Structural Deformation Surveying

EM 1110-2-1009
01 February 2018
US Army Corps
of Engineers
ENGINEERING AND DESIGN
Structural Deformation Surveying
ENGINEER MANUAL
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY *EM 1110-2-1009
U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers
CECW-EE Washington, DC 20314-1000
Manual
No. 1110-2-1009 01Feb2018
Engineering and Design

STRUCTURAL DEFORMATION SURVEYING
1. Puq?ose. This manual provides technical guidance for performing precise structural
defonnation surveys of locks, dams, and other hydraulic flood control or navigation structures.
Accuracy, procedural, and quality control standards are defined for monitoring displacements in
hydraulic structures.
2. Applicability. This manual applies to all U.S. Atmy Corps of Engineers (US.ACE) commands
having responsibility for conducting periodic inspections of completed civil works projects, as
required under Engineer Regulation (ER) 1110-2-1156, Safety of Dams -Policy and Procedure.
3. Distribution Statement. This publication is approved for public release; distribution is

unlimited.
4. Discussion. The Corps of Engineers has constructed hundreds of dams, locks, levees, and other
structures that require periodic surveys to monitor long-term movements and settlements, or to
monitor short-term deflections and defmmations. These structures are subject to external loads
that cause defmmation and pe1meation ofthe structure itself, as well as its foundations. Any
indication of abnmmal behavior may threaten the safety of the structure. Careful monitoring of the
loads on a structure and its response to them can aid in dete1mining abno1mal behavior of that
structure. In general, monitoring consists of both measurements and visual inspections, as outlined
in ER 1110-2-1156. To facilitate the monitoring of structures, they should be pennanently
equipped with proper instrumentation and/or monitoring points according to the goals of the
observation, structure type and size, and site conditions.
FOR THE COMMANDER:
6 Appendices E ERY A. ANDERSON

(See Table of Contents) COL, EN
Chief of Staff
*This manual supersedes EM 1110-2-1009, Structural Deformation Surveying, 1 June 2002

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY EM 1110-2-1009
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
CECW-EE Washington, DC 20314-1000
Manual
No. 1110-2-1009 01 Feb 18
Engineering and Design
STRUCTURAL DEFORMATION SURVEYING
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Paragraph Page
Chapter 1. Introduction
Purpose .......................................................................................1-1 1-1
Applicability ...............................................................................1-2 1-1
Distribution .................................................................................1-3 1-1
References...................................................................................1-4 1-1
Scope of Manual .........................................................................1-5 1-1
Background.................................................................................1-6 1-1
Structural Deformation Surveying..............................................1-7 1-3
Life Cycle Project Management .................................................1-8 1-4
Metrics ........................................................................................1-9 1-4
Trade Name Exclusions..............................................................1-10 1-4
Abbreviations and Terms............................................................1-11 1-4
Mandatory Requirements............................................................1-12 1-4
Proponency and Waivers ............................................................1-13 1-4
Chapter 2. Planning, Design, and Accuracy Requirements
Standards for Deformation Surveys............................................2-1 2-1
Accuracy Requirements for Performing Deformation Surveys..2-2 2-2
Overview of Deformation Surveying Design ............................2-3 2-4
Professional Associations ...........................................................2-4 2-9
Causes of Dam Failure................................................................2-5 2-10
Foundation Problems in Dams....................................................2-6 2-11
Navigation Locks........................................................................2-7 2-12
Deformation Parameters .............................................................2-8 2-14
Location of Monitoring Points....................................................2-9 2-15
Design of Reference Networks...................................................2-10 2-17
Reference Point Monumentation ................................................2-11 2-21
Monitoring Point Monumentation ..............................................2-12 2-23
Design of Measurement Schemes...............................................2-13 2-26
i
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Paragraph Page
Measurement Reliability.............................................................2-14 2-29
Frequency of Measurements.......................................................2-15 2-31
Chapter 3. Deformation Measurement and Alignment Instrumentation
General........................................................................................3-1 3-1
Angle and Distance Measurements ............................................3-2 3-2
Differential Leveling ..................................................................3-3 3-6
Total Station Trigonometric Elevations......................................3-4 3-7
Global Positioning System (GPS) ..............................................3-5 3-8
Photogrammetric Techniques .....................................................3-6 3-11
Alignment Measurements...........................................................3-7 3-12
Extension and Strain Measurements...........................................3-8 3-14
Tilt and Inclination Measurements .............................................3-9 3-17
Non-Geodetic Measurements .....................................................3-10 3-19
Optical Tooling Technology.......................................................3-11 3-21
Laser Tooling methods ...............................................................3-12 3-22
Chapter 4. Sources of Measurement Error and Instrument Calibrations
General........................................................................................4-1 4-1
Theory of Measurements and Survey Measurement Error.........4-2 4-1
Optical Pointing Error.................................................................4-3 4-4
Instrument Leveling Error ..........................................................4-4 4-7
Instrument Centering Error.........................................................4-5 4-8
Horizontal Angle Measurement Error ........................................4-6 4-11
Electronic Distance Measurement Error.....................................4-7 4-11
Zenith Angle Measurement Error...............................................4-8 4-14
Refraction of Optical Lines of Sight...........................................4-9 4-15
Theodolite System Error.............................................................4-10 4-20
Reflector Alignment Error..........................................................4-11 4-21
EDM Scale Error ........................................................................4-12 4-21
EDM Prism Zero Error ...............................................................4-13 4-22
EDM Cyclic Error.......................................................................4-14 4-24
Calibration Baselines ..................................................................4-15 4-25
Equipment for Baseline Calibration ...........................................4-16 4-26
Procedures for Baseline Calibration ...........................................4-17 4-27
Sources of Error in GPS Measurements .....................................4-18 4-29
ii
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Paragraph Page
Chapter 5. Angle and Distance Observations--Theodolites, Total Stations and EDM
Scope...........................................................................................5-1
5-1
Instrument and Reflector Centering Procedures.........................5-2 5-2
Angle and Direction Observations..............................................5-3 5-3
Distance Observations ................................................................5-4 5-6
Electro-Optical Distance Measurement......................................5-5 5-8
EDM Reductions ........................................................................5-6 5-11
Atmospheric Refraction Correction............................................5-7 5-12
Chapter 6. Settlement Surveys--Precise Differential Leveling Observations
Scope...........................................................................................6-1 6-1
Precise Geodetic Leveling ..........................................................6-2 6-1
Differential Leveling Reductions ...............................................6-3 6-5
Total Station Trigonometric Heights ..........................................6-4 6-8
Chapter 7. Alignment, Deflection, and Crack Measurement Surveys--Micrometer Observations
Scope...........................................................................................7-1 7-1
Relative Alignment Deflections from Fixed Baseline................7-2 7-1
Micrometer Crack Measurement Observations ..........................7-3 7-6
Chapter 8. Monitoring Structural Deformations Using the Global Positioning System
Purpose .......................................................................................8-1 8-1
Background.................................................................................8-2 8-1
Scope of Chapter.........................................................................8-3 8-2
Section I
Monitoring Structural Deformation with GPS
Surveying Requirements.............................................................8-4 8-4
Surveying Procedures .................................................................8-5 8-6
Data Processing Procedures........................................................8-6
8-8
GPS Monitoring Applications ....................................................8-7 8-11
GPS Survey Reporting and Results ............................................8-8 8-15
Section II
GPS Performance on Monitoring Networks
GPS Receiving System Performance..........................................8-9
8-17
GPS Performance on Monitoring Networks...............................8-10 8-20
iii
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Paragraph Page
Section III
Data Quality Assessment for GPS Monitoring Surveying
Post-Processing Statistics ...........................................................8-11 8-26
Closure and Station Checks ........................................................8-12 8-30
Section IV
Mitigation of Multipath Signals
Description of Multipath Signals................................................8-13 8-32
Data Cleaning Techniques for GPS Monitoring Surveys...........8-14 8-34
Chapter 9. Preanalysis and Network Adjustment
General........................................................................................9-1 9-1
Least Squares Adjustment ..........................................................9-2 9-1
Adjustment Input Parameters .....................................................9-3 9-5
Adjustment Output Parameters...................................................9-4 9-10
Adjustment Procedures...............................................................9-5 9-15
Chapter 10. Laser Scanning in Deformation Monitoring
General........................................................................................10-1 10-1
Instrumentation and Performance...............................................10-2 10-2
Data Management.......................................................................10-3 10-5
Standardized Reporting ..............................................................10-4 10-5
Project Example..........................................................................10-5 10-6
Chapter 11. Analysis and Assessment of Results
General........................................................................................11-1 11-1
Geometrical Analysis..................................................................11-2 11-2
Statistical Modeling ....................................................................11-3 11-8
Deterministic Modeling ..............................................................11-4 11-9
Hybrid Analysis Method.............................................................11-5 11-10
Automated Data Management ....................................................11-6 11-11
Scope of Deformation Analysis..................................................11-7 11-13
Chapter 12. Data Presentation and Final Reports
Reporting Content and Format ...................................................12-1 12-1
Displacement Data Presentation .................................................12-2 12-3
iv
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Paragraph Page
Data Management.......................................................................12-3 12-4

Example Report ..........................................................................12-4 12-5
Appendix A References A-1
Appendix B Applications: Deformation Surveys of Locks and Dams B-1

Central & Southern Florida Flood Control Project
(Jacksonville District)
Surveying for Lock Structure Dewatering
(Lock and Dam No. 4, St. Paul District)
Appendix C Applications: Monitoring Schemes for Concrete Dams C-1

(Libby Dam, Seattle District)
Appendix D Yatesville Lake Dam Network Adjustment Example D-1
Appendix E Laser Alignment Surveys and Instrumentation E-1
Appendix F Relative Distance Ratio Assessment Methods F-1
Glossary Glossary-1
v
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
vi
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
1-1. Purpose. This manual provides technical guidance for performing precise structural
deformation surveys of locks, dams, and other hydraulic flood control or navigation structures.
Accuracy, procedural, and quality control standards are defined for monitoring displacements in
hydraulic structures.
1-2. Applicability. This manual applies to all U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
Commands having responsibility for conducting periodic inspections of completed civil works
projects, as required under Engineer Regulation (ER) 1110-2-1156, Safety of Dams – Policy and
Procedure.
1-3. Distribution Statement. This publication is approved for public release; distribution is
unlimited.
1-4. References. Required and related references are at Appendix A.
1-5. Scope of Manual. The primary emphasis of this manual is placed on the technical
procedures for performing precise monitoring surveys in support of the USACE dam safety
programs. General planning criteria, field and office execution procedures, data reduction and
adjustment methods, and required accuracy specifications for performing structural deformation
surveys are provided. These techniques are applicable to periodic monitoring surveys on earth
and rock-fill dams, embankments, and concrete structures. This manual covers both
conventional (terrestrial) and satellite (Global Positioning System (GPS)) deformation survey
methods used for measuring external movements. This manual does not cover instrumentation
required to measure internal loads, stresses, strains, or pressures within a structure—refer to the
references at Appendix A for these activities. Example applications on USACE projects are
provided at Appendix B (Deformation Surveys of Locks and Dams) and Appendix C
(Monitoring Schemes for Concrete Dams). The manual is intended to be a reference guide for
structural deformation surveying, whether performed by in-house hired-labor forces, contracted
forces, or combinations thereof. This manual should be directly referenced in the scopes of work
for Architect-Engineer (A-E) survey services or other third-party survey services.
1-6. Background. USACE has constructed hundreds of dams, locks, levees, and other flood
control structures that require periodic surveys to monitor long-term movements and settlements,
or to monitor short-term deflections and deformations. These surveys are usually performed
under the directives of ER 1110-2-1156.
a. Structural Deformation. Dams, locks, levees, embankments, and other flood control
structures are subject to external loads that cause deformation and permeation of the structure
itself, as well as its foundations. Any indication of abnormal behavior may threaten the safety of
the structure. Careful monitoring of the loads on a structure and its response to them can aid in
1-1
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
determining abnormal behavior of that structure. In general, monitoring consists of both

measurements and visual inspections, as outlined in ER 1110-2-1156. To facilitate the
monitoring of structures, they should be permanently equipped with proper instrumentation
and/or monitoring points per the goals of the observation, structure type and size, and site
conditions.
b. Concrete Structures. It is intuitive that deformations and periodic observations will vary
per the type of structure. Differences in construction materials are one of the larger influences
on how a structure deforms. For example, concrete dams deform differently than earthen or
embankment dams. For concrete dams and other concrete flood control devices, deformation is
highly dependent on reservoir water pressure and temperature variations with an overall elastic
behavior. Permanent deformation of the structure can sometimes occur as the subsoil adapts to
new loads, concrete aging, or foundation rock fatigue is experienced. Such deformation is not
considered unsafe if it does not go beyond a predetermined critical value. Therefore, periodic
observations are typically configured to observing relatively long-term movement trends, to
include abnormal settlements, heaving, or lateral movements. Conventional geodetic survey
methods from external points are sufficient to monitor these long-term trends. Highly accurate,
short-term deflections or relative movements between monoliths due to varying temperature or
hydraulic loading are more rarely required. These may include crack measurements or relative
movements between monoliths over different hydraulic loadings.
c. Earthen Embankment Structures. Earthen or embankment dams and levees obviously will
deform altogether differently than concrete ones. With earthen dams, the deformation is largely
characterized as more permanent. Deformation of an earthen dam can either be from
consolidation (self-weight like loading) or the hydrostatic load from the reservoir the dam is
resisting. Deformation might be described as multilane. An earthen dam crest cracks, or starts
with a divot, or sometimes a heaved boil and a slough. The shapes are mulitplanar. Deformation
survey accuracy requirements are less rigid for earthen embankments, and traditional
construction survey methods will usually provide sufficient accuracy. Typical surveys include
periodic measurement of embankment crest elevations and slopes to monitor settlements and
slope stability.
d. Long-Term Deformation Monitoring. Depending on the type and condition of structure,

monitoring systems may need to be capable of measuring both long-term movement trends and
short-term loading deformations. Long-term measurements are far more common and somewhat
more complex given their external nature. Long-term monitoring of a structure's movement
typically requires observations to monitoring points on the structure from external reference
points. These external reference points are established on stable ground well removed from the
structure or its construction influence. These external reference points are inter-connected and
termed the "reference network." The reference network must also be monitored to ensure these
reference points have not themselves moved. Traditional geodetic survey instruments and
techniques may be employed to establish and monitor the reference network points.
1-2
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
1-7. Structural Deformation Surveying.
a. Reference and Monitoring Points. The general procedures to monitor the deformation of a
structure and its foundation involve measuring the spatial displacement of selected object points
(i.e., monitoring points) from external reference points that are fixed in position. Both terrestrial
and satellite methods are used to measure these geospatial displacements. When the reference
points are located in the structure, only relative deformation is determined, for example,
micrometer joint measurements are relative observations. Absolute deformation or displacement
is possible if the reference points are located outside the actual structure, in the foundation or
surrounding terrain, and beyond the area that may be affected by the dam or reservoir.
Subsequent periodic observations are then made relative to these absolute reference points.
Assessment of permanent deformations requires absolute data.
b. Reference Point Network. In general, for concrete dams, it is ideal to place the reference
points in a rock foundation at a depth unaffected by the reservoir. Once permanently
monumented, these reference points can be easily accessed to perform deformation surveys with
simple measurement devices. Fixed reference points located within the vicinity of the dam but
outside the range of its impact are essential to determination of the deformation behavior of the
structure. Thus, monitoring networks in the dam plane will be supplemented by and/or
connected horizontally and vertically to the National Spatial Reference System (NSRS) when
practical or feasible.
c. Monitoring Techniques. The monitoring of dam or foundation deformation must be done

in a manner such that the displacement is measured both horizontally and vertically (i.e.,
measurement along horizontal and vertical lines) to mimic mulitplanar movement. Such
measurements must include the foundation and extend as far as possible into it. Redundancy is
essential in this form of deformation monitoring and is achieved through measuring at the points
intersecting the orthogonal lines of the deformation network. If a dam includes inspection
galleries and shafts, deformation values along vertical lines can be obtained by using hanging
and/or inverted plumb lines and along horizontal lines by traverses—both of these methods are
standard practice for deformation monitoring. Where there are no galleries or shafts (e.g.,
embankment dams, thin arch dams, or small gravity dams), the same result can be achieved by
an orthogonal network of survey targets on the downstream face. These targets are sighted by
angle measurements (typically combined with optical distance measurements) from reference
points outside the dam.
d. Relative Displacement Observations. A more routine, less costly, and more frequent
monitoring process can be employed to monitor the short-term behavior of dams by simply
confining observation to trends at selected points along the crest and sometimes vertical lines.
Such procedures typically involve simple angle measurement or alignment (supplementing the
measuring installation) along the crest to determine horizontal displacement, and elevation
determination by leveling to determine vertical displacement (i.e., settlement). Even with this
monitoring process, it is essential to extend leveling to some distance beyond the abutments.
1-3
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Alternative methods described include settlement gauges, hose leveling devices, or

extensometers.
1-8. Life Cycle Project Management. As outlined in ER 1110-2-1156, structural stability

assessment surveys may be required through the entire life cycle of a project, spanning decades
in many cases. During the early planning phases of a project, a comprehensive monitoring plan
should be developed which considers survey requirements over a project's life cycle, with a goal
of eliminating duplicate or redundant surveys to the maximum extent possible. During initial
design and preconstruction phases of a project, reference points should be permanently
monumented and situated in areas that are conducive to the performance of periodic monitoring
surveys. During construction, fixed monitoring points should be established on the structure at
points called for in the comprehensive monitoring plan.
1-9. Metrics. Both English and metric (International System of Units (SI)) units are used in this
manual. Metric units are commonly used in precise surveying applications, including the
horizontal and vertical survey work covered in this manual. Structural movements are usually
recorded and reported in SI units. Some measurement instruments (e.g., micrometers) use
English units. In all cases, the use of either metric or non-SI units must follow local engineering
and construction practices. Accuracy standards and tolerances specified in this manual are
generally stated at the 95% confidence level.
1-10. Trade Name Exclusions. The citation or illustration in this manual of trade names of
commercially available survey products, including other auxiliary surveying equipment,
instrumentation, and adjustment software, does not constitute official endorsement or approval of
the use of such products.
1-11. Abbreviations and Terms. Engineering surveying terms and abbreviations used in this
manual are explained in the Glossary.
1-12. Mandatory Requirements. ER 1110-2-1150 (Engineering and Design for Civil Works
Projects) prescribes that mandatory requirements be identified in engineer manuals (EMs).
Mandatory accuracy standards, quality control, and quality assurance criteria are normally
summarized in tables within each chapter. If no mandatory requirements are listed, then the
material in a particular chapter is considered recommended guidance. The mandatory criteria
contained in this manual are based on the following considerations: (1) project safety assurance,
(2) overall project function, (3) previous USACE experience and practice, (4) USACE-wide
geospatial data standardization requirements, (5) adverse economic impacts if criteria are not
followed, and (6) HQUSACE commitments to industry standards.
1-13. Proponency and Waivers. The HQUSACE proponent for this manual is the Engineering
and Construction Division, Directorate of Civil Works. Technical development and compilation of
the manual was coordinated by the U.S. Army Geospatial Center (CEAGC-GSS). Comments,
recommended changes, or waivers to this manual should be forwarded through Major
Subordinate Commands (MSC) to Headquarters, USACE (HQUSACE) (ATTN: CECW-EE).
1-4
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
CHAPTER 2
Planning, Design, and Accuracy Requirements
2-1. Standards for Deformation Surveys.
a. General. This chapter provides guidance for planning and implementing structural
deformation surveys on USACE civil works projects. It discusses criteria and objectives used
for designing geodetic monitoring networks and for developing reliable and economical
measurement schemes based on precise engineering surveying methods. Deformation
monitoring is conducted primarily to ensure the safety of the dam and deformation surveys
provides engineering data and analysis for verifying design parameters, for construction safety,
for periodic inspection reports, and for regular maintenance operations. Safety, economical
design of man-made structures, efficient functioning and fitting of structural elements,
environmental protection, and development of mitigating measures in the case of natural
disasters (landslides, earthquakes, liquefaction of earth dams, etc.) require a good understanding
of causes (loads) and the mechanism of deformation, which can be achieved only through the
proper measurement and analysis of deformable bodies.
b. Dam Safety. USACE owns and operates a wide range of large engineering structures,
including major infrastructure facilities for navigation, flood protection, and large dams. The
National Dam Safety Program ensures that all dams and appurtenant structures are designed,
constructed, and operated safely and effectively under all conditions. The responsibility to
minimize the risk to the public is critical due to the potential loss of life and property that a
structural failure could cause. USACE dams and reservoirs must be inspected so that their
structural condition and design assumptions can be evaluated and verified. As a result of major
disasters in the United States, the Federal Government revised laws for supervision of the safety
of dams and reservoirs. The Dam Inspection Act, Public Law (PL) 92-367, 8 August 1972,
authorized the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers, to undertake a
national program of inspection of dams.
c. Engineer Regulations (ERs). Standards for conducting instrumentation surveys and for
periodic inspections are contained in the following publications.
-ER 1110-2-1156, Safety of Dams – Policy and Procedures

