Fieldwork No.

07
Stadia Leveling

Name :Cole, James Michael D Weather :Sunny

Group No. :2 Place :Hillside, USC
Designation :Instrument man Time, Start : 1:30 pm
Instructor :Engr. Oliver Dave L. Mag-uyon End : 3:30 pm
Class Schedule :MW, 1:30 pm – 4:30 pm

Objective:
To determine the difference in elevation of two distant points by stadia method of
indirect leveling.

Instruments:
Theodolite Stadia Rod Marking Pins

Procedure:
1. Set up and level the instrument at any convenient location along the designated
survey route.
2. Take a backsight on the rod held at the initial point or bench mark and observe
and record the hair readings (upper, middle, lower) and the vertical angle.
3. Establish a turning point ahead of the instrument station and along the general
direction of the survey route.
4. Take a foresight on the rod held at the turning point and observe and record the
hair readings (upper, middle, lower) and the vertical angle.
5. Transfer the instrument to a new location ahead of the turning point and repeat
the process of taking all readings at each point backsighted and foresighted. This
process of observing data and transferring the instrument to another advance
location is then continued until a foresight is taken on the terminal point.
6. Tabulate all observed and computed values accordingly.

Fig 3-1
 The general expression for the differences in elevation between two points such as B
and F is : DE = Rb  Vb  Vf  R
When the computed values of the vertical distances are tabulated the sign of V b is
made opposite to the sign of b, while the sign of Vf is made to correspond to the sign
of .
To determine the evaluation of the ground points on the foresight, the value of DE is
added algebraically to the elevation of the ground point on the backsight or:
Elev F = Elev B  DE
The customary check is prepared by determining the difference in elevation between
the initial and the terminal point and also determining the algebraic sum of the
tabulated differences in elevation. If the two quantities are equal, it can be assumed
that the preceding computations were done correctly.

Remarks:

1. The stadia method of indirect leveling provides a faster method of leveling in

rough and hilly terrain where a high degree of recision is not required.

2. The process involved in stadia leveling is very identical to that in differential

leveling. The main difference is that the line of sight in stadia leveling does not
have to be brought horizontal as in differential leveling.

3. The bubble in the telescope level vial should remain centered when the telescope
is clamped in a horizontal position. If the vertical vernier does not read zero when
the bubble is centered, there is an index error. The index correction should be
applied to the observed vertical angles.

Data and Results:

BS FS
DE ELEV
STA RR VD RR VD
S (m)  S (m)  (m) (m)
(m) (m) (m) (m)
BM 1 0.63 -6 0.935 3.3 100
BM 2 0.62 9 2.14 4.87 4.65 104.65

Sample Computations:
Conclusion:
In this fieldwork, we used a new type of leveling called Stadia Leveling. Stadia
leveling is a rapid and efficient method of measuring distances. It is not quite accurate for
high order surveys, but it is accurate enough for trigonometric leveling, locating topographic
details, and some traverses. This type of leveling is well suited for hilly places. After doing
this fieldwork, we developed some skills like reading the horizontal angle of the theodolite
by acquiring needed bearings.

In our data, we only had two benchmarks. BM 1 as our back sight and BM 2 as our
foresight. In our back-sight data, we had a stadia intercept of 0.63m, an angle of -6 and a
rod reading of 0.935m. After that, we computed for our vertical distance which is 3.3m. On
the other hand, on the foresight data, we had a stadia intercept of 0.62m, an angle of 9
and a rod reading of 2.14m. After that we obtained our vertical distance in foresight which
is 4.87m. The elevation of BM 1 is 100m and the elevation of the BM 2 is 104.65, so the
difference of elevation between those two is 4.65m. We obtained our vertical distances by
using trigonometry.

There are also possible errors in our fieldwork activity. The errors were: rod
handling – there might be some error in reading the stadia since the rods are far away you
can see that the rods were quite unsteady; natural error – it was sunny when this fieldwork
was conducted meaning it was very hot which could affect our stadia because they expand
when it’s hot which also could affect in rod reading.
Sketch: