].













Accuracy 15 m to 100 m
Unit dimensions, WxHxD 2.0" x 4.4" x 1.2" (5.1 x 11.2 x 3.0 cm)
Display size, WxH 1.1" x 2.1" (2.8 x 5.4 cm)
Display resolution, WxH 160 x 288 pixels
Display type 4 level gray LCD
Weight 5.3 oz (150 g) with batteries
1 Accuracy Hz, V
0.1 (0.1 mgon) Display resolution (standard deviation,
ISO 17123-3)
4 (0.07 gon) Compensator Working range
0.5 (0.2 mgon) Setting accuracy
3000 m Range Round prism (GPR1):
1500 m Range 360 reflector (GRZ4):
1200 m Range Mini prism (GMP101)
1.5 m Shortest measurable distance
~ 1.5 s Measurement Time
I nternational J ournal of Engineering Trends and Technology (I J ETT) Volume 5 number 1 Nov 2013

ISSN: 2231-5381 http://www.ijettjournal.org Page 34

III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Table 3 shows the coordinates for A and B stations
for all sampling points.
TABLE III
SAMPLING POINTS COORDINATES.
Points
Station A Station B
Easting,
x(m)
Northing, y
(m)
Easting, x
(m)
Northing, y
(m)
1 442270.000 3681940.999 442270.036 3681943.059
2 442271.001 3681944.009 442271.001 3681943.572
3 0442272.002 3681947.018 442271.964 3681949.097
4 442273.003 3681950.007 442272.909 3681949.603
5 442275.004 3681953.13 442273.866 681950.125
6 442275.005 3681956.008 442274.82 3681953.633
7 442276.007 3681956.997 442274.767 3681958.151
8 442277.009 3681962.996 442275.767 3681959.667
9 442278.005 3681963.001 442276.679 3681960.186
10 442279.007 3681968.012 442277.648 3681961.694

First and second coulombs for each station in Table 3
represent Easting and Northing coordinates for same points,
which have configuration as a straight line as shown in Fig. 4.
Table 4 shows the results using MATLAB program and
equations (1, 2, 5, and 6). The line of best fit for data in A and
B stations is illustrated in Figs. 5 and 6.


Fig. 4 Configuration of Points for total station (A) and (B).





TABLE IV
THE RESULTS FOR EACH STATION.





Fig. 5 The line of best fit for station (A)

The statistical data for coordinates in each station are
compared as shown in Table 5.










Station (B) Station (A)
2.4988 e
+006
2.4201 e
+006
Parameter of a
2.6753 2.8530 Parameter of b
y)x)= 2.6753
x+2.4988 e
+006

y(x)= 2.8530
x+2.4201 e
+006

Regression
equation (m)
5.4210 e
-018
2.1684 e
-019
Error (m
2
)
I nternational J ournal of Engineering Trends and Technology (I J ETT) Volume 5 number 1 Nov 2013

ISSN: 2231-5381 http://www.ijettjournal.org Page 35








TABLE V
COMPARISON BETWEEN TWO STATIONS.





Fig. 6 The line of best fit for station (B)





Conclusions
The The errors in station (A) less than station (B),
then minimum error ( ) gives of a and b this means the data
or ground points in total station (A) have configuration as
straight line batter than in total station (B).
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Financial support was provided by the University of Kufa.

REFERENCES
[1] Etrex Vista Garmin Navigator, 2007. User manual, Garmin International,
Inc. 1200 East 151
st
, USA.
[2] Canary Systems, Inc., TPS 1200 Total Station USERS GUIDE, 75
Newport Road, Suite 211, New London, NH 03257 USA, 2006.
[3] Ghilani, C., Walf, P., 2006. Adjustment computation: spatial data analysis,
4
th
edition, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New Jersey, USA.
[4] Dawod, G, 1991. Some considerations in the adjustment of GPS-derived
baselines in the network mode, M.SC. Thesis, Geodetic science and
surveying department, the Ohio state University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
[5] Abdi, H., Valentin D., Edelman, B.E. (1999). Neural networks. Thousand
Oaks: Sage.
[6] Bates, D.M., Watts D.G. (1988). Nonlinear regression analysis and its
applications. New York: Wiley.
[7] Greene, W.H. (2002). Econometric analysis. New York: Prentice Hall.

Station (A) Station (B)
x y x y
Mean 442274.604 3681954.2177 442273.9456 3681952.87
Standard
deviation
3.0284 8.8514 3.0284 6.8411
Variation 9.1709 78.3464 9.1709 46.8010
Minimum 442270 3681940.999 442270 3681943.059
Maximum 442279 3681968.012 442277.64 3681961.694