-ER 1110-2-103, Strong-Motion Instruments for Recording Earthquake Motions on Dams
-EM 1110-2-2300, General Design and Construction Consideration for Earth and Rock-Fill
Dams
-EM 1110-2-4300, Instrumentation for Concrete Structures
-EM 1110-2-1908, Instrumentation of Embankment Dams and Levees
Guidance for Civil Works projects provides for an adequate level of instrumentation, as
appropriate to address potential failure modes and risks, to enable design engineers to monitor
and evaluate the safe performance of the structures during the construction period and under all
2-1
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
operating conditions. Appendix AD of ER 1110-2-1156 states that a systematic plan will be

established for the inspection of those features relating to safety and stability of the structure and
to the operational adequacy of the project. Operational adequacy means the inspecting, testing,
operating, and evaluation of those components of the project whose failure to operate properly
would impair the operational capability and/or usability of the structure. Appendix AD also
addresses provisions to collect and permanently retain specific engineering data relating to the
project structure and examine records that detail the principal design assumptions and stability,
stress analysis, slope stability, and settlement analyses.
d. Specialized Standards. Federal geospatial data standards, established in OMB Circular

No. A-16, Coordination of Geographic Information and Related Spatial Data Activities, provide
for activities conducted to meet special agency program needs. USACE engineering and
construction guidance for geospatial data products prescribes voluntary industry standards and
consensus standards, except where they are non-existent, inappropriate, or do not meet a
project’s functional requirement. Specialized standards for conducting deformation surveys are
justified as long as products are consistent with effective government wide coordination and
efficient, economical service to the general public. Deformation monitoring often requires
specialized surveying methods that are planned and executed per specialized techniques and
procedures.
2-2. Accuracy Requirements for Performing Deformation Surveys.
a. Accuracy Requirements. Typical accuracy requirements for deformation surveys can be

found in Table 2-1. Surveying accuracy specifications are meant to ensure detection of a given
amount of movement under normal operating conditions. Allowable survey error thresholds are
related to the maximum expected displacement that would occur between repeated measurement
campaigns. For each survey, final positioning accuracies at the 95% probability level, usually
stated as 95% confidence level relative to the Root Mean Squared (RMS), should be less than or
equal to one-fourth (0.25) of the predicted (maximum) displacement value. In addition to the
maximum displacement criteria stated above, the expected velocity and/or frequency (cyclic
behavior) should be considered as a further practical basis for the design of accuracy
requirements. Specification of accuracy requirements is a major factor in the evaluation of
performance for a given GPS-based measurement scheme. The maximum deflection of any
structure varies widely and should be determined for each survey design, maximum deflection
should be determined by a separate structural analysis. The following sections provide examples
of how to calculate survey accuracy for various types of structures.
(1) Example calculation of survey accuracy for concrete structures. Long-term movement
studies on large concrete structures (mass gravity dams) indicate that normal maximum relative
horizontal deflections between any two monolith pairs are on the order of 20–30 millimeter
(mm), due mainly to cyclic-seasonal temperature and pool elevation changes. This implies an
accuracy of 5–7 mm in relative horizontal positioning from each survey is required at the 95%
confidence level, which closely approximates the values listed in Table 2.1.
2-2
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(2) Example calculation of survey accuracy for embankment structures. Settlement of earth
and rock-fill embankments decreases as a function of time (due to consolidation). Normal
vertical settlement is on the order of 400 mm over a 5–10-year stabilizing phase, progressing
most actively in the first two years. Mean settlement rates of approximately 50 mm/year, up to a
maximum of 140 mm/year are typical, however, these rates depend on the subsurface conditions
and embankment composition and can vary dramatically. This implies vertical survey accuracy
of approximately 12 mm/year up to a maximum of 35 mm. Horizontal displacements on
embankment structures follow similar stabilizing trends with maximum displacements on the
order 90–100 mm, occurring at peak rates of 30 mm/year. Positioning accuracies of
approximately 22-25 mm/year horizontally are required at the 95% confidence level.
(3) Example calculation of survey accuracy for navigation locks. Navigation lock structures
are subject to foundation uplift pressures (especially when dewatered for repairs), and
progressive deterioration from use, age, collisions, and river environment effects. Lock
monitoring includes events such as ground motion due to nearby seismic activity, scour and
associated wall settlements, and inward rotation of wall monoliths away from retaining
embankments. Assume an example relative movement (due to tilt) on the order of 20 mm or less
between the base and top of the wall would approach minimum safety and stability thresholds.
Survey accuracies on the order of 5 mm at 95% are required to observe movement trends and
give adequate warning time to evacuate the lock chamber(s) before failure.
b. The following table provides guidance on the accuracy requirements for performing
deformation surveys. These represent either absolute or relative movement accuracies on target
points that should be attained from survey observations made from external reference points.
The accuracy by which the external reference network is established and periodically monitored
for stability should exceed these accuracies. Many modern survey systems (e.g., electronic total
stations, digital levels, GPS, etc.) are easily capable of meeting or exceeding the accuracies
shown below. However, it is important that accuracy criteria be defined relative to the particular
structure's requirements, not the capabilities of a survey instrument or system.
Table 2-1. Nominal accuracy requirements for structure target points (95% RMS).
Concrete Structures Dams, Outlet Works, Locks, Intake Structures:

Long-Term Movement +5–10 mm
Relative Short-Term Deflections
Crack/Joint Movements +0.2 mm
Monolith Alignment +2 mm
Vertical Stability/Settlement +2 mm
Embankment Structures Earth Rock-fill Dams, Levees:
Slope/crest Stability +10–20 mm
Crest Alignment +10-20 mm
2-3
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Settlement measurements +5 mm
Control Structures Spillways, Stilling Basins, Approach/Outlet Channels, Reservoirs:
Scour/Erosion/Silting +25–100 mm
2-3. Overview of Deformation Surveying Design.
a. General. USACE districts have the responsibility for formulating inspection plans,
conducting inspections, processing and analyzing instrument observations, evaluating the
condition of the structures, recommending inspection schedules, and preparing inspection and
evaluation reports. This section presents information to aid in fulfilling these objectives.
b. Monitoring Plan. Each monitored structure should have a technical report or design
memorandum published for the instrumentation and/or surveying scheme to document the
monitoring plan and its intended performance. A project specific measurement scheme and its
operating procedures should be developed for the monitoring system (Figure 2-1). Separate
designs should be completed for the instrumentation plan and for the proposed measurement
scheme. This plan should be documented in the periodic inspections.
Maximum
Accuracy Preanalysis &
Expected
Requirements Survey Design
Displacement
Network Data Data

Adjustment Reductions Collection
Deformation Data
Modeling Presentation
Figure 2-1. Deformation survey data flow.
(1) Survey System Design. Although accuracy and sensitivity criteria may differ
considerably between various monitoring applications, the basic principles of the design of
monitoring schemes and their geometrical analysis remain the same. For example, a study on the
2-4
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
stability of magnets in a nuclear accelerator may require determination of relative displacements

with an accuracy of +0.05 mm, while a settlement study of a rock-fill dam may require only +10
mm accuracy. Although in both cases, the monitoring techniques and instrumentation may
differ, the same basic methodology applies to the design and analysis of the deformation
measurements.
(a) Instrumentation Plan (Design). The instrumentation plan is mainly concerned with
building or installing the physical network of surface movement points for a monitoring project.
Contained in the instrumentation plan are specifications, procedures, and descriptions for:
-required equipment, supplies, and materials;
-monument types, function, and operating principles;
-procedures for the installation and protection of monuments;
-location and coverage of monitoring points on the project; and
-maintenance and inspection of the monitoring network.
The plan contains drawings, product specifications, and other documents that completely
describe the proposed instrumentation, and methods for fabrication; testing; installation; and
protection and maintenance of instruments and monuments.
(b) Measurement Scheme (Design). The design of the survey measurement scheme should
include analysis and specifications for:
-predicted performance of the structure,
-measurement accuracy requirements,
-positioning accuracy requirements,
-number and types of measurements,
-selection of instrument type and precision,
-data collection and field procedures,
-data reduction and processing procedures,
-data analysis and modeling procedures,
-reporting standards and formats, and
-project management and data archiving.
The main technique used to design and evaluate measurement schemes for accuracy is known as
"network preanalysis." Software applications specially written for preanalysis and adjustment
are used to compute expected error and positioning confidence for all surveyed points in the
monitoring network (see examples in Chapter 9).
(2) Data Collection. The data collection required on a project survey is specifically
prescribed by the results of network preanalysis. The data collection scheme must provide built-
in levels of both accuracy and reliability to ensure acceptance of the raw data.
2-5
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(a) Accuracy. Achieving the required accuracy for monitoring surveys is based on
instrument performance and observing procedures. Minimum instrument resolution, data
collection options, and proper operating instructions are determined from manufacturer
specifications. The actual data collection is executed per the results of network preanalysis so
that the quality of the results can be verified during data processing and post-analysis of the
network adjustment.
(b) Reliability. Reliability in the raw measurements requires a system of redundant

measurements, sufficient geometric closure, and strength in the network configuration. Geodetic
surveying methods can yield high redundancy in the design of the data collection scheme.
(3) Data Processing. Raw survey data must be converted into meaningful engineering values
during the data processing stage. Several major categories of data reductions are:
-applying pre-determined calibration values to the raw measurements,
-finding mean values for repeated measurements of the same observable,
-data quality assessment and statistical testing during least squares adjustment, and
-measurement outlier detection and data cleaning prior to the final adjustment.
Procedures for data reductions should be based on the most rigorous formulas and data
processing techniques available. These procedures are applied consistently to each monitoring
survey to ensure comparable results. Network adjustment software based on least squares
techniques is strongly recommended for data processing. Least squares adjustment techniques
are used to compute the coordinates and survey accuracy for each point in the monitoring
network. Network adjustment processing also identifies measurement blunders by statistically
testing the observation residuals.
(4) Data Analysis. Geometric modeling is used to analyze spatial displacements (see Chapter
11). General movement trends are described using a sufficient number of discrete point
displacements (dn):
dn(x, y, z) for n = point number
Point displacements are calculated by differencing the adjusted coordinates for the most recent
survey campaign (f), from the coordinates obtained at some reference time (i), for example:
x = xf - xi is the x coordinate displacement,
y = yf - yi is the y coordinate displacement,
z = zf - zi is the z coordinate displacement, and
t = tf - ti is the time difference between surveys.
Each movement vector has magnitude and direction expressed as point displacement coordinate
differences. Collectively, these vectors describe the displacement field over a given time
2-6
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
interval. Displacements that exceed the amount of movement expected under normal operating
conditions will indicate possible abnormal behavior. Comparison of the magnitude of the
calculated displacement and its associated survey accuracy indicates whether the reported
movement is more likely due to survey error:
dn  (en)
where
dn = sqrt (x2 + y2 + z2) for point n, is the magnitude of the displacement,
(en) = max dimension of combined 95% confidence ellipse for
point n = (1.96) sqrt (f 2 + i 2),
and
f is the standard error in position for the (final) or most recent survey,
i is the standard error in position for the (initial) or reference survey.
For example, if the adjusted coordinates for point n in the initial survey were:
xi = 1000.000 m
yi = 1000.000 m
zi = 1000.000 m
and the adjusted coordinates for the same point in the final survey were:
xf = 1000.006 m
yf = 1000.002 m
zf = 1000.002 m
then the calculated displacement components for point n would be:
x = 6 mm
y = 2 mm
z = 2 mm
Assuming that the horizontal position has a standard deviation of h = 1.5 mm for both surveys,
and similarly the vertical position has a standard deviation of v = 2.0 mm, as reported from the
adjustment results, then the combined (95%) confidence in the horizontal displacement would
be:
(1.96) sqrt (f 2 + i 2) = (1.96) sqrt (2.25 + 2.25) ~ 4.2 mm at 95% confidence
2-7
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
The magnitude of the horizontal displacement is:
dh = sqrt (x2 + y2) = sqrt (36 + 4) = 6.3 mm
These results show that the horizontal component exceeds the expected survey error margin and
is likely due to actual movement of point n in the horizontal plane.
Confidence in the vertical displacement would be:
(1.96) sqrt (f 2 + i 2) = (1.96) sqrt (4 + 4) ~ 5.5 mm at 95% confidence
The magnitude of the vertical displacement is:
dv = 2.0 mm
The magnitude of the vertical displacement is much smaller than the confidence in the vertical
displacement, and it therefore does not indicate a significant vertical movement. If the structure
were to normally experience cyclic movement of 10 mm (horizontally) and 1 mm (vertically)
over the course of one year, and if our example deformation surveys were made six months
apart, then the above results would be consistent with expected behavior. Specialized methods
of geometrical analysis exist to carry out more complex deformation modeling, and it is
sometimes possible to identify the causes of deformation based on comparing the actual
displacements to alternative predicted displacement modes for the specific type of structure
under study. Refer to Chapter 11 for a more detailed discussion.
(5) Data Presentation. Survey reports for monitoring projects should have a standardized
format. Reports should contain a summary of the results in both tabulated and graphical form
(see Chapter 12). All supporting information, analyses, and data should be documented in an
appendix format. Conclusions and recommendations should be clearly presented in an executive
summary.
(6) Data Management. Survey personnel should produce hardcopy survey reports and
complete electronic copies of these reports. Survey data and processed results should be
archived, indexed, and cross-referenced to existing structural performance records. These should
be easily located and retrievable whenever the need arises. Information management using
computer-based methods is strongly recommended. One of the main difficulties with creating a
data management system that includes historical data is the time and cost required to transfer
existing hardcopy data into an electronic database for each project. Gradual transition to fully
electronic data management on future project surveys should be adopted. Data management
tools such as customized software, database software, and spreadsheet programs should be used
to organize, store, and retrieve measurement data and processed results. A standard format for
archiving data should be established for all monitoring projects.
2-8
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
c. Management Plan. Sound administration and execution of the monitoring program is an

integral and valuable part of the periodic inspection process. Personnel involved in the
monitoring and instrumentation should maintain a regular interaction with the senior program
manager. Structural monitoring encompasses a wide range of tasks performed by specialists in
different functional areas. All participants should have a general understanding of requirements
for the complete evaluation process:
-general engineering for planning and monitoring requests, preparation/presentation of data
and results, and quality assurance measures;
-surveying for data collection (in-house or contract requirements), data reduction,
processing, network adjustment, quality assurance, and preparing survey reports;
-geotechnical and structural engineering for analysis and evaluation of results and
preparation of findings and recommendations; and
-technical support for data management, archiving, computer resources, archiving final
reports, and electronic information support.
Safety requires consideration of more than just technical factors. Systems should be in place so
that any voice within the organization can be heard. Even experts can make mistakes and good
ideas can come from any level within an organization. Meetings and/or site visits including all
participants are held to ensure that information flows freely across internal boundaries.
Integration of separate efforts should be ongoing and seamless rather than simply gluing together
individual final products.
d. External Review. An organization must be willing to accept, and seek out, an

independent review of its engineering practices. Structures require defensive engineering that
considers a range of circumstances that might occur that threatens their safety. A contingency
plan to efficiently examine and assess unexpected changes in the behavior of the structure should
be in place. Outside experts should be consulted from time-to-time, especially if a project
structure exhibits unusual behavior that warrants specialized measurement and analysis.
2-4. Professional Associations.
a. General. The development of new methods and techniques for monitoring and analysis of
deformations and the development of methods for the optimal modeling and prediction of
deformations have been the subject of intensive studies by many professional groups at national
and international levels.
b. Organizations. Within the most active international organizations that are involved in
deformation studies, one should list:
-International Federation of Surveyors (FIG) Commission 6, which has significantly

contributed to the recent development of new methods for the design and geometrical
analysis of integrated deformation surveys and new concepts for analyses and modeling of
deformations;
2-9
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
-International Commission on Large Dams (ICOLD) with its Committee on Monitoring of

Dams and their Foundations;
-International Association of Geodesy (IAG) Commission on Recent Crustal Movements,
concerning geodynamics, tectonic plate movement, and modeling of regional earth crust
deformation;
-International Society for Mine Surveying (ISM) Commission 4 on Ground Subsidence and
Surface Protection in mining areas;
-International Society for Rock Mechanics (ISRM) with overall interest in rock stability
and ground control; and
-International Association of Hydrological Sciences (IAHS), with work on ground
subsidence due to the withdrawal of underground liquids (water, oil, etc.).
2-5. Causes of Dam Failure.
a. Concrete Structures. Deformation in concrete structures is mainly elastic, and for large
dams, highly dependent on reservoir water pressure and temperature variations. Permanent
deformation of the structure can sometimes occur as the subsoil adapts to new loads, concrete
aging, or foundation rock fatigue. Such deformation is not considered unsafe if it does not go
beyond a pre-determined critical value. Monitoring is typically configured to observing
relatively long-term movement trends, including abnormal settlements, heaving, or lateral
movements. Some ways concrete dams can fail are:
-uplift at the base leading to overturning and/or downstream creep,
-foundation failure or buttress collapse, and
-surrounding embankments that are susceptible to internal erosion.
(1) Concrete Deterioration. Chemical and physical factors can age concrete. Visible clues to
the deterioration include expansion, cracking, gelatinous discharge, and chalky surfaces.
b. Embankment Structures. Deformation is largely inelastic with earthen dams characterized

by permanent changes in shape. Self-weight of the embankment forces the fill material and the
foundation to consolidate resulting in vertical settlement of the structure. Reservoir water
pressure also causes permanent horizontal deformation mostly perpendicular to the embankment
centerline. Some causes of damage to earthen dams are:
-differential settlement causing cracking of the embankment material, and
-internal erosion resulting the loss of material.
Often these changes are slow and not readily discerned by visual examination. Other well-
known causes of failure in earthen dams are overtopping at extreme flood stage and liquefaction
due to ground motion during earthquakes.
c. Structural Distress. Adverse conditions that deserve attention include: cracking in the
core zone, cracking at zonal interfaces, soluble foundation rock, deteriorating impervious
2-10
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
structural membranes, inadequate foundation cutoffs, desiccation of clay fill, steep slopes
vulnerable to sliding, blocky foundation rock susceptible to differential settlement, ineffective
contact at adjoining structures and at abutments, pervious embankment strata, and vulnerability
to conditions during an earthquake. The following warning signs are evidence for the potential
failure of dam.
-Significant sloughs, settlement, or slides in embankments such as in earth or rock-fill dams

-Movement in levees, bridge abutments or slopes of spillway channels, locks, and
abutments
-Unusual vertical or horizontal movement or cracking of embankments or abutments
-Sinkholes or localized subsidence in the foundation, embankments, and structures
-Excessive deflection, displacement, or vibration of concrete structures
-Tilting or sliding of intake towers, bridge piers, lock walls, and flood walls
-Erratic movement, binding, excessive deflection, or vibration of outlet and spillway gates
-Significant damage or changes in structures, foundations, reservoir levels, groundwater
conditions, and adjacent terrain as a result of seismic events of local or regional areas
-Other indications of distress or potential failure that could inhibit the operation of a project
or endanger life and property
2-6. Foundation Problems in Dams.
a. General. Differential settlement, sliding, high piezometric pressures, and uncontrolled

seepage are common evidences of foundation distress. Cracks in the dam, even minor ones, can
indicate a foundation problem. Clay or silt in weathered joints can preclude grouting and
eventually swell the crack, enlarging it and causing further stress. Foundation seepage can cause
internal erosion or solution. Potential erosion of the foundation must be considered as erosion
can leave collapsible voids. Actual deterioration may be evidenced by increased seepage, by
sediment in seepage water, or an increase in soluble materials disclosed by chemical analyses.
Materials vulnerable to such erosion include dispersive clays, water reactive shales, gypsum, and
limestone.
b. Settlement. Pumping from underground can cause foundation settlement as the

supporting water pressure is removed and the gradient changes. Loading and wetting will also
cause the pressure gradient to change, and may also cause settlement or shifting. The consequent
cracking of the dam can create a dangerous condition, especially in earth-fill dams of low
cohesive strength. Foundations with low shear strength or with extensive seams of weak
materials may be vulnerable to sliding. Shear zones can also cause problems at dam sites where
bedding plane zones in sedimentary rocks and foliation zones in metamorphics are two common
problems. An embankment may be most vulnerable at its interface with rock abutments.
Settlement in rock-fill dams can be significantly reduced if the rock-fill is mechanically
compacted. In some ways, a compacted earth core is superior to a concrete slab as the
impervious element of a rock-fill dam. If the core has sufficient plasticity, it can be flexible
enough to sustain pressures without significant damage. Several dam failures have occurred
during initial impoundment due to these reasons.
2-11
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
c. Seepage. Water movement through a dam or through its foundation is one of the
important indicators of the condition of the structure and may be an indicator of a serious issue.
Seeping water can chemically attack the components of the dam, and constant attention must be
focused on any changes, such as in the rate of seepage, settlement, or in the character of the
escaping water. Adequate measurements must be taken of the piezometric surface within the
foundation and the embankment, as well as any horizontal or vertical deformation in the
abutments and fill. Any leakage at an earth embankment is potentially dangerous, as rapid
erosion may quickly enlarge an initially minor defect.
d. Erosion. Embankments may be susceptible to erosion unless protected from wave action
on the upstream face and surface runoff on the downstream face. Riprap armor stone on the
upstream slope of an earth-fill structure can protect against wave erosion, but can become
dislodged over time. This phenomenon, known as creep, can usually be detected and corrected
before serious damage occurs. In older embankment dams, the condition of materials may vary
considerably. The location of areas of low strength must be a key objective of the evaluation of
such dams. Soluble materials are sometimes used in construction, and instability in the
embankment will develop as these materials are dissolved over time.
e. Liquefaction. Hydraulic fill dams and structures constructed on soluble materials are
particularly susceptible to earthquake damage. Liquefaction is a potential problem for any
embankment that has continuous layers of soil with uniform gradation and of fine grain size.
2-7. Navigation Locks.
a. Lock Wall Monoliths. Periodic monitoring is provided to assess the safety performance of
lock structures. Instrumentation should be designed to monitor lateral, vertical, and rotational
movement of the lock monoliths, although not all structural components of a lock complex (e.g.,
wall/monoliths, wing walls, gates, dams) may need to be monitored. Navigation locks (including
access bridge piers) and their surroundings are monitored to determine the extent of any
differential movements between wall monoliths, monolith tilt, sheet pile cell movement,
cracking, or translation or rotation affecting sections of the lock structure.
(1) Foundation. Piezometers are used to monitor uplift pressures beneath the lock structure.
Water level monitoring can be made through wells fitted with a vibrating wire pressure
transducer or designed for manual measurement with a portable water level indicator.
Inclinometer casings are anchored in stable zones under the structure and are used to monitor
lateral movement of selected monoliths. Probe readings are made at 2 feet increments to
measure the slope of the casing and determine the amount of deflection undergone. Foundation
design concerns soil/structure interactions, pile or soil bearing strength, settlement, scour
protection, stability for uplift, sliding, and overturning, slide activity below ground level,
earthquake forces and liquefaction, horizontal stresses in underlying strata and residual strength,
rock faults that penetrate foundation sedimentary materials, and evidence of movement in
unconsolidated sediment along the rim and foundation of the structure.
2-12
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(2) Expected Loads. Lock structures experience dynamic loads due to hydraulic forces,
seismic and ice forces, earth pressures, and thermal stresses. Static loads include weight of the
structure and equipment. Horizontal water pressure and uplift on lock walls vary due to
fluctuating water levels, and horizontal earth pressures and vertical loading vary with drained,
saturated, or submerged backfill and siltation. Seismic forces and impact loads from collisions
are accounted for in dynamic analysis for design of the structure. Loads are generated by filling
and emptying, system turbulence, barge mooring, ice and debris, wave pressure, wind loads, and
differential water pressure on opposite sides of sheetpile cutoffs at the bottom of the lock
monolith. Loads are generated by gate and bulkhead structures, machinery and appurtenant
items, superstructure and bridge loads imparted to lock walls, temperature, and internal pore
pressure in concrete. These loads can greatly affect deformation surveys; therefore, attention
should be made to collect data under familiar loading cycles.
(3) Dewatering Maintenance. Locks often undergo temporary closures for dewatering the
lock chamber during maintenance activities or emergencies. Lock wall monitoring is conducted
at both gate monoliths and selected interior chamber monoliths to detect any potential movement
due to changing loads as the water level is lowered during lock chamber dewatering. Monitoring
wells placed in the landside embankment are checked regularly to determine ground water levels
that exert pressures on the landside wall. Monitoring surveys are conducted for measuring the
lateral displacement of the lock walls with respect to each other and to stable ground. These are
made continuously, and at regular time intervals, through the dewatering process and until the
chamber is completely rewatered.
b. Lock Miter Gates. Observations for distress in miter lock gates may include one or more
of the following: top anchorage movement, elevation change, miter offset, bearing gaps, and
downstream movement.
c. Sheet Pile Structures. Distress in sheet pile structures may include one or more of the
following: misalignment, settlement, cavity formation, or interlock separation.
d. Rubble Breakwaters and Jetties. Observations for breakwaters and jetties include the
seaside and leeside slopes and crest: seaside/leeside slope - protection side walls should be
examined for armor loss, armor quality defects, lack of armor contact/interlock, core
exposure/loss, and other slope defects. Crest/cap - peak or topmost surface areas should be
examined for breaching, armor loss, core exposure/loss, and settlement. Any number of
measurements may be needed to monitor the condition of breakwaters, jetties, or stone
placement. These may involve either lower accuracy conventional surveying, photogrammetric,
or hydrographic methods.
e. Scour Monitoring. Hydrographic surveys for scour monitoring employ equipment that
will produce full coverage bathymetric mapping of the area under investigation. The procedures
and specifications should conform to standards referenced in EM 1110-2-1003, Hydrographic
Surveying. Scour monitoring surveys should specify accuracy requirements, boundaries of
2-13
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
coverage area, bathymetry contour interval, delivery file formats, and the required frequency of
hydrographic surveying.
2-8. Deformation Parameters.
a. General. The main purpose for monitoring and analysis of structural deformations is:
-to check whether the behavior of the investigated structure and its environment follow the
predicted pattern so that any unpredicted deformations could be detected at an early stage,
and
-in the case of abnormal behavior, to determine the causative factors which trigger the
deformation and to assist in further design.
Coordinate differencing and observation differencing are the two principal methods used to
determine structural displacements from surveying data. Coordinate differencing methods are
recommended for most applications that require long-term periodic monitoring. Observation
differencing is mainly used for short-term monitoring projects or as a quick field check on the
raw data as it is collected.
(1) Coordinate Differencing. Monitoring point positions from two independent surveys are
required to determine displacements by coordinate differencing. The final adjusted Cartesian
coordinates (i.e., the coordinate components) from these two surveys are arithmetically
differenced to determine point displacements. A major advantage of the coordinate differencing
method is that each survey campaign can be independently analyzed for blunders and for data
adjustment quality. However, great care must be taken to remove any systematic errors in the
measurements, for example, by applying all instrument calibration corrections, and by rigorously
following standard data reduction procedures.
(2) Observation Differencing. The method of observation differencing involves tracking

changes in measurements between two time epochs. Measurements are compared to previous
surveys to reveal any observed change in the position of monitoring points. Although
observation differencing is efficient, and does not rely on solving for station coordinates, it has
the drawback that the surveyor must collect data in an identical configuration, and with the same
instrument types each time a survey is conducted.
b. Absolute Displacements. Displacements of monumented points represent the behavior of

the dam, its foundation, and abutments, with respect to a stable framework of points established
by an external reference network.
(1) Horizontal Displacements. Two-dimensional (2D) displacements are measured in a

critical direction, usually perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the dam, at the crest, and other
important points of embankments (abutments, toes, etc.) using conventional geodetic methods.
Alignment techniques for alignment-offset measurements are made in relation to a pair of control
points having well-known coordinates. Horizontal movement can also be determined with
2-14
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
respect to plumb lines having a stable anchor point (see EM 1110-2-4300, Instrumentation for
Concrete Structures).
(2) Vertical Displacements. Vertical displacements are measured in relation to stable project
benchmarks, such as deeply anchored vertical borehole extensometers, or alternatively, to deep
benchmarks located near the dam using geodetic methods (differential leveling). Hydrostatic
leveling is also sometimes used to determine settlements. Settlement gauges are used to detect
settlements of the foundation, or of interior structural parts which are not readily accessible
(core, foundation contact). Settlements of individual layers of embankments should be
monitored through settlement gauges installed in the different layers (refer to EM 1110-2-2300,
General Design and Construction Consideration for Earth and Rock-Fill Dams).
c. Relative Displacements. These measurements are intended to determine small differential

movements of points representative of the behavior of the dam, its foundation, and abutments
with respect to other points on the structure, or even on the same structural element.
(1) Deflections. Relative deflections (inclinations) of a concrete dam are measured by direct
or inverted plumb lines. Alignment survey techniques are used in the interior galleries of dams
to determine the relative movements between monoliths with respect to a horizontal reference
line set along the longitudinal axis of the dam. Relative horizontal displacements of points inside
embankments are detected by means of inclinometer probes sent through casings set in drilled
shafts. Foundation subsidence and tilts are measured with geodetic leveling, hydrostatic
leveling, and tiltmeters. The last two are usually permanently installed in galleries.
(2) Extensions. Combinations of geodetic leveling with suspended invar wires equipped
with short reading scales at different levels of the dam and connected to borehole extensometers
can supply information on the relative vertical movements as well as on the absolute vertical
displacements and relative tilts. Extensometers have become important instruments for
measuring differential foundation movements. Strain gauges are embedded in the concrete
during construction, installed on the faces of the dam after completion, or embedded in
foundation boreholes. Joint measurements are justified in the case of joints separation or to
check grouting in dome or arch-gravity dams. Cracks are measured by the same methods with
the instruments being installed on the surface.
2-9. Location of Monitoring Points.
a. Normal Conditions. Monitoring schemes include survey stations at the points where
maximum deformations have been predicted plus a few observables at the points which,
depending on previous experience, could signal any potential unpredictable behavior,
particularly at the interface between the monitored structure and the surrounding material.
b. Unusual Conditions. Once any abnormal deformations are noticed, then additional
observables are added at the locations indicated by the preliminary analysis of the monitoring
surveys as being the most sensitive to identification of causative factors.
2-15
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
c. Long-Term Monitoring. The spatial distribution of survey monuments should provide

complete coverage of the structure, extending to stable areas of the project if possible. A
minimum of four (4) monitoring points are recommended to model behavior in a plane section
(tilts, subsidence, etc.). For linear structures, monuments are placed at intervals that provide
coverage along the structure's total length, and generally not more than 100 meters apart, when
using conventional instruments, to allow for measurement check ties to nearby monuments. The
following are suggested guidelines for the location of survey monuments for long-term
monitoring applications listed per the type of structure. Refer also to the generalized monitoring
schemes shown in Figures 2-2 through 2-6.
(1) Gravity and Concrete Dams. For gravity dams, each separate block should have at least
one monitoring point. Tilts of the foundation should be measured at the center point for small
structures, and at not less than three points for larger structures.
(2) Multiple-Arch and Buttress Dams. Monitoring points for multiple-arch and buttress dams
should be located at the head and downstream toe of each buttress. For massive buttresses and
large arches, special attention should be paid to the foundations of the buttresses. If buttresses
are traversed by construction joints, the behavior of joints should be observed.
(3) Arch-Gravity Dams and Thick Arch Dams. Absolute displacements of dam toe and
abutments are critical for arch-gravity dams and thick arch dams. For small structures, the
deformation of the central block is to be monitored. For large structures the measurement of
deformations in each block is required.
(4) Thin Arch Dams. Measurement of horizontal and vertical displacements are required
along the crest for thin arch dams. Special attention should be given to the central cantilever,
abutments, and abutment rock.
(5) Embankment and Earthen Dams. Measurement of horizontal and vertical displacements
are required at the dam crest, and upstream and downstream toe locations for embankment dams.
Surface displacement monuments should be located to provide coverage across the length of the
dam extending to the adjacent stable areas. Provisions should be made to detect relative and
absolute movement of armor on the dam face. Typically, the spacing of points near abutments
and appurtenant structures are closer by about 50 percent than for the points at the midsection of
the crest to provide denser movement data with respect to the surrounding sides, spillways, and
foundation areas. New or temporary monitoring points may be concentrated in areas where
significant movement is detected or repairs are underway.
(6) Navigation Lock Monoliths. Monitoring points are set on each lock chamber wall,
typically with at least two alignment pins situated close to each monolith joint on each wall. The
centerline of the alignment pins is placed in a longitudinal alignment between at least two major
monumented control points to facilitate making deflection/offset alignment measurements—see
Figures 2-4 and 2-5. Alignment pins are placed after proper curing of the structural concrete, and
2-16
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
set back about six (6) inches perpendicularly from the centerline of the monolith joint, with one
bolt located on either side of the joint.
2-10. Design of Reference Networks.
a. General. Having multiple control stations in the reference network is critical for
improving the reliability of deformation surveys, and for investigating the stability of reference
monuments over time. Each control station in the reference network should be intervisible to a
maximum number of structural monitoring points (placed on the structure) and to at least two
other reference monuments. The number of reference points for vertical control should be not
less than three (3), and preferably four (4) benchmarks. For horizontal control, the minimum
number of reference points should be at least four (4), preferably six (6). Reference stations are
usually located at both ends of the dam, along its longitudinal axis, at the elevation of the dam
crest. Geometry and reliability of the reference network can be improved by adding control
stations either upstream or downstream from the crest or on the structure itself.
b. Project Datum Selection. A project datum defines the relative positions and coordinates
established on the reference network. Coordinates of monitoring points are also calculated with
respect to the project datum. The project datum for large monitoring projects should be based on
geodetic NAD83 (or WGS84) coordinates. A geodetic coordinate system is recommended
because positioning can be directly related to a standard reference ellipsoid. Network adjustment
processing software often requires definition of the project datum in geodetic coordinates.
Geodetic coordinates are also compatible with standard formulas used to transform 3D positions
into 2D plane projections, and can incorporate data from GPS surveys. See Figures 2-2 and 2-3.
2-17
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Reference point
near abutment
C D
Target points on dam
B A
Downstream reference points
Figure 2-2. Strong monitoring scheme for a concrete or earth/rock-fill dam.
Figure 2-3. Reference network configuration for a concrete dam depicting reference
points near abutments and at downstream locations.
2-18
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Control points on lock and dam
Reference points
Figure 2-4. Strong monitoring scheme for a lock and dam.
Control points
Reference points
Figure 2-5. Idealized monitoring scheme for controlling target points on the lock and dam.
2-19
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure 2-6. Idealized reference network surrounding a hydroelectric dam. External

reference points are established at downstream points and on reservoir to provide strong
geodetic network.
(1) Reference Station Coordinates. Coordinates are initially established on at least one
station in the reference network from National Spatial Reference System (NSRS) control
monuments available in the local area. Coordinates are then transferred by direct measurement
to the remaining stations in the reference network before the first monitoring survey. 3D
coordinates should be established on all structure control points and reference stations for
projects that combine horizontal and vertical positioning surveys.
(2) Monitoring Point Coordinates. Geodetic or state plane coordinate systems are
recommended for monitoring networks because standard mapping projection will provide
consistency in coordinate transformations. Arbitrary coordinate systems based on a local project
construction datum are more difficult to work with if there is a need for transforming from the
local datum. Independent vertical positioning surveys are needed to augment 2D horizontal
positioning networks. Vertical settlements are then computed apart from the horizontal
displacement components.
c. Reference Network Stability. Reference network stations can be independently measured

using higher precision survey methods than used for the general monitoring network. The
reference network survey is also analyzed in a separate network adjustment to check for any
change in reference station coordinates between monitoring campaigns. GPS technology alone,
or GPS combined with high precision electronic distance measurements (EDM) distance
measurements is suggested for reference network stability monitoring. Multiple EDM distance
2-20
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
ties provide additional network redundancy as an external check on the GPS results. Detection
and analysis of unstable reference points in the reference network has been successfully
implemented using the Iterative Weighted Similarity Transformation (IWST). This analysis
indicates whether any particular reference station has experienced significant movement between
monitoring surveys by transforming observed displacements independent of the network
constraints.
2-11. Reference Point Monumentation.
a. General. A monument used for deformation monitoring is any structure or device that
defines a point in the survey network. Monuments can be classified as either a reference
point or a monitoring point. A reference point typically is located away from the
structure and is to be "occupied" during the survey, while a monitoring (or object) point is
located directly on the structure and is to be "monitored" during the survey. Each must
have long-term stability of less than 0.5 mm both horizontally and vertically with respect
to the surrounding area. A permanent one (1) mm diameter reference mark, or forced
centering device, should be used for every monitoring point monument. All reference
points should be described and maintained in the USACE Survey Monument Archival
and Retrieval Tool. Further information on specific monument design and installation is
provided in EM 1110-1-1002, Survey Markers and Monumentations.
Figure 2-7. Reference point monumentation. Concrete pier construction vicinity of a lock
and dam. Forced centering plug set into concrete pier. (Little Rock District).
2-21
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
b. Reference Point Monuments. Reference points can be either a steel pipe pile or cast-in-
place reinforced concrete pile—Figure 2-7. If a steel pipe pile is used, the nominal diameter will
be no less than 20 centimeter (cm)m, while the wall thickness will be no less than that for
standard weight pipe. If using a cast-in-place reinforced concrete pile, the nominal diameter will
also be no less than 20 cm (see Figure 2-8).
Stainless steel bolt 5/8-in. diam 11NC
Stainless steel plate nominal thickness 2 cm

Steel pipe
nominal diam 20 cm
1.5 m + Reinforced concrete pile wall thickness not less
nominal diam 20 cm than for standard
weight pipe
Notes: Notes:
1. Pile cast in place 1. Pile driven to refusal
2. Steel reinforcing bar cage shall have 2. Pile shall not be
sufficient steel such that the ratio of the area installed in a predrilled
of longitudinal steel to the cross-sectional hole
area of the pile is not less than 0.02
3. Concrete shall have 28-day compressive
strength of not less than 15 megaPascals
4. Precast piles installed in predrilled holes
shall not be used
a. Reinforced concrete pile

b. Steel pile reference point
reference point
Figure 2-8. Reference point monumentation. Detail for reinforced concrete pile
or steel pile construction.
c. Reference Point Installation. Reference points placed in the earth are installed to a depth
equal to at least twice the depth of frost penetration in the project area. The reference point
extends above ground level to a convenient height (e.g., 1.5 m) where the equipment can be force
centered. Typically, at the top of such a reference point pile, a stainless-steel plate not less than 2
cm thick is cast into the top of the pile using a minimum of four steel reinforcing bar anchors
welded to the underside of the plate. In the center of the plate, a 5/8-inch diameter 11NC steel
bolt is welded to the plate to allow survey equipment to be attached.
(1) Steel Pipe Pile. A steel pipe pile is installed by driving it until refusal. If refusal occurs at
a depth of less than twice the depth of frost penetration in the project area, the pile is removed
and its installation attempted in another location. Steel pipes placed in oversized pre-drilled
holes and backfilled will not be used as reference points. For pipe piles terminating at or slightly
below ground level, a convex stainless steel plate and stub will be installed as described above.
The plate will be convex as required for leveling observations and will have an etched cross at
the highest point of the convex surface for horizontal observation. It is recommended that such
piles also have a cylindrical rim and cover around it for protection. If a cylindrical rim and cover
2-22
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
is used, it is further recommended the cover be buried for easy recovery with a metal detector, as
well as to minimize the chance of vandalism.
(2) Cast-in-Place Reinforced Concrete Pile. A cast-in-place reinforced concrete pile is

installed by first drilling a hole to at least twice the depth of frost penetration in the project area.
The cage of steel reinforcing bars used will have cross-sectional area of steel to concrete ratio of
not less than 0.02. After the cage is formed, it is placed in the hole. Concrete with a 28-day
compressive strength of not less than 15 megapascals is then poured into the form. Precast
reinforced concrete piles driven into pre-drilled holes or placed in oversized pre-drilled holes and
backfilled will not be used for reference points. Reference points installed in rock or concrete
consist of a stainless-steel plate as described above, except with a steel reinforcing bar stub
welded to the underside. For installation, a hole at least 50% larger than the stub is drilled into
sound rock or concrete. The plate with the stub attached is secured to the rock or concrete using
adequate epoxy adhesive to completely fill the void between the stub and the rock or concrete.
(3) Insulation. Projects subjected to cold weather conditions will have an insulation sleeve
installed around the reference point pile that extends above the ground. The installation of a
sleeve is to eliminate the possibility of temperature induced pile movements that may be the
result of solar radiation (i.e., temperature variation due to time of day). When this is the case, the
sleeve should have an R value of not less than 10.
(4) Stability. If possible, the reference points should be installed at least a year prior to their
use to minimize the effects of pile rebound and shrinkage. If this is not practical, no less than a
month prior to its use will suffice.
2-12. Monitoring Point Monumentation.
a. Monitoring Point Monuments. Monitoring points installed in earth consist of a nominal 3

m length of square steel hollow structural section with a nominal side length of 5 cm and a wall
thickness not less than that for a standard weight square steel hollow structural section. The base
of the section is sharpened by cutting it at a 45 degree angle. Welded approximately 15 cm from
the base, is one length of 10 mm thick, 20 cm diameter circular helix, with a pitch of 7 cm.
Welded to the top of the pipe, is a steel plate not less than 5 mm thick. In the center of the plate,
a 5/8 inch, 11NC steel bolt, on which survey equipment is to be connected is drilled through and
welded to the plate. Some method (e.g., through the use of a cap) should be used to protect the
threads of the bolt during the time survey equipment is not attached.
b. Monitoring Point Installation. Monitoring points set directly in rock or concrete may be
either a steel bolt or a steel insert into which survey equipment is force centered—see Figure 2-9.
Installation of these types of monuments is as follows:
(1) Steel Bolt. The steel bolt is drilled through and welded to a 5-cm diameter, 1 cm thick
steel plate. A steel reinforcing bar stub of suitable length is welded to the head of the bolt. A
hole approximately 50% larger than the stub is drilled in sound rock or concrete. The plate with
2-23
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
the stub attached is secured to the rock or concrete using adequate epoxy adhesive to completely
fill the void between the stub and the rock or concrete. The threads of the bolt should be
protected during the time survey equipment is not attached (e.g., by use of a cap). upside down.
Wild tribrach with forced

centering device
5/8-inch forced centering

plug set into concrete structure
Figure 2-9. Target plug set on concrete structure. Forced centering device on tribrach shown
upside down.
(2) Steel Insert. Steel inserts have been designed as commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) items.
Manufacturer instructions for proper installation of the insert should be followed.
(3) Other Materials. Monitoring points on materials (e.g., steel, masonry, etc.) other than
described in the previous paragraphs will be permanently affixed. For object points to be
mounted on steel, a steel bolt welded to the steel may be suitable. For masonry, or other
material, a steel bolt, plate, and rear stub or a steel insert may be suitable.
c. Monitoring Point Targets. A target is a device with a well-defined aiming point that is
placed vertically over or attached to a monument. The purpose of a target is to connect the
measurement to a physical object. A target is typically installed only for the period of the survey,
in some cases, the monument may be a target itself.
(1) Optical Theodolites. Force-centered, standard target sets designed for one second
theodolites, or the actual reference mark on the monument itself can be used as a target.
2-24
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(2) Electronic Total Station. Force-centered, standard target set/prism combination used with
a particular total station. Target set/prism combinations not matched to a particular total station
will not be used. Target set/prism combinations for total stations which are non-coaxial, will be
tilting target set/prism combinations that allow for alignment with the line of observation.
(3) EDM Prisms. EDM targets will be the reflectors included with the EDM unit. Prisms not
matched to a particular EDM will not be used.
(4) Chaining Points. Targets for taped distances will be the monuments themselves.
(5) Leveling Points. Targets for leveled height difference measurements will be the
monuments themselves. If the monuments are steel inserts, the targets will be stainless steel
plugs designed for the purpose. If more than one plug is to be used on a project, the plugs will
be of the same size. Standard vertical control benchmarks may also be used, as shown in Figure
2-10.
Figure 2-10. External deep-driven benchmark design—for vertical control only.

(6) Panel Points. Photogrammetric survey targets will consist of a high contrast, white dot on
a black background. The diameter of the white dot is chosen so as to yield an average image
2-25
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
diameter of 60 microns. The black background typically is 5 times the diameter of the white
target.
(7) GPS Reference Marks. Targets for GPS surveys must be the monuments themselves.
Antenna offsets will be measured to relate the antenna phase center to the station marks.
d. Identification. A unique identifier (e.g., numeric or alphanumeric) will be stamped on the

point as appropriate for all installed reference and monitoring points. Permanent records will be
kept of the identifier, description, location, and condition of each reference and monitoring point.
2-13. Design of Measurement Schemes.
a. Optimal Design Methods. The optimization of geodetic positioning networks is

concerned with accuracy, reliability, and economy of the survey scheme as the design criteria.
Design of deformation monitoring schemes is more complex and differs in many respects from
the design of simple positioning networks. Monitoring design is aimed at obtaining optimum
accuracies for the deformation parameters (e.g., strain, shear, rotations, etc.), rather than for the
coordinates of the monitoring stations. This allows using various types of (geodetic and
non-geodetic) observables with allowable configuration defects. Multi-objective analytical
design methodologies are known but not presently implemented within USACE because their
practical application has not been demonstrated in any real-life examples. These techniques
allow for a fully analytical, multi-objective optimal design of integrated deformation monitoring
schemes with geodetic and geotechnical instrumentation. The method gives a simultaneous
solution for the optimal configuration and accuracy of the monitoring scheme per the given
criteria and restrictions concerning the locations of some observation stations and required
accuracy of the deformation parameters.
b. Expected Movement Thresholds. The design of deformation surveys from simple

positioning accuracy criteria requires knowledge of the maximum expected displacement for all
monitoring points on the structure. The amount of expected deformation is predicted using either
deterministic modeling (by finite or boundary element methods), or empirical (statistical)
prediction models. For example, predicted displacements from an engineering analysis may be
documented in design memorandums prepared for construction, or from displacement trends
established by geotechnical instruments. Displacements predicted at specific monument
locations are requested from design engineers and then documented in the Instrumentation Plan.
When structures with known distress are planned to be monitored, or if monitoring is planned
during extreme loading events, the Instrumentation Plan will include emergency notification
thresholds from design engineers along with contact information and notification procedures.
c. Accuracy Requirements. Positioning accuracy required for each monitored point is

directly related to the maximum expected displacement occurring under normal operating
conditions. Accuracy requirements are computed by equating the maximum allowable
positioning error to some portion of the total magnitude of movement that is expected at each
2-26
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
point. Specifically, the positioning accuracy (at the 95% probability level) should be equal to
one fourth (0.25 times) the predicted value of the maximum displacement for the given span of
time between the repeated measurements. Maximum possible accuracy is required once any
abnormal deformations are noticed. With higher accuracy measurements, it is easier to
determine the mechanism of any unpredicted deformations. Therefore, monitoring surveys may
require updating of the initial measurement design over the duration of the monitoring project.
d. Survey Error Budget. The basis for computing the allowable survey error budget is as
follows:
(1) Accuracy analysis should start with an error budget of less than one-third of the predicted
value for the maximum expected displacement (D max) over the given span of time between two
surveys. This ensures that the total uncertainty in coordinates (plus and minus) is less than two-
thirds of the total predicted movement as a minimum safety factor.
P error < (1/3) D max (Eq 2-1)
where
P error = allowed positioning error
D max = maximum expected displacement
(2) Displacements are calculated by differencing coordinates obtained from two monitoring
surveys. Therefore, the total allowable displacement error (d) must combine uncertainty in both
the initial (1) and final (2) surveys:
 d = sqrt (1 2 + 2 2) (Eq 2-2)
where
1 = positioning uncertainty of initial survey

2 = positioning uncertainty of final survey
Positioning accuracy will be approximately equal (0) if the same methods and instruments are
used on each survey:
 0 2 = 1 2 = 2 2 and d = sqrt (2) · (0) (Eq 2-3)
Therefore, the error budget should be divided by a factor of the square root of 2:
P error = (d) / sqrt (2)
(3) The developments above assume positioning uncertainty at the 95% confidence level:
2-27
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
P 95% < [ (1/3) D max ] / sqrt (2) (Eq 2-4)
or approximately P 95% = (0.25) (D max). Expressed as a standard error (one-sigma value), it

would need to be divided by the univariate confidence level expansion factor of 1.96, and
changed to:
P one-sigma < [ (1/3) D max ] / [ sqrt (2)·(1.96) ] (Eq 2-5)
or approximately P one-sigma = (0.12) (D max ).
(4) Accuracy Requirement Example. To detect an expected displacement component of x

mm from two independent monitoring surveys (same methods), it should be determined with an
accuracy of:
(x / 3) / (1.41) ~ x / 4 mm, at the 95% confidence level, or
(x / 4) / (1.96) ~ x / 9 mm, at one standard error.
As a 'rule of thumb,' the measurements of a deformation component should be performed with a

standard deviation (an error at one-sigma level) about nine (9) times smaller than the expected
maximum value of the deformation. At the 95% confidence level this equates to approximately
four (4) times smaller than the expected maximum value of the deformation.
e. Network Preanalysis. Two closely related techniques for processing survey data are
preanalysis and adjustment of geodetic networks.
(1) Preanalysis is a measurement design technique used to statistically verify whether a

proposed monitoring survey meets pre-set accuracy requirements. It requires the user to choose
approximate coordinates for each survey point, plan a desired measurement configuration, and
assign a standard deviation to each measurement based on instrument specifications. Preanalysis
yields an expected precision for each monitoring station in the network for a given survey
design.
(2) Adjustment requires the user to process actual survey data. Usually data is collected per
the same measurement scheme developed from preanalysis. Survey adjustment yields best-fit
coordinates and precision for each monitoring station in the network. Both preanalysis and
adjustment use the same underlying mathematical model to produce results. Although the
required computations are complex, this problem is always transparent to the user because
processing is done by software applications. Preanalysis specifies the expected positioning
uncertainty based on random error only, therefore, a weight is assigned to each survey
measurement based on its predicted standard deviation, which is computed a priori using known
variance estimation formulas. Measurement uncertainties are propagated mathematically into a
predicted error value for each station coordinate. This error is reported graphically by a point
confidence ellipse, or by a relative confidence ellipse between two points. Each point confidence
2-28
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
ellipse (error ellipse) encloses a region of maximum positioning uncertainty at a given statistical
confidence level (usually 99% for preanalysis and 95% for adjustment). The corresponding
vertical positioning error is reported by a point confidence interval for each point. Once
accuracy requirements are specified for positioning the monitoring points, different survey
designs can be proposed, tested, and modified until the coordinate error becomes small enough to
detect a target level of movement based on accuracy requirements. Instruments used for each
survey design are then selected based on the preanalysis results. Refinements to the survey
design are made by judiciously adding or removing observations to create a finished
measurement scheme. Once the accuracy performance of each survey design has been verified,
the selected instruments, the number and type of measurements, and the survey network layout
can be specified for field data collection.
2-14. Measurement Reliability.
a. General. Reliability addresses the geometric strength of the observation scheme,

measurement redundancy, and techniques for minimizing measurement biases. Statistical
methods can determine the maximum level of undetected systematic error using outlier
detection. Some reliability factors are:
-redundant measurements,
-external checks on the validity of the data,
-instrument calibrations,
-reference network stability analysis,
-rigorous data processing techniques, and
-multiple connections between stations.
b. Redundancy. Multiple sources of monitoring data (instruments and observations) allow

for checking the consistency of deformation surveying measurements. Redundancy on
monitoring surveys provides a means to check results, such as by collecting twice as many
measurements as unknown coordinates, and by keeping parallel but separate sets of instruments
that use different measurement methods. For example, relative displacements can be obtained
from tiltmeters and geodetic leveling. A properly designed monitoring scheme should have a
sufficient connection of measurements using different measuring techniques and such geometry
of the scheme that self-checking through closures would be possible. Redundancy is also a
requirement for using least squares adjustment techniques in data processing.
c. Instrument Calibrations. Calibrations of surveying instruments are highly standardized

and are essential for valid results when coordinate differencing is used to compute
displacements. Major sources of systematic error and types of calibrations and procedures are
presented in Chapter 4.
d. Stable Point Analysis. Accuracy in displacement measurements depends greatly on the

stability of the network of reference stations. The reference network survey is analyzed
2-29
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
separately to detect unstable reference station in monitoring networks (see reference listed in
Section A-2 of Appendix A.
e. Rigorous Data Processing. Most surveying observations will require post processing
before being used in a network adjustment or in the calculation of final displacements, for
example, for the elimination of nuisance parameters and the management of various data
reductions and transformations. Some of the available reduction formulas are more accurate and
complete than others. In general, the more rigorous version of a given formula is recommended
for processing data on deformation networks.
f. Design of Complex Monitoring Schemes. Survey networks can be broken down into
several sub-networks to obtain specialized deformation information where each small piece can
be analyzed in separate network adjustment, or so that measurements made on an isolated
structural element can be connected to the whole. Dividing the network into distinct parts makes
it simpler to isolate and identify gross errors and provides for additional observations between
each sub-network to strengthen the overall measurement scheme. Specialized sub-networks
increase the reliability of the survey results.
(1) Cross-Sections. Surface monuments can be co-located with geotechnical instrumentation

that are installed on the interior of the structure (e.g., service galleries of a dam). Geodetic
monitoring points and fixed instrumentation placed on the same monolith provides the
monitoring scheme with a high degree of redundancy.
(2) Survey Sub-Networks. Monitoring networks can be broken down into different types of
smaller surveys (i.e., networks).
(a) Regional reference network is established by a few widely distributed, off-site, reference
points to provide regional information in seismically or geologically active areas.
(b) Main reference network of project reference points, situated in stable areas surrounding
the structure, are used as a base to survey the monitoring points on the structure. The reference
network is surveyed independently to investigate the stability of the reference stations, and to
obtain higher accuracy of the coordinates of the reference stations.
(c) Secondary network of control monuments, installed directly on the structure, provides for
a system of measurement ties between each other (i.e., between other structure control points).
Control points in the secondary network are inter-connected by measurements and are also
directly connected by measurements to the main reference network. For example, on navigation
locks, angles and distances could be observed between secondary control points on adjacent lock
walls, to tie together the separate alignment sections that are installed on each lock wall.
(d) Localized networks consist of the major body of survey monitoring points, grouped
between secondary control points, for example, sections of multiple alignment pins that are
2-30
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
placed between two control points on the structure. Such localized surveys provide monitoring
coverage over the entire structure and in any critical areas. Alignment section surveys are
examples of localized networks, as well as the point data gathered from localized instrumentation
such as jointmeters or plumb line stations.
(3) Seismic Network Stations. Pre-surveyed positions can be established on any number of
additional localized monitoring points (i.e., points not intended for routine observation) to
determine the nature and extent of large displacements due to earthquakes. Continuous geodetic
measurements also can be used for monitoring the consequences of seismic activity. One or
more points on the structure are connected to a regional reference network, such as wide-area
GPS arrays used for tectonic studies.
2-15. Frequency of Measurements.
a. General. Geodetic monitoring surveys (for periodic inspections) are conducted at regular
time intervals rather than by continuous measurements that are more typical of automated
structural or geotechnical instrumentation. The time interval between deformation surveys will
vary per the purpose for monitoring, but is generally correlated to condition of the structure.
Design factors such as the structure's age, hazard classification, safety regulations, and
probability of failure determines an appropriate frequency for surveys. The need for establishing
more frequent survey campaigns will be developed pending a risk-informed recommendation
and decision per procedures outlined in ER 1110-2-1156 or as directed by the Dam Safety
Officer in response to an incident.
b. Continuous Monitoring. With automatic data acquisition, such as by Differential GPS

(DGPS) or robotic total stations, the frequency of measurements does not impose any problem
because the data can be decoded at a pre-programmed time interval without difficulty and at
practically no difference in cost of the monitoring process. Continuous monitoring systems with
geodetic measurements are not yet commonly used and the frequency of measurements of
individual observables must be carefully designed to compromise between the actual need and
the cost.
c. Age-Based Criteria. Guidelines for the frequency for conducting monitoring surveys (e.g.,
International Committee on Large Dams) follow a time table based on the age of the structure.
(1) Pre-Construction. It would be useful to carry out some geodetic and piezometric
measurements of the abutments and site before and during construction.
(2) Initial Filling. A complete set of measurements should be made before the first filling is
started. The dates of successive measurements will depend on the level the water has reached in
the reservoir. The closer the water is to the top level, the shorter will be the interval between
measurements. For instance, one survey should be conducted when the water reaches 1/4 of the
total height; another survey when the water reaches mid-height; one survey every tenth of the
total height for the third quarter; and one survey every 6 feet of variation for the fourth quarter.
2-31
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
The interval between two successive surveys should never exceed a month until filling is
completed.
(3) Stabilizing Phase. Measurements should be more frequent in the years immediately
following the first filling when active deformation is in progress. Geodetic surveys can be
carried out four times a year and other geotechnical measurements can be made once every 1 to 2
weeks.
(4) Normal Operation. After the structure is stable, which can take up to 5 to 10 years or
more, the above frequencies can be reduced by half. The frequencies of measurement can be
reduced further per what is learned during the first years of operation.
(5) Remedial Phase. Once a structure begins showing significant signs of stress or advanced
deterioration, measurement frequencies based on the stabilizing phase can be resumed to track
potential failure conditions. It should be possible to conduct intensive investigations in areas
undergoing the most critical distress to determine the causes of the deformations and plan for
repairs.
d. Technical Instructions and Scopes of Work. Appendix B contains a sample contract

scope of work for performing periodic deformation monitoring surveys. As is outlined in the
example scope, some of the specialized monitoring instrumentation is furnished by the
Government. Not all Architect-Engineer firms can be expected to have monitoring equipment on
hand due to the limited requirement for such work. Often, a Government representative may be
required to accompany the survey team on site.
2-32
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
CHAPTER 3
Deformation Measurement and Alignment Instrumentation
3-1. General. This chapter describes the different techniques and equipment that are used in
measuring external structural deformations. The objective of deformation surveys is to
determine the position of object points on the monitored structure. Horizontal and vertical
positions are usually determined by conventional surveying instruments (e.g., EDM, theodolite
or total station, digital levels) or geodetic GPS receivers, depending on the required accuracy.
Conventional surveys are established from a network of reference stations in stable areas nearby
the project site. Distance, angle, and height difference measurements are made to object points
on the structure. Work procedures consist of moving equipment from point-to-point and
observing, recording, and checking field data on-site. Field data collection is designed for high-
reliability by making repeated observations, obtaining check loop closures, conducting
instrument calibrations, and collecting auxiliary data (if necessary). Extensive data processing is
required to convert raw survey data into useful engineering values (via data cleaning, data
reductions, final position determination, and displacement calculations). Final coordinates are
based on a least squares adjustment of the survey observations using the fixed coordinates of the
reference network. Position differences are observed over time at each object point. These
define a specific displacement field valid for the time span between two surveys. The total set of
point displacements are modeled as a geometric surface that analytically represents changes in
the location, shape, and size of the structure (or its components). Deformation model parameters
(linear strain, differential or block rotation, and translations) are used to solve for deformations at
any desired part of the structure. The sensitivity and significance of these parameters depend on
the number, spacing, and accuracy of the surveyed point positions.
a. Geodetic and Geotechnical Measurements. The measuring techniques and

instrumentation for deformation monitoring have traditionally been categorized into two groups
per the disciplines of professionals who use the techniques:
-geodetic surveys, which include conventional (terrestrial), photogrammetric, satellite, and

some special techniques (interferometry, hydrostatic leveling, alignment, etc.); and
-geotechnical/structural measurements of local deformations using lasers, tiltmeters,
strainmeters, extensometers, joint-meters, plumb lines, micrometers, etc.
b. Comparison of Measurement Methods. Each measurement type has its own advantages
and drawbacks. Geodetic surveys, through a network of points interconnected by angle and/or
distance measurements, usually supply a sufficient redundancy of observations for the statistical
evaluation of their quality and for a detection of errors. They give global information on the
behavior of the deformable structure while the geotechnical measurements give very localized
and, often, locally disturbed information, in some cases without any check, unless compared with
some other independent measurements. On the other hand, geotechnical instruments are easier
to adapt for automatic and continuous monitoring than conventional geodetic instruments.
3-1
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Conventional terrestrial surveys are labor intensive and require skillful observers, while
geotechnical instruments, once installed, require only infrequent checks on their performance.
Geodetic surveys have traditionally been used mainly for determining the absolute displacements
of selected points on the surface of the object with respect to some reference points that are
assumed to be stable. Geotechnical measurements have mainly been used for relative
deformation measurements within the deformable object and its surroundings. However, with
the technological progress of the last few years, the differences between the two techniques and
their main applications are not as obvious as twenty years ago.
(1) For example, inverted plumb-lines and borehole extensometers, if anchored deeply
enough in bedrock below the deformation zone, may serve the same way as, or even better than,
geodetic surveys for determining the absolute displacements of the object points. Geodetic
surveys with optical and electro-magnetic instruments (including satellite techniques) are always
contaminated by atmospheric (tropospheric and ionospheric) refraction, which limits their
positioning accuracy to about ±1 parts per million (ppm) to ±2 ppm (at the standard deviation
level) of the distance. So, for instance, given a 500-m average distance between the object and
reference points, the absolute displacements of the object points cannot be determined to an
accuracy better than about ±2 mm at the 95% probability level. In some cases, this accuracy is
not adequate. On the other hand, precision electro-optical geodetic instruments for EDM with
their accuracies of ±0.8 mm over short distances may serve as extensometers in relative
deformation surveys. Similarly, geodetic leveling, with an achievable accuracy of better than
±0.3 mm over short distances up to 20 m may provide better accuracy for the tilt determination
(equivalent to ±1 second of arc) than any local measurements with electronic tiltmeters.
Measurements of small concrete cracks can be made to a high degree of accuracy using
micrometers—see Chapter 7 for micrometer observation procedures. In a highly controlled
environment, electronic theodolites may provide relative positioning in almost real-time to an
accuracy of ±0.5 mm over distances of several (2-3) meters. The satellite-based GPS, when used
in a differential mode, offers a few millimeters accuracy over several kilometers. GPS has
replaced conventional terrestrial surveys in many deformation studies and, particularly, in
establishing the reference networks.
(2) From the point of view of the achievable instrumental accuracy, the distinction between
geodetic and geotechnical techniques no longer applies. With the technological developments in
both geodetic and geotechnical instrumentation, at a cost one may achieve almost any practical
instrumental resolution and precision, full automation, and virtually real-time data processing.
Thus, the user has an array of different types of instruments available for deformation studies.
This creates a new challenge for the designers of the monitoring surveys: what instruments to
choose, where to locate them, and how to combine them into one integrated monitoring scheme
in which the geodetic and geotechnical/structural measurements would optimally complement
each other.
3-2. Angle and Distance Measurements. Manually operated transits and theodolites have been
traditionally used for angle measurement in structural deformation surveying. Distances were
3-2
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
measured using precise surveying chains (tapes) or manually operated EDM devices. Electronic
total station devices, such as those shown in Figure 3-1, have largely replaced these older
instruments and techniques.
Trimble S9
Leica TS30
Figure 3-1. Leica TS30 and Trimble S9 are example of electronic total stations that can be
used for high precision machine alignment and deformation measurements. Accuracy
specified at 1.0 mm (distance) and 0.5 sec (angular).
a. Electronic Theodolites. Technological progress in angle measurements has been mainly

in the automation of the readout systems of the horizontal and vertical circles of the theodolites.
The optical readout systems have been replaced by various, mainly photo-electronic, scanning
systems of coded circles with an automatic digital display and transfer of the readout to
electronic data collectors or computers. Some of the precision electronic theodolites are
equipped with microprocessor controlled biaxial sensors (electronic tiltmeters), which can sense
the inclination (misleveling) of the theodolite to an accuracy better than 0.5 arc seconds and
automatically correct, not only vertical, but also horizontal, direction readouts. In optical
theodolites in which the inclination is controlled only by a spirit level, errors of several seconds
of arc in horizontal directions could be produced when observing along steeply inclined lines of
sight. Atmospheric refraction is a particular danger to any optical measurements, particularly
where the line of sight (LOS) lies close to obstructions. The gradient of air temperature in the
direction perpendicular to the LOS is the main parameter of refraction. Therefore, when
selecting an electronic theodolite for precision surveys, one should always choose one with the
biaxial leveling compensator.
b. Three-Dimensional Coordinating Systems. Two or more electronic theodolites linked to a

microcomputer create a three-dimensional (3D) coordinating (positioning) system with real-time
3-3
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
calculations of the coordinates. The systems are used for the highest precision positioning and
deformation monitoring surveys over small areas. If standard deviations of simultaneously
measured horizontal and vertical angles do not exceed 1 arc second, then positions (x, y, z) of
targets at distances up to ten meters away may be determined with the standard deviations
smaller than 0.05 millimeters. Usually short invar rods of known length are included in the
measuring scheme to provide scale for the calculation of coordinates.
c. Electronic Distance Measurements (EDMs). Short-range (several kilometers),

electro-optical EDM instruments with visible or near infrared (IR) continuous radiation are used
widely in engineering surveys. The accuracy (standard deviation) of EDM instruments may be
expressed in a general form as:
 = sqrt ( a 2 + b 2 x·S 2 ) (Eq 3-1)
where "a" contains errors of the phase measurement and calibration errors of the so-called zero
correction (additive constant of the instrument and of the reflector), while the value of "b"
represents a scale error due to the aforementioned uncertainties in the determination of the
refractive index and errors in the calibration of the modulation frequency and “S” is the
measured distance. Typically, the value of "a" ranges from 3 mm to 5 mm. In the highest
precision EDM instruments, the "a" value is 0.2 mm to 0.5 mm based on a high modulation
frequency and high resolution of the phase measurements in those instruments. Over distances
longer than a few hundred meters, however, the prevailing error in all EDM instruments is due to
the difficulty in determining the refractive index.
d. Pulse Type Measurement. EDM instruments with a short pulse transmission and direct
measurement of the propagation time are available. These instruments, having a high energy
transmitted signal, may be used without reflectors to measure short distances (up to 200 m)
directly to walls or natural flat surfaces with an accuracy of about 10 millimeters. Automated
laser scanning instruments are also available that can be used to scan accurate (+/- 5 mm), real-
time detailed models of structures and construction sites—see Figure 3-2.
3-4
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure 3-2. Real-time laser scanner being set up to scan Libby Dam. (Army Geospatial
Center, Leica Geosystems).
e. Total Stations. Any electronic theodolite linked to an EDM instrument and to a computer
creates a total surveying station, which allows for a simultaneous measurement of the three basic
positioning parameters, distance, horizontal direction, and vertical angle, from which relative
horizontal and vertical positions of the observed points can be determined directly in the field.
Several manufacturers of survey equipment produce integrated total stations in which the EDM
and electronic angle measurement systems are incorporated into one compact instrument with
common pointing optics, as illustrated in Figure 3-1. Different models of total stations vary in
accuracy, range, sophistication of the automatic data collection, and possibilities for online data
processing.
f. Automatic Target Recognition (ATR). Early automated vision systems were installed in
precision theodolites by the 1980's. Its operating components consisted of an external video
camera imaging system and a separate servomotor drive. Modern systems are more
sophisticated, being packaged internally and having an active beam sensing capability. An
emitted IR signal is transmitted to the prism that passively reflects the signal back to the
instrument. The return spot is imaged on a high-resolution (500 x 500) pixel Charged Couple
Device (CCD) array. The center of gravity (centroid) is located in relation to the current position
3-5
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
of the optical cross-hairs (reticule). An initial calibration process is carried out immediately after
setting up the instrument, where a reference object is sighted so that the fixed orientation of the
telescope is registered to the ATR image coordinates. To run the system after calibration, a
series of targets are sighted so the instrument can be trained to their location at least once. With
the approximate coordinates of each target prism stored in memory, the ATR system can then
take over the pointing, reading, and measuring functions completely within the instrument.
Target search radius, data rejection thresholds, and other controls can be programmed into the
operating menus by the user. The search pattern is set by default to one-third of the telescope
field of view, but this range can be narrowed to provide better search and recognition
performance once the instrument has been trained to a given point. Factory reliability tests on
the servomotor drive have proven continuous operation of the system over four consecutive
years in a continuous measurement mode.
g. Survey Robots. For continuous or frequent deformation measurements, a fully automatic

system based on computerized and motorized total stations has been developed. These systems
can be programmed for sequential self-pointing to a set of prism targets at predetermined time
intervals, can measure distances and horizontal and vertical angles, and can transmit the data to
the office computer via a telemetry link. The robotic systems are used in many applications,
particularly in monitoring high walls in open pit mining and in slope stability studies. Generally,
the accuracy of direction measurements with the self-pointing computerized theodolites is worse
than the measurements with manual pointing.
3-3. Differential Leveling.
a. General. Differential leveling provides height difference measurements between a series

of benchmarks. Vertical positions are determined to very high accuracy (±1 mm) over short
distances (10-100's of meters) using precision levels. Two major classes of precision levels
commonly used for making deformation measurements are automatic levels and digital levels.
b. Automatic Levels. The old method of geometrical leveling with horizontal LOSs (using
spirit or compensated levels) is still the most reliable and accurate, though slow, surveying
method. With high magnification leveling instruments, equipped with the parallel glass plate
micrometer and with invar graduated rods, a standard deviation smaller than 0.1 mm per setup
may be achieved in height difference determination as long as the balanced LOSs do not exceed
20 m. In leveling over long distances (with a number of instrument setups) with the LOSs not
exceeding 30 m, a standard deviation of 1 mm per kilometer may be achieved in flat terrain. The
influence of atmospheric refraction and earth curvature is minimized by balancing the LOSs
between the forward and backward leveling rods. A significant accumulation of refraction error,
up to 15 mm for each 100-m difference in elevation, may take place along moderately inclined
long routes due to unequal heights of the forward and backward horizontal lines above the
terrain.
3-6
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
c. Digital Levels. The digital automatic leveling systems with height and distance readout
from encoded leveling rods (Figure 3-3) has considerably increased the speed of leveling (by
about 30%) and decreased the number of personnel needed on the survey crew.
Invar Barcode Scale
Figure 3-3. Leica LS10 digital level and section from bar-coded invar level rod.
d. Tilt Measurements by Leveling. Monolith tilt on dams can be determined from leveling
observations using the dimensions and tilting axis of the object. For example, a well-spaced
(e.g., rectangular) four-point configuration of points provides the attitude of a plane that can be
solved by least squares surface fitting to the measurements. The required survey data inputs are
the height differences between the points and an absolute height tied to at least one point, either
transferred or assumed from a given reference. The unknown two-axis tilt parameters (X and
Y) are derived from the solution of the equation for the plane.
3-4. Total Station Trigonometric Elevations.
a. Zenith Angle Methods. High precision electronic theodolites and EDM equipment allow
for the replacement of geodetic leveling with more economical trigonometric height
measurements. An accuracy better than 1 mm may be achieved in height difference
determination between two targets 200 m apart using precision electronic theodolites for vertical
angle measurements and an EDM instrument. The measurements must be performed either
reciprocally, with two theodolites simultaneously, or from an auxiliary station with equal
distances to the two targets (similar methodology as in spirit leveling) to minimize atmospheric
refraction effects.
3-7
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
b. Measurement Accuracy. Zenith angle heighting accuracy is practically independent of the

height differences and is especially more economical than conventional leveling in hilly terrain,
and in all situations where large height differences between survey stations are involved.
Trigonometric height traversing (reciprocal or with balanced lines of sight) with precision
theodolites and with the lines of sight not exceeding 250 m can give a standard deviation smaller
than 2 mm per kilometer. For standard height transfer applications, with automatic data
collection and online processing, measurements are achieved independent of the terrain
configuration. The refraction error is still the major problem with increasing the accuracy of
trigonometric leveling.
3-5. Global Positioning System (GPS).
a. General. The satellite based GPS (shown in Figures 3-4 and 3-5) offers advantages over
conventional terrestrial methods. Intervisibility between stations is not strictly necessary,
allowing greater flexibility in the selection of station locations than for terrestrial geodetic
surveys. Measurements can be taken during night or day, under varying weather conditions,
which makes GPS measurements economical, especially when multiple receivers can be
deployed on the structure during the survey. Reference EM 1110-1-1003, NAVSTAR Global
Positioning System Surveying.
Figure 3-4. GPS equipment setup on Racine Lock and Dam.
3-8
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure 3-5. Standard GPS equipment for precise surveying. From left to right: graduated
rods for antenna height measurement, GPS antenna with ground plane, tribrach,
antenna/tribrach adapter, antenna cable, data download cable, surveyors tripod, GPS
receiver, camcorder batteries, power cord for support module, 12V battery with attached
cable, and support module for data downloading.
b. Measurement Accuracy. The accuracy of GPS relative positioning depends on the

distribution (positional geometry) of the observed satellites and on the quality of the
observations. Several major sources of error contaminating the GPS measurements are:
-signal propagation errors—tropospheric and ionospheric refraction, and signal multipath,

-receiver-related errors—antenna phase center variation, and receiver system noise, and
-satellite-related errors—such as orbit errors and accuracy of the ephemeris data.
GPS errors relative to deformation survey applications are discussed in detail in Chapter 8.
c. GPS Positioning Accuracy. Experience with the use of GPS in various deformation
studies indicate that with the available technology the accuracy of GPS relative positioning over
3-9
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
areas of up to 50 km in diameter can be expressed in terms of the variance of the horizontal

components of the GPS baselines over a distance (S):
 2 = ( 3mm ) 2 + ( 10-6 x S ) 2 (Eq 3-2)
Systematic biases (rotations and change in scale of the network) are identified and eliminated
through proper modeling at the stage of the deformation interpretation. The accuracy of vertical
components of the baselines is 1.5 to 2.5 times worse than the horizontal components.
Systematic measurement errors over short distances (up to a few hundred meters) are usually
negligible and the horizontal components of the GPS baselines can be determined with a
standard deviation of 3 mm or less. The use of Real Time Kinematic GPS data processing
allows for the real-time determination of changes in the position of GPS observed stations.
d. Systematic GPS Errors. Different types of errors affect GPS relative positioning in
different ways. Some of the errors may have a systematic effect on the measured baselines
producing scale errors and rotations. Due to the changeable geometrical distribution of the
satellites and the resulting changeable systematic effects of the observation errors, repeated GPS
surveys for the purpose of monitoring deformations can affect derived deformation parameters
(up to a few ppm). The solution for systematic parameters in a GPS network may be obtained
by:
-combining GPS surveys of some baselines (with different orientation) with terrestrial
surveys of a compatible or better accuracy, and
-Establishing several points outside the deformable area (fiducial stations) which would
serve as reference points.
These aspects must be considered when designing GPS networks for any engineering project.
e. Automated GPS Surveys. USACE developed a fully automated system for high-precision
deformation surveys with GPS. With the Continuous Deformation Monitoring System (CDMS),
GPS antennas are located at multiple points on the structure. At least two other GPS antennas
must be located over reference points that are considered stable. The GPS antennas are
connected to computers using a data telemetry link. CDMS can give accuracies of 3 mm both
horizontally and vertically over a 300-m baseline. Although GPS does not require the
intervisibility between the observing stations, it requires an unobstructed view to the satellites,
which limits the use of GPS only to reasonably open areas. One should also remember that there
might be some additional sources of errors (e.g., multipath, etc.) in GPS measurements.
f. GPS Receiver Specifications. When performing GPS-based deformation surveys, the

receiver used must be geodetic quality and capable of one second data sampling. The receiver
should also be capable of recording the GPS carrier frequency, receiver clock time, and signal
strength for each data sample. A GPS receiver is required for each reference station in the
reference network. The same model receiver/antenna combination should be used for each
3-10
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
setup. Pre-processing of GPS survey data, at a minimum, must include determination of the 3D
coordinate differences and associated variance-covariance matrix in the 3D coordinate system
for all baselines observed, and data screening to eliminate possible outliers. When performing
GPS-based deformation surveys, procedures should be done per the guidance in Chapter 8 of this
manual.
GPS reference stations
Target points on dam
Figure 3-6. Concept sketch depicting GPS deformation monitoring surveys on a dam. The
CDMS was first applied at Dworshak Dam, Idaho. (Walla Walla District).
3-6. Photogrammetric Techniques.
a. General. Aerial photogrammetry has been extensively used in determining ground

movements in ground subsidence studies in mining areas, and terrestrial photogrammetry has
been used in the monitoring of engineering structures. The main advantages of using
photogrammetry are the reduced time of field work; simultaneous three dimensional coordinates;
and in principle an unlimited number of points can be monitored.
b. Terrestrial Photogrammetry. Special cameras with minimized distortions must be used in

precision photogrammetry. Cameras combined with theodolites (phototheodolites) or
stereocameras (two cameras mounted on a bar of known length) have found many applications in
terrestrial engineering surveys including mapping and volume determination of underground
excavations and profiling of tunnels. The accuracy of photogrammetric positioning with special
cameras depends mainly on the accuracy of the determination of the image coordinates and the
3-11
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
scale of the photographs. The image coordinates may, typically, be determined with an accuracy
of about 10 µm, though 3 µm is achievable. The photo scale may be approximately expressed
as:
Photo Scale = f / S (Eq 3-3)
where
f = the focal length of the camera lens
S = the distance of the camera from the object
Using a camera with f = 100 mm, at a distance S = 100 m, with the accuracy of the image
coordinates of 10 µm, the coordinates of the object points can be determined with the accuracy
of 10 mm.
c. Photogrammetric Standards. When performing photogrammetric-based deformation

surveys, only metric cameras will be used. Typically, only one camera is necessary as it is
moved from station to station. The instrument used for image coordinate measurement (e.g.,
monocomparator, stereocomparator, or analytical stereocomparator) will be capable of 1 micron
or better resolution. EM 1110-1-1000, Photogrammetric and LiDAR Mapping, and
photogrammetric product manufacturer guidelines should be referred to for more specifics on the
photogrammetric process.
3-7. Alignment Measurements.
a. General. Alignment surveys cover an extremely wide spectrum of engineering

applications from the tooling industry, through measurements of amplitude of vibrations of
engineering structures, to deformation monitoring of nuclear accelerometers several kilometers
long. Each application may require different specialized equipment. The methods used in
practice may be classified per the method of establishing the reference line:
-mechanical method in which stretched wire (e.g., steel, nylon) establishes the
reference line,
-direct optical method (collimation) with optical LOS or a laser beam to mark
the line, and
-diffraction method where a reference line is created by projecting a pattern of
diffraction slits.
b. Mechanical Methods. Mechanical alignment methods with tensioned wires used as the
reference lines have found many applications, including dam deformation surveys. This is due to
their simplicity, high accuracy, and easy adaptation to continuous monitoring of structural
deformations using inductive sensors applicable over distances up to a few hundred meters.
Accuracies of 0.1 mm are achievable using mechanical alignment methods.
3-12
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
c. Direct Optical Methods. Direct optical methods (Figure 3-7) utilize either an optical
telescope and movable targets with micrometric sliding devices or a collimated laser beam
(projected through the telescope) and movable photo-centering targets. Besides the
aforementioned influence of atmospheric refraction, pointing and focusing are the main sources
of error when using optical telescopes. Refer to Chapter 7 for details on performing micrometer
alignment observations.
Reference Target
Alignment Target
Deflection Angle
Instrument
Reference
Control Point
Alignment Offset
Alignment Pin
Control Point
Figure 3-7. Direct optical alignment technique. Deflection angle method used to measure
baseline offsets in conventional alignment surveys.
d. Aligning Telescopes. Special aligning telescopes with large magnification (up to 100)
are available. When the optical LOS is replaced by a collimated laser beam, then the accuracy of
pointing may be considerably improved if special self-centering laser detectors with a time
integration of the laser beam energy are used. The use of laser allows for automation of the
alignment procedure and for continuous data acquisition. Attention must be paid to the stability
of the laser cavity when using the laser beam directly as the reference line. A directional drift of
the laser beam as high as 4 arc seconds per degree Celsius may occur due to thermal effects on
the laser cavity. This effect is decreased by a factor of the magnification when projecting the
laser through a telescope.
e. Diffraction Methods. In diffraction alignment methods, a pinhole source of

monochromatic (laser) light, the center of a plate with diffraction slits, and the center of an
optical or photoelectric sensor are the three basic points of the alignment line. If two of the three
points are fixed in their position, then the third may be aligned by centering the reticule on the
interference pattern created by the diffraction grating. It should be pointed out that movements
of the laser and of its output do not influence the accuracy of this method of alignment because
3-13
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
the laser serves only as a source of monochromatic light placed behind the pinhole and not as the
reference line. Therefore, any kind of laser may be employed in this method, even the simplest
and least expensive ones, as long as the output power requirements are satisfied. Various
patterns of diffraction slits are used in practice. The highest accuracy and the longest range are
obtained with the so-called Fresnel zone plates that act as focusing lenses. For instance,
rectangular Fresnel zone plates with an electro-optical centering device were used in alignment
and deformation measurements of a 3 km long nuclear accelerator giving relative accuracy (in a
vacuum) of 10-7 of the distance. In the open atmosphere, the thermal turbulence of air seems to
have a smaller effect when using the Fresnel zone plates than in the case of direct optical
alignment. The laser diffraction alignment methods have successfully been applied in
monitoring both straight and curved (arch) dams using self-centering targets with automatic data
recording.
f. Micrometer Translation Stages. Developments in the manufacture of translation stages for

scientific and laboratory use (such as for laser and optical alignment work), as well as other
specialized products used in the field of industrial metrology, include a broad array of alignment
measurement tools (such as scales, precise micrometers, and right angle prisms). Modern linear
translation stages can reliably provide extremely high resolution (1/1000 inch at one-sigma) with
very stable material and mechanical properties. Translation stages with large travel ranges are
available to adapt these off-the-shelf devices to monitoring applications, especially alignment
surveys.
3-8. Extension and Strain Measurements.
a. Types of Extensometers. Various types of instruments, mainly mechanical and electro

mechanical, are used to measure changes in distance to determine compaction or upheaval of
soil, convergence of walls in engineering structures and underground excavations, strain in rocks
and in man-made materials, separation between rock layers around driven tunnels, slope
stability, and movements of structures with respect to the foundation rocks. Depending on its
particular application, the same instrument may be named an extensometer, strainmeter,
convergencemeter, or fissuremeter. The various instruments differ from each other by the
method of linking together the points between which the change in the distance is to be
determined and the kind of sensor employed to measure the change. The links in most
instruments are mechanical, such as wires, rods, or tubes. The sensors usually are mechanical,
such as calipers or dial gauges. In order to adapt them to automatic and continuous data
recording, electric transducers can be employed using, for instance, linear potentiometers,
differential transformers, and self-inductance resonant circuits. In general, when choosing the
kind of transducer for automatic data acquisition, one should consult with an electronics
specialist on which kind would best suit the purpose of the measurements in the given
environmental conditions. One should point out that the precision EDM instruments, as
described earlier with their accuracy of 0.3 mm over short distances, may also be used as
extensometers, particularly when the distances involved are several tens of meters long.
3-14
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
If an extensometer is installed in the material with a homogeneous strain field, then the measured
change ( l ) of the distance ( l ) gives directly the strain component (  ):
 = l / l (Eq 3-4)
in the direction of the measurements. To determine the total strain tensor in a plane (two normal
strains and one shearing), a minimum of three extensometers must be installed in three different
directions.
Inside & outside micrometers
Various slide and vernier calipers
Figure 3-8. Assortment of Starrett micrometers and calipers that can be used for measuring
short distances in concrete structures to an accuracy of 0.0005 inch or better.
b. Wire and Tape Extensometers. Maintaining a constant tension throughout the use of the
wire or tape extensometer is very important. In some portable extensometers, the constant
tensioning weight has been replaced by precision tensioning springs. One should be careful
because there are several models of spring tensioned extensometers on the market which do not
provide any means of tension calibration. As the spring ages, these instruments may indicate
false expansion results unless they are carefully calibrated on a baseline of constant length before
and after each measuring campaign.
(1) Invar Wire Strain Gauge. Among the most precise wire extensometers are the Kern
Distometer (discontinued production) and the European Organization for Nuclear Research
3-15
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(CERN) Distinvar (Switzerland). Both instruments use invar wires and special constant
tensioning devices which, if properly calibrated and used, can give accuracies of 0.05 mm or
better in measurements of changes of distances over lengths from about 1 m to about 20 meters.
Invar is a capricious alloy and must be handled very carefully to avoid sudden changes in the
length of the wire. When only small changes in temperature are expected or a smaller precision
(0.1 mm to 1 mm) is required, steel wires or steel tapes are more appropriate.
(2) Vibrating Wire Strain Gauge. Special high precision strainmeters of a short length (up to
a few decimeters) are available for strain measurements in structural material and in
homogeneous rocks. These instruments employ a thin steel wire in which the changeable
resonant frequency is measured. In one particular model of extensometers, an accuracy of one
microstrain (10-6) is claimed in the strain measurements which corresponds to 0.15 µm relative
displacements of points over a distance of 150 mm.
c. Rod, Tube, and Torpedo Extensometers. Steel, invar, aluminum, or fiberglass rods of
various lengths, together with sensors of their movements, may be used depending on the
application. Multiple point measurements in boreholes or in trenches may be made using either a
parallel arrangement of rods anchored at different distances from the sensing head, or a string (in
series) arrangement with intermediate sensors of the relative movements of the rods. A typical
accuracy of 0.1 mm to 0.5 mm may be achieved up to a total length of 200 m (usually in
segments of 3 m to 6 m). The actual accuracy depends on the temperature corrections and on the
quality of the installation of the extensometer. When installing rods in plastic conduit (usually
when installing in boreholes), the friction between the rod and the conduit may significantly
distort the extensometer indications if the length of the extensometer exceeds a few tens of
meters. The dial indicator readout may be replaced by potentiometric or other transducers with
digital readout systems. Telescopic tubes may replace rods in some simple applications, for
instance, in measurements of convergence between the roof and floor of openings in
underground mining. Several models of torpedo borehole extensometers and sliding
micrometers are available from different companies. Reference rings on the casing are spaced
within the length of the torpedo. The sensors and reference rings form the inductance oscillating
circuits. The torpedo is lowered in the borehole and stopped between the successive rings
recording changes in distances between the pairs of rings with a claimed accuracy of 0.1
millimeter. Boreholes up to several hundreds of meters long can be scanned.
d. Interferometric Measurements of Linear Displacements. Various kinds of interferometers

using lasers as a source of monochromatic radiation are becoming common tools in precision
displacement measurements. A linear resolution of 0.01 µm, or better, is achievable. One has to
remember, however, that interferometric distance measurements are affected by atmospheric
refractivity in the same way as all EDM systems. Therefore, even if temperature and barometric
pressure corrections are applied, the practical accuracy limit is about 10-6S (equivalent to 1 µm
per meter). Thermal turbulence of air limits the range of interferometric measurements in the
open atmosphere to about 60 meters. The laser interferometer has found many industrial and
3-16
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
laboratory applications in the measurement of small displacements and the calibration of

surveying instruments.
e. Use of Optical Fiber Sensors. The measurements of extensions and changes in

crack-width employs a fully automatic extensometer that utilizes the principle of electro-optical
distance measurements within fiber optic conduits. The change in length of the fiber optic
sensors are sensed electro-optically and are computer controlled.
f. Precise Concrete Crack Measurements. Distances between crack plug pins in concrete
structures are typically measured using precision micrometers or calipers as well as using
automated vibrating wire crackmeters, such as those as shown in Figure 3-8. Details on
micrometer crack observing procedures are covered in Chapter 7.
3-9. Tilt and Inclination Measurements.
a. Methods of Tilt Measurement. The measurement of tilt is usually understood as the

determination of a deviation from the horizontal plane, while inclination is interpreted as a
deviation from the vertical. Instruments that measures tilt at a point are known as either a
tiltmeter or an inclinometer. Geodetic leveling techniques can achieve an accuracy of 0.1 mm
over a distance of 20 m, which would be equivalent to about 1 arc second of angular tilt. This
accuracy is more than sufficient in most engineering deformation measurements. Various in-situ
instruments are used when higher accuracy or continuous or very frequent collection of data on
the tilt changes is necessary:
-engineering tiltmeters and inclinometers,
-suspended and inverted plumb lines, and
-hydrostatic levels.
Other specialized instruments such as mercury/laser levels have been developed but are not
commonly used in practice.
b. Tiltmeters and Inclinometers. There are many reasonably priced models of various liquid,
electrolytic, vibrating wire, and pendulum type tiltmeters that satisfy most of the needs of
engineering surveys. Particularly popular are servo-accelerometer tiltmeters with a small
horizontal pendulum. They offer ruggedness, durability, and low temperature operation. The
output signal (volts) is proportional to the sine of the angle of tilt. The typical output voltage
range for tiltmeters is ±5 V, which corresponds to the maximum range of the tilt. Angular
resolution depends on the tilt range of the selected model of tiltmeter and the resolution of the
voltmeter (e.g., 1 mV). There are many factors affecting the accuracy of tilt sensing. A
temperature change produces dimensional changes of the mechanical components, changes in the
viscosity of the liquid in the electrolytic tiltmeters, and of the damping oil in the pendulum
tiltmeters. Drifts of tilt indications and fluctuations of the readout may also occur. Thorough
testing and calibration are required even when accuracy requirements are not very high.
Tiltmeters have a wide range of applications. A series of tiltmeters, if arranged along a terrain
3-17
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
profile, may replace geodetic leveling in the determination of ground subsidence. Similarly,
deformation profiles of tall structures may be determined by placing a series of tiltmeters at
different levels of the structure. A popular application of tiltmeters in geomechanical
engineering is in slope stability studies and in monitoring embankment dams using the torpedo
(scanning) type borehole inclinometers (usually the servo-accelerometer type tiltmeters). The
biaxial inclinometers are used to scan boreholes drilled to the depth of an expected stable strata
in the slope. By lowering the inclinometer on a cable with marked intervals and taking readings
of the inclinometer at those intervals, a full profile of the borehole and its changes may be
determined through repeated surveys. Usually the servo-accelerometer inclinometers are used
with various ranges of inclination measurements, for instance, ±6 degrees, ±54 degrees, or even
±90 degrees. If a 40-m deep borehole is measured every 50 cm with an inclinometer of only 10
arc seconds accuracy, then the linear lateral displacement of the collar of the borehole could be
determined with an accuracy of 2 millimeters. Fully automatic (computerized) borehole
scanning inclinometer systems with a telemetric data acquisition have been designed for
monitoring slope stability.
c. Suspended and Inverted Plumb Lines. Two kinds of mechanical plumbing are used in
controlling the stability of vertical structures:
-suspended plumb lines, and
-floating or inverted plumb lines.
Inverted plumb lines have an advantage over suspended plumb lines in the possibility of
monitoring absolute displacements of structures with respect to deeply anchored points in the
foundation rocks that may be considered as stable. In the case of power dams, the depth of the
anchors must be 50 m or even more below the foundation in order to obtain absolute
displacements of the surface points. If invar wire is used for the inverted plumb line, vertical
movements of the investigated structure with respect to the bedrock can also be determined.
Caution must be used in installing plumb lines. If the plumb line is installed outside the dam, a
vertical pipe of a proper inner diameter should be used to protect the wire from the wind. The
main concern with floating plumb lines is to ensure verticality of the boreholes so that the wire
of the plumb line has freedom of motion. The tank containing the float is generally filled with
oil or with water to which some anti-freeze can be added. The volume of the float should be
such as to exert sufficient tension on the wire. Thermal convection displacements in a float tank
may easily develop from thermal gradients that may affect measurements—requiring the whole
tank to be thermally insulated. Several types of recording devices that measure displacements of
structural points with respect to the vertical plumb lines are produced by different companies.
The simplest are mechanical or electromechanical micrometers. With these, the plumb wire can
be positioned with respect to reference lines of a recording (coordinating) table to an accuracy of
±0.1 mm or better. Traveling microscopes may give the same accuracy. Automatic sensing and
recording is possible. Automated vision systems use CCD video cameras to image the plumb
line with a resolution of about 3 micrometers over a range of 75 mm. Two sources of error that
may sometimes be underestimated by users are the influence of air currents and the spiral shape
3-18
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
of wires. The plumb line should be protected within a pipe (e.g., PVC tube) with openings only
at the reading tables to reduce the influence of the air pressure.
d. Optical Plummets. High precision optical plummets [e.g., Leica ZL (zenith) and NL
(nadir) plummets] offer accuracy of up to 1:200,000 for precise centering, and both can be
equipped with a laser. Atmospheric refraction remains as a major source of error for optical
instruments.
e. Hydrostatic Leveling. If two connected containers are partially filled with a liquid, then
the heights h1 and h2 of the liquid in the containers are related through the hydrostatic equation:
h1 + P1 / (g1 r1) = h2 + P2 / (g2 r2) = constant (Eq 3-5)
where P is the barometric pressure, g is gravity, and r is the density of the liquid, which is a
function of temperature. The above relationship has been employed in hydrostatic leveling.
Hydrostatic leveling is frequently used in the form of a network of permanently installed
instruments filled with a liquid and connected by hose-pipes to monitor change in height
differences of large structures. The height differences of the liquid levels are automatically
recorded. The accuracy ranges from 0.1 mm to 0.01 mm over a few tens of meters depending on
the types of instruments. The main factor limiting the survey accuracy is the temperature effect.
To reduce this effect, the instrument must either be installed in a place with small temperature
variations, or the temperature along the pipes must be measured and corrections applied, or a
double liquid (e.g., water and mercury) is employed to derive the correction for this effect.
Water of a constant temperature is pumped into the system just before taking the readings for the
highest accuracy applications. The instruments with direct measurement of the liquid levels are
limited in the vertical range by the height of the containers. This problem may be overcome if
liquid pressures are measured instead of the changes in elevation of the water levels, where
pneumatic pressure cells or pressure transducer cells may be used.
3-10. Non-Geodetic Measurements.
a. General. Deformation of large structures (e.g., dams) is caused mainly by reservoir loads,
temperature, self-weight of the dam, and earth pressure. A monitoring system should therefore
include regular measurements of the reservoir level and temperature and pressure data.
b. Reservoir Level Measurement. Historically reservoir levels were measured with pressure
balances, where double checking the measurements must be done and can be facilitated by
installing a manometer on either an existing or new pipe connected to the reservoir. The
measurement range should extend at least as far as the dam crest allowing observation and
judgment of the flood risk and assessment of peak inflows. Current common practice involves
the use of pressure transducers and air acoustic measurement devices.
3-19
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
c. Temperature Measurement. Temperature measurements are required to determine the

impact of temperature variations on the structure itself, as well as whether precipitation consists
of rain or snow and, if applicable, whether the snow melt period has begun. Temperature
measurements should be done at least daily. The thermometers should be placed at various
locations within the dam, either embedded in the structure itself or within drill holes.
Redundancy should be provided for by using a greater number of thermometers than otherwise
would be required.
d. Precipitation Measurement. Precipitation measurement should be done by using a

precipitation gauge. Daily readings are recommended. The gauging station does not need to be
located at the dam site, but should not be too far away so as to not be representative of the
precipitation level at the structure itself. Every large structure has some form of seepage through
the structure itself or its foundation, even with a grout curtain. In concrete dams, seepage
typically is small and limited to permeable areas of the concrete, joints, and contact between rock
and concrete. Any abnormal seepage is an immediate warning that something may be wrong
with the structure or foundation. In embankment (i.e., earthen) dams, seepage flow through the
structure itself is similar to that observed in its foundation. Monitoring local precipitation will
help to determine potential sources of seepage.
e. Seepage Rate. The total seepage rate is the seepage at the face of the structure taken as a
whole. Seepage rate can be measured volumetrically by using a calibrated container and a
stopwatch or a gauging weir or flume. Partial seepage rates are taken in isolated zones of the
structure found to be representative for the area examined. Such rates should be monitored
periodically. In the course of monitoring seepage, if an abnormality (i.e., a change in normal
seepage rate) is detected, the critical zone and cause of the seepage is easier to identify.
f. Chemical Property Analysis. If the structure is constructed of soluble or easily erodible

material, the seepage should be monitored for turbidity and chemical content also. Doing so will
permit the assessment of the overall stability of the embankment and foundation materials.
g. Pore-Water Pressure Measurement. Structures are usually designed with specific pore-
water pressure values that should not be exceeded. Pressure cells typically are designed or built
into the structure themselves to measure pore-water pressure. The linking together of several
cells forms a profile for the structure. The greater the number of measurement profiles and
number of cells per profile, the more useful the data obtained will be. Even though pressure cells
can be installed in structures themselves, rehabilitation of existing ones is not always practicable.
Where pressure cells cannot be used to monitor pore-water pressure, the phreatic line in selected
points will be monitored. Standpipe piezometers mounted in the embankment at several cross
sections should be used to monitor the phreatic surface.
h. Uplift Pressure. Seepage underneath a structure causes uplift pressure that can alter the
stabilizing effect of the structure's self-weight. Uplift pressure can be reasonably controlled by
cutoffs and controlled drainage, but uplift pressure and the physical effectiveness of these control
3-20
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
measures should be carefully monitored. Piezometers are a reliable means to measure the uplift
pressure in cross-sections and several points on the upstream and downstream face of the
structure.
i. Discharge Measurement. If the foundation is being drained, drainage discharge should be

monitored by either volumetric gauging or gauging weir. Any change in flow rate may be
indicative of clogging in the drainage system. If possible, the discharge of any spring, river,
stream, or flood control structure downstream of the structure should be monitored.
3-11. Optical Tooling Technology.
a. General. This section discusses modern optical metrology. A set of methods known in
industry as optical tooling is used to create precise lines and planes in space from which
measurements are made using light.
b. Definition of Optical Tooling. Optical tooling is a means for establishing and utilizing a
LOS to obtain precise reference lines and reference planes from which accurate measurements
are made with position sensitive targets (see Williams, 1989). Measurements are made by a
person interpreting a scale or optical micrometer by looking through an alignment telescope, or
the lines and planes are created by a laser with digital measurements. Optical tooling uses the
principle that light travels in straight lines so as to enable precise measurements and level lines
with every point is perpendicular to the force of gravity (e.g., plumb lines can be set to a given
level datum). Right angles also can be produced quickly and precisely with auxiliary equipment
components. In the assembly, maintenance, and calibration of industrial equipment, or
alignment of precision systems, up to four basic alignment elements are used:
-straightness,
-flatness,
-squareness, and
-plumb.
A number of techniques have been developed to make these measurements, and in some cases, it
is no longer necessary to interpret readings or to make constant adjustments and calculations to
produce accurate results. For example, in laser alignment applications, direct precision
measurements are made rapidly and consistently based on existing technology.
(1) Straightness. In aligning several points, a tight wire is often used as a reference line.
This technique has some drawbacks and can introduce inaccuracy. Wire has weight, which
causes it to sag, and over long distances this sag can become considerable. Wire can vibrate,
bend, or kink when stretched in the area to be measured and equipment cannot be moved around
for fear of disturbing the wire reference line. Even a gentle breeze can cause the wire to move a
considerable amount because of the relatively large aerodynamic drag on a thin wire. In laser
alignment, the LOS is established by a laser beam instead of a tight wire. The laser LOS
reference has no weight, cannot sag, kink, or be disturbed, nor is it a safety hazard. It constitutes
3-21
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
a precise reference for determining straightness to within thousandths of an inch. Straightness

applications are employed for establishing an alignment survey reference line.
(2) Flatness. A shop level and/or a straightedge are traditionally employed to determine
flatness. The shop level must be moved from part to part over large horizontal areas to measure
the degree of flatness of each individual surface upon which the level is place. Flatness over a
considerable area must be assured in the erection of large machinery, surface tables, and large
machine tools. Conventional bubble levels and "laser levels," offer a way to produce a level
datum over a wide area. Laser technology has overcome the many disadvantages of bubble
levels and assures levelness to within a few thousandths of an inch over hundreds of feet. This
high degree of levelness is accomplished by horizontally sweeping the laser beam manually or
via a motor driven rotary stage. This revolving line of laser light becomes a horizontal "plane of
sight," giving a precise horizontal reference datum, sometimes called a waterline.
(3) Squareness. Perfect squareness implies that one plane forms a 90 degree angle with
another intersecting plane. When a steel square is used to test for this condition, measurements
rely upon the trueness of the steel square, which can vary from square to square with time. Steel
squares have a definite limit in their physical dimensions and consequently the testing of very
large surface becomes less accurate and slower. Laser alignment methods use a transparent
penta prism in conjunction with a simple alignment laser. This optical element will split the
beam from the laser into two parts; one beam passes through the prism undeviated, and the other
beam is reflected at a 90 degree angle. Other systems use three independently mounted lasers
that are orthogonal to each other.
(4) Plumb. A plumb line and pendulum are used to establish a single vertical reference line.
As vertical distances increase, settling time, vibration, air currents, and other disturbances will
have increased effects on the measurements. In the laser alignment method, there are several
ways to produce a plumb reference; it can be a plane or a line. To form a plumb line, an
alignment laser with auto-collimating capability is used with a pool of almost any liquid.
Autocollimation senses the angle of an external mirror by reflecting its beam back into the laser
head. A position sensor, beamsplitter, and lens measure the angle of the reflected beam. When
the laser is adjusted such that the internal sensor reads zero in both axes, then the laser is
producing a plumb line. If the laser beam is emitted from a manual or motor driver rotary base
whose rotary axis is level, then the swept plane of light is a vertical plane. Position detectors in
this plane will give an indication of how far to one side or other they are with respect to the
plane.
3-12. Laser Tooling Methods.
a. Straightness Alignment. Before lasers and electronic targets came into use, alignment
consisted of sighting through two points, near and far, and deciding if an object placed in-
between them was to the left or right, or up or down with respect to this LOS. The choice of the
two reference points is still the most important selection process of a straightness survey. For
example, if a heavy machine tool is being surveyed, the two reference points that determine the
3-22
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
LOS should be located off of the machine. If for any reason the machine were to move or to
deflect, then all measurements would be in error. The two reference points should be located
close enough to be convenient to use and/or out of the way of other people working in the area.
Transits and alignment telescopes were the first instruments used to make these types of
measurements. The use of transits and telescopes require one person to interpret a reading scale
placed on the object of interest; and usually a second person is holding the scale against the
object. It is a two-person job that takes time and much training to accomplish. This type of
alignment measurement, commonly called straightness, is the most basic of all alignment
applications.
b. Alignment Transfer. Another common requirement is to establish a second LOS

perpendicular or parallel to an original LOS. To establish a perpendicular LOS with lasers, a
special prism is used called a penta prism or optical squares as they are often called. Prisms have
the property that rotation around its axis does not deviate the reflected beam at all, and therefore
it does not have to be critically mounted. Tooling bars are also used to establish a parallel LOS
with respect to an existing LOS, especially if the distance is relatively short, for example a meter
or less. These bars are made of steel and hold electronic targets at a precise distance from a
center point. Using two bars from the original LOS establishes a parallel LOS. If the distance
between the two LOS is large, then transfer can be done using the penta prism twice; the first
time to turn the beam 90 degrees, followed by a certain distance, and concluded by turning the
beam back 90 degrees. Care must be taken that two LOSs are truly parallel, which is usually
confirmed from a level reference datum.
c. Oriented Alignment. The next alignment application involves measuring the alignment
error between two different LOS datums. A typical application is to determine the lateral offset
and angular error between two shafts (alignment segments). The shafts essentially define the
two LOSs. The measurement is made by setting up a laser source parallel to one shaft. Targets
are placed on the second shaft and surveyed in. Then the shafts are rotated 180 degrees and
surveyed in again. The measured survey difference is equal to twice the shaft offset. If the
target is placed at two axial locations and measured for offset, then the difference in the offsets
divided by twice the axial separation is the angular error in radians.
d. Alignment Plane. A more sophisticated alignment application is to quickly sweep a laser

beam to generate a plane of light. The advantage of this is that many targets can be aligned using
one laser source. In simple straightness applications, the target location is restricted to the active
area of the position sensor. In swept plane alignment, the targets are sensitive in only one
dimension. A typical application to establish a level plane is to put three or more targets at the
same (desired) waterline location and adjust the structure to the targets until all targets read the
same. The targets for a swept plane alignment can be static, meaning they require the laser beam
to be constantly directed in to them. Usually the laser beam is swept by hand by rotating a knob
on the laser source. If the laser plane is moving at high speed, say once a second or faster, then
the targets must capture and hold the position of the laser beam as the beam sweeps by. The
problem becomes harder to accomplish at longer distance because the beam is on the detector for
3-23
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
such short periods of time. Physical high and low spots can be discovered and measured by
moving the targets around the surface.
3-24
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
CHAPTER 4
Sources of Measurement Error and Instrument Calibrations
4-1. General. This chapter describes the various sources of measurement error that need to be
considered in deformation monitoring. These errors come from the tools and processes used
during data collection and monitoring. Instrument calibrations are discussed in this chapter since
this is a contribution to errors.
4-2. Theory of Measurements and Surveying Measurement Errors.
a. Random Variables. Survey measurements are geometrical quantities with numerical

values assigned to them with a certain accuracy. The ‘observable’ is a term used to indicate the
type of surveying measurement, such as direction, distance, azimuth, coordinate difference, and
height difference. An ‘observation’ refers to the specific number assigned to the observable.
Surveying observations always contain random deviations where each observation error is called
an instance of a random variable. Random variables have a well-known expected frequency
distribution (Gaussian or normal) that can be rigorously described by simple parameters.
b. Measures of Central Tendency. The influence of random error is minimized by

computing the mean value of a series of observations, which is also the most probable estimate
of the unknown true value. The mean value of a sample can be computed as follows:
x =  ( xi ) / n (Eq 4-1)
where
x = sample mean
xi = observations ( where i = 1 through n )
n = number of observations
The accuracy of the sample mean is very sensitive to bias or systematic error in the
measurements. An incorrect value for the sample mean, due to measurement bias, is shifted
away from the true population mean.
c. Measures of Dispersion. The variance of a sample of measurements is an estimator of

precision or repeatability. The variance describes how closely the measurements are grouped
around the sample mean. The sample variance is computed from the average of the squares of
the measurement deviations about the mean. A large variance implies lower precision and
greater dispersion. The standard deviation or unbiased root mean square (RMS) error is the
positive square root of the variance. The sample variance (s2), or population variance (2), are
calculated as follows:
4-1
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Sample Variance:
s2 = (  ( xi - x ) 2 ) / (n - 1) (Eq 4-2)
Population Variance:
 2 = (  ( xi -  ) 2 ) / N (Eq 4-3)
where
x = observations ( where i = 1 through n )
s2 = sample variance
x = sample mean = (  xi ) / n
2 = population variance
 = population mean = (  xi ) / N
N = number of elements within the population
When the population mean () is unknown, the sample variance ( s 2 ) is computed using the
sample mean (x). Another measure of dispersion is the range (R) of a data sample:
R = | x MAX - x MIN | (Eq 4-4)
where
R = range
x MAX = maximum value
x MIN = minimum value
The range R is the absolute value of the difference between the minimum and maximum value.
d. Blunders. Blunders are the result of mistakes by the user or inadvertent equipment
failure. For example, an observer may misread a level rod by a tenth of a foot or a
malfunctioning data recorder may cause erroneous data storage. Blunders are minimized by
adopting consistent measurement procedures that contain self-checks. Blunders must be detected
and removed before a final usable set of data can be compiled. Techniques used to identify
blunders in the data include:
-calculation of loop and traverse closures to check whether the misclosure is within
tolerances,
4-2
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
-standard deviation of a series of measurements to check if the spread is within tolerance,
and
-comparison of misclosures to a well-determined or to an assumed true position.
e. Systematic Error. Systematic error is the result of an inadequate mathematical model that
omits some necessary physical or mathematical parameter that is necessary to exactly describe
the relationship between measurements and coordinates. For example, using a tape that is 0.1 m
off or a fixed height tripod that has not been calibrated can result in a systematic error in the
measurements. Systematic error is removed through calibrations and data reductions that are
made before entering the data into the network adjustment software. Unremoved systematic
errors are detected statistically by an examination of the observation residuals and using the Chi-
square Goodness-of-Fit test. Systematic error is caused by deficiencies in the physical or
computation model used to process the measurements. Systematic error can produce a biased
value for the estimated mean (i.e., it is significantly different than the desired true value). For
example, systematic errors in EDM instruments include:
-EDM/prism zero error,
-EDM scale error,
-EDM signal refraction error, and
-EDM cyclic error.
Corrections to these systematic errors are determined by various instrument calibration

techniques. Error is minimized from the data during post-processing by applying the resulting
correction values to the measurements. Where systematic errors cannot be adequately
determined, sometimes their effects can be randomized with specialized observation procedures.
For example, if the surveying measurements are repeated under different field conditions such as
at different times of the day, under different weather conditions, and even on different days.
f. Random Error. Random error is an inherent result of the measurement process. Least
squares processing requires the assumption that only random errors exist within the data. If all
systematic errors and blunders have been removed, then observations will contain only random
error. Random error is broadly characterized as small, uncontrolled deviations in an observed
measurement value. The expected range of uncertainty in measurements due to random error is
known as precision, and is described by the standard deviation () of the distribution of
observations about their mean value. Measurement precision can be estimated by standard
statistical analysis or predicted a priori from error propagation formulas. Error sources in
geodetic measurements with conventional instruments (e.g., theodolites) are:
-pointing error,
-centering error,
-leveling error, and
-reading error.
4-3
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
An expected variance can be calculated for each type of error component. These are added
together to estimate the measurement standard deviation. Measurement precision is critical
information for analyzing positioning accuracy through survey preanalysis and for assigning
appropriate weights to measurements in a least squares network adjustment.
g. Instrument Calibrations. Measuring equipment used for deformation monitoring surveys

must be maintained in adjustment and undergo periodic calibration so as to minimize systematic
error. Manufacturer specifications and recommendations will be used as the basis for any
internal instrument adjustments. EDM instruments must be calibrated for the instrument/prism
zero correction and for scale error, as these may change with time. EDMs should be calibrated at
least once a year for engineering projects of high precision, or before and after an important
project. The calibration for zero error must account for all actual combinations of EDM-reflector
pairings that are used on the survey since each reflector may produce a different error value (i.e.,
there is a different constant for each pairing).
4-3. Optical Pointing Error.
a. Optical Pointing. All measurements with optical theodolites are subject to pointing error
due to such factors as: target design, prevailing atmospheric conditions, operator bias, and
focusing. The approximate magnitude of a single-direction pointing error (i.e., standard
deviation) is directly related to the magnification of the theodolite telescope.
 p = 45" / M (Eq 4-5)
where
p = instrument pointing error (arc seconds)
M = objective lens magnification
For example, an objective lens with 30 times magnification would have a pointing error ( p) of
approximately 1.5 arc seconds (one-sigma) for a single direction. Taking repeated measurements
from the same setup reduces the standard deviation by a factor of 1/sqrt (n), with n being the
number of repetitions (see Figure 4.1). The standard deviation (due to pointing error) of a single
direction measured by repetition in (n) sets can be determined from the following formula:
  =  p / sqrt (n) (Eq 4-6)
where
 = single direction pointing error (arc seconds)
p = instrument pointing error
n = number of repeated sets
4-4
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
This result assumes that each pointing to the backsight and foresight has the same precision.
b. Empirical Determination of Pointing Error. Pointing error can be determined for a given
instrument by making direct observations to a target point (for use with an optical theodolite with
micrometer scales). First, the operator sets and levels the instrument and target per standard
techniques. Next, the operator points the theodolite crosshairs to the target and records the
direction reading. Repeat the pointing procedure at least twenty times to gather a sufficient
number of direction readings for calculating a mean error value from the data. Then compute the
standard deviation of the resulting test data (in arc seconds). The result is an empirical pointing
uncertainty for the instrument. The reading error component must be subtracted from the
combined pointing and reading error.
 p = sqrt [ ( p +  r )2 - ( r )2 ] (Eq 4-7)
where
p = instrument pointing error (arc seconds)
( p +  r ) = combined pointing and reading error
r = instrument reading error (arc seconds)
Reading error (  r ) is determined independently from either the standard deviation of a series of
twenty readings of the theodolite scales with the instrument’s motion locked, or from the
instrument specifications.
c. Minimization of Pointing Error. Instrument pointing error degrades the precision of

horizontal and vertical angle measurements to a greater degree on long baselines. It can be
minimized by observing survey targets under high magnification. Some instruments are
equipped with interchangeable eyepieces that provide higher magnification then when focused to
infinity with a standard eyepiece. The technique of averaging repeated sets of angles is used to
reduce instrument pointing error when greater lens magnification is not available.
d. Atmospheric Disturbance. Air turbulence can greatly interfere with instrument pointing
accuracy. This is especially true on structures exposed to direct sunlight (e.g., dams, concrete
lock walls). Very little can be done to eliminate these effects except to observe under more
favorable conditions, such as in the early morning hours, on overcast days, and during cooler
seasons. Repeated sets of angles will again reduce instrument pointing error with poor observing
conditions. The spread of repeated measurements (final standard deviation after repetitions)
should be checked to see whether it exceeds the required measurement accuracy.
4-5
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure 4-1. Standard error decreases as repeated number of directions increases.
e. Electronic Pointing. Precision EDM instruments use electronic pointing instead of optical
pointing to retrieve the EDM signal. Electronic pointing is a trial-and-error targeting procedure
used to find the peak reading of the EDM signal strength indicator as the instrument fine motion
screws are adjusted. A stronger signal return produces more accurate distance measurements and
minimizes the use of anomalous phase patterns near the return signal beam edges. This is
especially critical when making measurements over short distances (i.e., less than 20 m), where
the EDM 'phase inhomogeneity' effect will be most pronounced.
f. Minimization of Electrical Pointing Error. The modulation wave front issuing from a
properly designed and operating instrument is at all points equidistant from the center of the
instrument. However, the wave front may be distorted in passing through the modulator, and
then a portion of the wave may be ahead or behind the remainder. An instrument senses both
reflectors as equidistant because the phase of the modulated wave is the same for both. If the
instrument is moved in azimuth slightly, the distance that it reads would change. This type of
error may be detected simply by multiple pointings at a reflector. If different pointings yield
different results, it may be necessary to take several readings in the field, swinging off the target
and then back until two or three sets of readings agree well. Practice in the field may help
eliminate this problem as an experienced operator tends to point and adjust an instrument in the
same way for each measurement.
4-6
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
4-4. Instrument Leveling Error.
a. General. Even when exercising great care in setting up the instrument, there is a definite
limit to the ability to level the instrument due to the sensitivity of the plate level bubble.
Therefore, at least some inclination of the instrument's vertical axis with respect to the plumb
line is unavoidable. Theodolite inclination error is computed (for the purpose of measurement
design) as:
 I = (0.2) (bubble sensitivity per division)
or at five times less than the level bubble sensitivity of the instrument (e.g., for a thirty-second
bubble, one gets approximately 30"/5 = 6" leveling error). The effect of vertical axis inclination
error (  I ) on the measured horizontal angle, is computed as:
 L = (  I ) / [tan (Z)] (Eq 4-8)
where
L = leveling error (arc seconds)
I = inclination error
Z = measured zenith angle
Leveling errors affect the accuracy of horizontal angle measurements mainly when observing
over steep vertical angles. This situation is common in monitoring embankment dams where
reference monuments set on the crest of the dam are used to observe monuments set at the toe of
the structure (or vice-versa). As a result, the measurements between the backsight and foresight
stations will be subject to 'standing axis' error causing incorrect horizontal circle readings.
b. Standing Axis Correction. The inclination of the instrument’s vertical axis can be
measured and corrected for with a special observing technique. First, with the instrument
properly leveled and centered, the inclined target (above or below) is directly sighted through the
scope. With the theodolite vertical circle clamp locked, the vertical angle (VTAR) is read and
recorded, then the horizontal clamp is loosened. Next, the instrument is turned 90 degrees to the
right of the LOS and the vertical circle (still locked) is again read and recorded ( VR ). Next, the
instrument is rotated 90 degrees to the left of the LOS and the vertical circle reading (still
locked) in its new position is also recorded ( VL ). The maximum value of the leveling error
correction for a single pointing is half the difference of the right and left vertical circle readings
multiplied by the tangent of the vertical angle initially measured to the inclined target.
LC = [ (VR - VL) / 2 ] tan (VTAR) (Eq 4-9)
where
4-7
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
LC = leveling correction (arc seconds)
VR = recorded vertical angle right
VL = recorded vertical angle left
VTAR = vertical angle to target
The horizontal circle reading is corrected by this amount right or left per its sign (i.e., with a
positive inclination value, the correction is added as a right deflection).
c. Predetermined Tolerance. Not every horizontal direction will need to be corrected for
leveling error. The standing axis correction needs to be computed only for steep lines of sight.
A vertical angle threshold value can be pre-determined from the leveling sensitivity of the
instrument to decide if the correction needs to be applied on a given target sighting. This
tolerance angle is found by solving the above correction equation for the VTAR term with a
known inclination error for the instrument. For example, with an instrument plate bubble
sensitivity of 30 arc seconds (taken from manufacturer’s instrument specifications), and a
maximum allowable tolerance for the final correction value of 1 arc second; vertical angles
greater than 10 degrees from horizontal would require the correction. On embankment dams, toe
monument stations observed from reference stations on the dam crest at the opposite end of the
structure will typically have vertical angles less than 10 degrees.
d. Internal Biaxial Compensator. Modern instruments can correct horizontal angle readings
for slight mis-levelment error by employing a biaxial compensator. The compensator senses the
degree of non-verticality of the vertical axis using two liquid sensors mounted along
perpendicular horizontal axes within the instrument. Some instruments equipped with a biaxial
compensator will automatically compute and apply corrections to the horizontal circle reading.
4-5. Instrument Centering Error.
a. General. Either forced centering or an optical plummet built into the tribrach are standard
means for centering during instrument/target setups. Centering errors are caused when the
vertical axis of the instrument (or target/prism) is not coincident with (i.e., collimated above) the
reference mark on the control point monument.
b. Short Baselines. The uncertainty (standard deviation) of an angle measurement due to

centering error can be approximated for the case where centering methods and distances between
backsight and foresight stations are similar:
 b = sqrt [ (  c 2 ) (  2 ) ( 4 / D 2 ) ] (Eq 4-10)
where
b = angle uncertainty due to centering error
c = centering standard deviation
4-8
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
 = 206264.8
D = distance between stations (mm)
The centering standard deviation (c) is computed as:
 c = ( 0.5mm ) ( HI )
for tribrach optical plummets, and:
 c = ( 0.1mm ) ( HI )
for forced centering.
In each case the height of instrument (HI) is measured in meters. For example, a measurement
made over a distance of 100 m using standard tripods and tribrachs (with optical plummet), can
introduce as much as 3.1 arc seconds error in the horizontal angle. Therefore, taking repeated
sets of angles (re-centering between sets) is recommended to reduce the effects of centering
error. As the distance increases between the instrument and target stations, the influence of
centering error is reduced. Therefore, centering errors will be significant for horizontal angle
measurements that are made over very short baselines.
c. Optical Plummets. Nadir and zenith plummet surveying instruments (Figure 4-2) are
specially designed for precise centering and collimation. These types of instruments are
available commercially for geodetic, deformation monitoring, and mining surveying
applications. Their use has been recommended for deformation surveys because high centering
tolerances are required to ensure survey repeatability.
d. Reference Marks. Ground-based survey control monuments should be designed with a

well-defined reference mark—see Figure 4-3. This visual feature will minimize difficulty in re
establishing an instrument or target over the reference point, thus, ensuring greater repeatability
in centering. Further information on monuments and targets for deformation surveys can be
found in Chapter 2 and in the references listed in Appendix A.
4-9
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure 4-2. Nadir plummet instrument from Leica Co. Nadir plummets operate like an
automatic level but establish a vertical LOS. The tribrach is centered over the surveyor’s
mark using the nadir plummet. Then a theodolite or a GPS antenna is placed in the tribrach
by forced centering.
Figure 4-3. Comparison of optical plummet centering devices. The left-hand image shows
the field-of-view and centering circle for a standard optical plummet fixed-mounted in a
tribrach. The right-hand image shows the greater magnification and centering ability
provided by a nadir plummet instrument. Both images show the same brass disk at an
instrument height of approximately 1.5 m.
4-10
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
4-6. Horizontal Angle Measurement Error.
a. General. The precision (standard deviation) of horizontal angle measurements made with
a theodolite can be predicted by a summation of variances as follows:
 angl = sqrt [ 2p + 2r + 2b +2 L ] (Eq 4-11)
where
 angl = horizontal angle error (arc seconds)
p = pointing error
r = reading error
b = centering error
L = leveling error
The above variance components can be determined from the formulas presented in Sections 4-2
through 4-4.
b. Example Horizontal Angle Error. Using the above formulas, for an objective lens
magnification equal to 30 times, and centering with a tribrach optical plummet with a 1.5 m HI,
and a level bubble sensitivity of 20"/2 mm with a zenith angle of 85 degrees, and a 100-meter
slope distance to the backsight and foresight stations, the precision of the horizontal angle is
estimated to be approximately 3.5 arc seconds. Using this same example with two independent
sets of repeated measurements, the standard deviation of the angle measurement is
approximately 2.4 arc seconds (at the one-sigma level). Using an electronic theodolite equipped
with biaxial compensator, leveling and reading error are negligible.
4-7. Electronic Distance Measurement Error.
a. General. The precision (standard deviation) of distance measurements made with EDM
instruments may be expressed in a general form as:
 = sqrt [ a2 + b2 · S2 ] (Eq 4-12)
where
a = errors of the phase measurement, centering, and calibration errors

b = scale error due to uncertainties in the determination of the refractive index
and the calibration of the modulation frequency
S = measured distance
The standard deviation for near infrared (NIR) and lightwave carrier EDM instruments can be
determined by the following summation of variance components:
4-11
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
 S = sqrt [ 2res + 2c + 2cal + 2ref ] (Eq 4-13)
where
S = slope distance measurement error
 res = resolution of instrument
c = centering error
 cal = calibration error
 ref = refractive index correction error
(1) Resolution ( res). EDM Measurement resolution varies per each specific type of
instrument, but is generally a function of both the modulated wavelength and its sensitivity to
detecting signal phase difference. The constant value used for EDM resolution (res) is normally
given in the manufacturer’s equipment specifications.
(2) Refraction Correction Error ( ref). The accuracy of the computed refractive index
correction depends on the accuracy of the temperature and pressure values input into the
refraction correction formula. To compute the effect of inaccurate temperature and pressure on
the corrected distance, the following approximation can be used:
 ref = sqrt [ [ ( 2N ) / N2 ]· (S2) ] (Eq 4-14)
where
 ref = error in refraction correction determination
N = error in refractive index determination
N = estimated refractive index
S = slope distance
For a simplified estimate of the refraction correction error, an approximate formula for the above
quantities can be used. The following refraction correction error equations neglect the partial
water vapor pressure without creating an extreme distortion to the distance error estimation:
N = 1 + [ ( NG ) ( P ) ] / [ (3.709) ( T ) ] / (1106) (Eq 4-15)

 N = sqrt [ (A2 ) (2Temp ) + ( B2 ) (2Press ) ] / [ 11012 ] (Eq 4-16)
where
NG = (287.604) + [(4.8864) / (2)] + [(0.068) / (4)]
 = EDM carrier frequency wavelength (micrometers)
T = 273.15 + t
t = temperature in °C (std. = 15°C)
4-12
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
P = pressure in mbar (std. = 1013.25 mb)
A = [ (-NG / 3.709) (P / T2) ]2
B = [ (NG / 3.709) / ( T ) ]2
 Temp = temperature measurement uncertainty
 Press = pressure measurement uncertainty
Relative humidity is the least critical parameter for determination of refractive index for light and
NIR source EDM instruments. Temperature differences between stations can be substituted for
temperature measurement uncertainty to give more conservative estimates of the refraction
correction error. The error also can be determined sufficiently by simply multiplying the
distance by 1 ppm for every °C of temperature measurement error to roughly obtain the standard
deviation of the refraction correction term.
(3) Centering Error ( c ). The estimated centering error for distance measurements ( c ) can
be calculated per formulas presented earlier in this chapter. For distance measurements, the
centering error from both the instrument and target are combined:
 c = sqrt ( 2 inst +  2 tar ) (Eq 4-17)
where
 inst = instrument centering error
 tar = target centering error
(4) Calibration Error ( cal). Calibration error refers to the precision (standard deviation) of
the correction constants determined from instrument calibrations. These are standard outputs of
statistical tests performed during the calibration data reduction process (typically less than
instrument resolution).
(5) Slope-to-Horizontal Distance Error. Uncertainty in horizontal distances stem from both
the precision of the height difference determination and the precision of the slope distance
measurement.
 horz = ( S / H ) sqrt (  S 2 +  2 hdiff ) (Eq 4-18)
where
 horz = horizontal distance error
S = slope distance error
 hdiff = height difference error
S = slope distance
H = horizontal distance
4-13
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
b. Example EDM Distance Error. With an EDM instrument resolution of 3.0 mm, carrier
wavelength of 0.850 micrometer, and centering with a tribrach optical plummet with a 1.5 m HI
for both the instrument and target stations, the resulting distance determination will have an
uncertainty of approximately 3.2 mm (one-sigma level, at 15°C, 1013 mb, over a distance of 200
m), assuming temperature and pressure were measured to 1°C and 3 mb, respectively. If a
temperature difference of 7°C is substituted for temperature error, the distance error estimate
increases to 3.5 mm. Using the example values above and a height difference uncertainty of 3
mm, station height difference reductions add approximately 1 mm (one-sigma error) to the
horizontal distance over a 20 m height difference.
4-8. Zenith Angle Measurement Error.
a. General. Zenith angle measurements are determined by the difference of two direction
measurements, with one direction defined by the vertical axis of the theodolite. Theodolite-
based zenith angle measurement precision can be predicted as follows:
 zen = sqrt ( 2p + 2r + 2 I +  ref ) (Eq 4-19)
where
 zen = zenith angle error (arc seconds)
p = pointing error
I = inclination error
r = reading error
 ref = refraction error
The above variance components can be determined from the formulas presented in Sections 4-2
through 4-3. One of the main sources of systematic error in zenith angle measurement is due to
atmospheric refraction. Zenith angle error can be roughly determined as a function of the slope
distance:
 ref = sqrt [ ( S2 ) / ( 4 R2 ) (  2 ) ( 4 ) ] (Eq 4-20)
where
 ref = refraction error (arc seconds)
S = measured slope distance (m)
R = mean radius of the earth (~ 6374000 m)
 = 206264.8
For example, over a distance of 100 m, the expected error due to refraction would be
approximately 3 arc seconds.
4-14
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
b. Trigonometric Height Traversing. Station height differences determined from zenith

angle and horizontal or slope distance measurements are not always as accurate as differential
leveling. Methods of trigonometric heighting are warranted where differential leveling would
accumulate excessive random error. If differential leveling is attempted over steep slopes
between crest and toe stations on a dam, then most of the total error in the height difference is
introduced during the numerous instrument setups. In cases like this, trigonometric height
traversing can directly substitute for differential leveling methods.
4-9. Refraction of Optical Lines of Sight.
a. General. All types of measurements with optical instruments are affected by atmospheric
refraction. The line is refracted when the air temperature is not homogeneous but varies across
the LOS with a temperature gradient of dT/dy. Refraction effects are most pronounced in
leveling and zenith angle measurements when the LOS is near the ground surface (e.g., 2 meters
or less), and has a significantly different temperature than the layers of air above the surface.
The horizontal effects of refraction may also be significant if the LOS of the observed horizontal
direction runs parallel and very close to prolonged objects of a different temperature, such as
walls in tunnels, galleries of long dams, or rows of transformers or turbines at a different
temperature than air flowing in the center of the gallery.
b. Refraction Effects. If the temperature gradient (dT/dy) across the LOS is constant at all
points of the line, then the line is refracted along a circular curve (Figure 4-4) producing an error
('e') of pointing to a survey target.
S B
A
e
B'
Figure 4-4. Refracted LOS.
The value of 'e' can be estimated from:
e = (k)(S2) / (2R) (Eq 4-21)
4-15
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
where
k is a coefficient of refraction,
S is the distance to the target, and
R is the earth radius.
The coefficient of refraction (k) is a function of temperature gradient (dT/dy) and it can be
approximated (for the average wavelength of the optical spectrum) by:
k = 508.8 (P/T2)(dT/dy) (Eq 4-22)
where
P is barometric pressure [in mb],
T is the average (absolute) air temperature in Kelvin, and
t in °C and T in Kelvin are related by T = 273.15 + t.
By taking the average radius of earth (R = 6371 km), and substituting (Eq 4-21) into (Eq 4-22),
the pointing error may be expressed as a function of the gradient of temperature:
e = 3.9 ∙ (PS2/T2)(dT/dy) ∙ 10-5 (Eq 4-23)
For example, given a line of sight S = 200 m; temperature of air t = +30° C (i.e.,
T = 303.15 Kelvin); barometric pressure 1000 mb, and a constant gradient of temperature across
the LOS, dT/dy = 0.5° C/m. From (Eq 4-23) above, we have:
k = 2.8 and e = 8.5 mm
Usually, the temperature gradient differs from one point to another, producing an irregular shape
of the refracted LOS (Figure 4-5). In this case, the gradient of temperature and the coefficient of
refraction also change along the LOS (x direction) and k is a function of position [k(x)]. The
pointing error should be calculated from:
e = (1/R) integral [ k(S-x) dx ]; from 0 to S (Eq 4-24)
If gradients of temperature are measured at discrete points, say in the middle of each segment si
in Figure 4-5, then the integral (Eq 4-24) can be solved using, for example, Simpson's rule, to
obtain:
e = 1/2R {si [k1S+k2(S-si)]+s2 [k2(S-s1)+k3(S-si-s2)]+…

…sn-1 [kn-1(S-s1-s2...s n-2)+kn(S-s1-s2…s n-2)]+s n-1[kn(S-s1...sn-1)]} (Eq 4-25)
4-16
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
B'
A e
B
k1 k2 k3
X
0 S
Figure 4-5. Effects of changeable gradients of temperature.
For example, let us take S = 200 m divided into four segments of si = 50 m each, and consider
two cases:
(I) For k1 = 2.8 (same as previous example)
where k2 = k3 = k4 = 0.
In this first case, we assume that the refraction takes place only within the first 50 m from the
instrument, while there is no refraction (dT/dy = 0) over the rest of the line.
(II) For k4 = 2.8
where k1 = k2 = k3 = 0.
In this second case, the refraction takes place only in the last segment, near the survey target.
For both cases:
t = 30° C
P = 1000 mb
R = 6371 km.
From Eq 4-21 we have:
For Case I: e = 3.8 mm
For Case II: e = 1.9 mm
4-17
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
The effects of refraction are more significant near the instrument than near the target (see Figure
4-6). Thus, instruments should be located as far away as possible from any surfaces having
different temperature than the surrounding air.
Figure 4-6. Effects of refraction near instrument vs. near target.
c. Effects on Alignment Measurements. In alignment surveys between two fixed stations A

and B (Figure 4-7), the LOS from A is constrained to point to a target at B. If the gradient of
temperature across the LOS is constant between A and B, then the alignment reference line will
be refracted along a circular path with the largest error of alignment being in the middle between
A and B. Even when the alignment surveys would be performed in segments (i.e., resetting the
alignment telescope or laser in steps between A and B), the whole survey will follow the same
refracted circular curve. For example, when using a HeNe laser ( = 0.63 m) the maximum
error (y) in the center of the refracted path can be calculated from:
y = [(PS2)/(101760 T2)](dT/dy) (Eq 4-26)

where
P is barometric pressure in [mb],
T is temperature in Kelvin, and
S is total length of the alignment line.
With example values of S = 500 m, T = 300 K, P = 1000 mb, and dT/dy = 0.2 C. The error of
alignment is y = 5.4 mm.
4-18
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
y
A B
Figure 4-7. Refraction effects on alignment survey.
d. Methods of Reducing Refraction Effects. The effects of refraction can be reduced by:
(1) Avoiding LOSs running closer than 1 m from any prolonged surface that may have a
different temperature than the surrounding air,
(2) Measuring the gradients of temperature with several temperature sensors of high
precision (resolution of at least 0.05 degrees C) and calculating the refraction correction, or
(3) Using two sources of radiation of a different wavelength (i.e., dispersion method).
The first method is the most practical, but it does not assure a refraction-free LOS. The second
method, though applicable in practice, requires special instrumentation and tedious
measurements. The third method requires very expensive and difficult-to-acquire
instrumentation and it is applicable only in scientific measurements of the highest precision (e.g.,
in industrial metrology). In deformation surveys, only the first method seems to be feasible. If
both walls in narrow galleries are exposed to different temperature, for example, one wall being
exposed to water and another to the sun radiation, even placing the alignment line in the center of
the gallery may not sufficiently reduce the refraction effect. In the latter case, non-optical
methods may be used in the displacement measurements.
e. Effects on Direction Measurements. Refraction occurs in deflection angle and direction

measurements with optical theodolites. With a uniform temperature gradient over the length (S)
of the LOS, the refraction error ( eref ) in arc seconds of the observed direction may be
approximated by:
eref = ( 8" ) [ ( S ) ( P ) / ( T 2 ) ] ( dT/dy ) (Eq 4-27)
where
S = distance between stations (m)
4-19
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
P = barometric pressure (mb)
T = temperature in Kelvin ( T = 273.15 + t° C )
dT/dy = temperature gradient
For example, if a gradient of only 0.1°C/m persists over a distance of 500 m at P = 1000 mb and
t = 27°C, it will cause a directional error of 4.4 arc seconds.
Figure 4-8. Aspirating Psychrometer from Belfort Instrument Co. Psychrometers are
equipped with two thermometers, one with a wet bulb and one with a dry bulb. The wet bulb
is covered with a wick that must be saturated with distilled water. A battery-operated fan in
the aspirating psychrometer draws air over the bulbs. The cooling effect of evaporation
produces a lower reading on the wet bulb, which is then used to determine the relative
humidity. The dry bulb is read directly from the dry thermometer. These readings are used to
compute the refractive index correction for the atmosphere in precise distance measurement.
4-10. Theodolite System Error.
a. General. Theodolite instruments used for angle measurement can have small
misalignments in the system attributed to its manufacturing or normal wear from repeated use
and handling. Theodolite mis-adjustments produce systematic error in angle measurements. For
example:
-Trunnion axis not perpendicular to LOS
-Horizontal axis not perpendicular to vertical axis
-Vertical circle index error
-Inclined cross-hairs
-Plate eccentric to rotation axis
4-20
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
b. Elimination of Instrument Errors. The main technique used to eliminate the above
instrument biases is to observe the target in both the direct and reverse positions of the theodolite
at all times. All of the systematic errors noted above will cancel when measurements are made
in two positions of the theodolite (e.g., double centering).
4-11. Reflector Alignment Error.
a. General. Older model reflector prisms can introduce small errors in both distance and
direction measurements due to mis-orientation. The magnitude of the error is based on factors
such as the EDM wavelength, the prism dimensions, the refractive index of the prism glass, and
the horizontal and vertical misalignment angle (non-perpendicular to the LOS). It has been
determined for older prism designs that less than 0.5 mm error in distance will be caused by a
misalignment angle under 10 degrees from the LOS, which is well within the normal ability to
point the reflector toward the EDM. With directions (horizontal and vertical), the error can be
limited to less than 1 arc second (over 500 m) with a misalignment of less than 10 degrees. The
angular error is highly dependent on the distance from the instrument in that shorter distances
will produce larger errors.
b. Reflector Design. Reflector prisms in use today have been specifically re-designed to
minimize the influence of misalignments on distance measurement accuracy. With standard
prisms, the resulting distance errors are negligible for small misalignments. However, attention
to consistent and accurate pointing of the prism toward the instrument is still recommended
practice.
4-12. EDM Scale Error.
a. Temperature Frequency Drift. Short-term drift of the oscillator frequency in EDM

instruments is most likely to occur during the warm-up of its internal electronic components. If a
frequency drift persists throughout the course of a survey, then the measurements will contain a
time dependent bias that can reach a maximum drift value of up to 3 ppm (depending on the
instrument and environment).
b. Frequency Drift Due to Aging. Frequency drift can also occur as a result of mechanical
aging of the oscillator crystal over time, so that the EDM develops a bias in its internal
measuring scale (in some instruments less than 1 ppm per year). This can be a critical factor in
deformation surveys when the same EDM instrument is used for repeated surveys and the
resulting observations are compared over time.
c. Scale Error Calibration. For precise surveying applications, it is recommended that the
EDM be calibrated for scale error at least once a year. The most common method for EDM scale
factor calibration is from measurements made over a certified calibration baseline. Scale error is
determined by comparing a series of distances measured along a linear array of stations where
the station coordinates are precisely known. The known distances between stations are
4-21
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
differenced from the product of the measured distance and an unknown scale factor, as shown in
the following linear equation:
[( k ) ( S )] - ( D ) = 0 (Eq 4-28)
where
k = unknown scale factor
S = measured distance
D = fixed distance (known)
The horizontal distance measurements (S) are processed together in a linear least squares
adjustment to solve for the unknown scale factor parameter (k). Once the scale error has been
determined, all subsequently measured distances are multiplied by the constant scale factor (k) to
yield a corrected distance.
d. Frequency Counter Methods. An alternative to using a baseline for EDM scale calibration
is to send the instrument back to the manufacturer for a direct reading of its oscillator frequency.
This laboratory procedure uses a high grade electronic frequency counter to compare the actual
and reference frequencies of the EDM under controlled conditions. The instrument must have a
built-in port connector so that the frequency may be sampled to solve for the instrument scale
factor.
4-13. EDM Prism Zero Error.
a. Additive Constant or Zero Error. The additive constant is an unknown systematic bias
that is present in all distance measurements made with a particular EDM instrument-prism
combination. The bias is usually small for instruments using light waves. The bias is an
absolute constant offset that exists between the optical and mechanical centers of the reflector
prism and the electrical center of the EDM instrument when centered over the setup station.
Distances uncorrected for zero error will produce discrepancies in the final station coordinates of
survey points. These can be detected from check measurements; such as multiple observations
made over a network of points or when more than two distance intersections are compared as a
check on the monument positions.
b. Correction Determination. Measured distances can be corrected for zero error by a

determination of the additive constant of the instrument-prism combination on a calibration
baseline. The calibration process relies on comparing distances that are measured over a set of
fixed stations. The four-station baseline and observing configuration shown in Figure 4-9 allows
each of the six measured distances (m i) to be written as the sum of each true distance (d i) and
one unknown constant bias term (z).
m i = ( d i + z ) for i = 1 through 6
4-22
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
This basic equation is repeated for each observed station-pair (p i) along the baseline and the
method of parametric linear least squares is used to solve for the constant term (z). For example,
each measured and true distance can be expressed using station coordinates as:
m1 = (p2 - p1) + z i.e., d1 = p2 - p1
m2 = (p3 - p1) + z i.e., d2 = p3 - p1
m3 = (p4 - p1) + z i.e., d3 = p4 - p1
m4 = (p3 - p2) + z i.e., d4 = p3 - p2
m5 = (p4 - p2) + z i.e., d5 = p4 - p2
m6 = (p4 - p3) + z i.e., d6 = p4 - p3
since
m1 = - p1 + p2 + 0 + 0 + z
m2 = - p1 + 0 + p3 + 0 + z
m3 = - p1 + 0 + 0 + p4 + z
m4 = 0 - p2 + p3 + 0 + z
m5 = 0 - p2 + 0 + p4 + z
m6 = 0 + 0 - p3 + p4 + z
By setting the coordinate of the initial point (p1) to zero, leaving three unknown coordinates (p2,
p3, and p4) and one unknown constant (z), this system of equations can be represented in matrix
form as:
Ax=b
where
+1 0 0 +1
0 +1 0 +1
A= 0 0 +1 +1
-1 +1 0 +1
-1 0 +1 +1
0 -1 +1 +1
x= [p2 p3 p4 z]T
b= [m1 m2 m3 m4 m5 m6]T
The unknown parameter (z) is common to each measurement so an over determined set of
measurements is used to detect the discrepancy it causes between measurements. The least
squares solution:
x = (AT P A) -1 AT P b
4-23
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
uses a diagonal weight matrix (P) populated with the inverse of the variances computed for each
distance measurement. In practice, 5 to 7 fixed points are needed, which adds to the observing
time, but also provides sufficient redundancy for statistically testing the significance of the
additive constant parameter. National Geodetic Survey (NGS) standards for baseline calibration
recommend a four-station baseline to simultaneously solve for both the scale factor and the
additive constant, but this requires measurements both forward and backward from each station
and uses known distances between stations. In either case, standard data reductions must be
applied to the measurements (e.g., refractive index and slope distance reductions) before solving
for the additive constant. Software applications are available from NGS that cover all aspects of
EDM baseline calibration including data collection and associated least squares computations.
The residuals from the data adjustment should be plotted and examined visually for any obvious
trends that would indicate there are systematic errors remaining in the measurements. The
resulting calibration constant is added to each measured distance, with an opposite algebraic
sign, to obtain the corrected distance. The accuracy of the correction itself will depend on the
number of observations made and their precision.
m5
m4
m6
1 2 3 4
m1
m2 m3
Figure 4-9. Zero error calibration baseline concept.
4-14. EDM Cyclic Error. Stray radiation and signal interference inside the EDM unit can occur
at the same phase as the internal reference signal. A sinusoidal pattern of deviations in the
measured phase can systematically change the distance measurements. The stability of the EDM
internal electronics can also vary with age, therefore, the cyclic error can change significantly
over time. Cyclic error is inversely proportional to the strength of the returned signal, so its
effects will increase with increasing distance (i.e., low signal return strength). Calibration
procedures exist to determine the EDM cyclic error that consist of taking bench measurements
through one full EDM modulation wavelength, and then comparing these values to known
distances and modeling any cyclic trends found in the discrepancies. This procedure requires a
4-24
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
specialized calibration baseline designed to detect the presence of cyclic error from the spacing
of the measurement intervals.
4-15. Calibration Baselines.
a. General. Construction of an EDM calibration baseline requires preparation for the design,
layout, monumentation, and proposed calibration techniques. It should be noted that establishing
a calibration baseline and keeping it in good order can be expensive and time consuming when
maintenance is considered. Use of an established baseline that is available within the local area
would be far more economical than to build a new facility.
b. Standard Baselines. A standard baseline design recommended by the NGS should be used
for EDM instrument calibrations. Guidance is provided on EDM calibrations and baselines in
the following publications:
- National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Technical Memorandum

- National Ocean Service (NOS) NGS-8, Establishment of Calibration Base Lines, and
- NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NGS-10, Use of Calibration Base Lines
These documents must be consulted before building a new calibration baseline and for
conducting EDM instrument calibrations following NGS methods.
c. Specialized Baselines. NGS calibration baselines have at least four monuments set in an
alignment that deviates no more than 5 degrees of arc, which provides 12 measured distances in
a complete calibration session—see Figure 4-9. NGS conventions for baseline design have
monuments set out at 0, 150, 400-430, and 1,000-1,400 m along a straight line. If this spacing is
not convenient to the local terrain, it is recommended to place the intermediate monuments at an
even multiple of the unit wavelength of the EDM instrument to be calibrated (e.g., multiples of
10 m). This 'multiple of 10' rule of thumb is meant to ensure that the EDM phase detector will
sample the return signal at the same point along the carrier wave for each measurement (i.e.,
resolve the partial wavelength at the same point along the carrier wave to avoid the effects of
cyclic error in the calibration process). Alternative designs for calibration baselines can be
developed for special purposes (see Rueger, 1990). A determination of monument spacing for
specialized calibration baselines is made using baseline design formulas with the following input
parameters:
-total length of baseline,
-EDM instrument reference wavelength, and
-total number of baseline monuments.
Trial and error combinations of different values for the above design parameters can be tested
and the results examined to evaluate each baseline configuration. Designing a specialized
baseline is warranted where unique EDM resolution, signal frequency, and range limits are
4-25
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
encountered. A baseline design should provide distance combinations that evenly span the
working range of the EDM, and the length of the baseline should be optimized at the minimum
range of the EDM when operating under poor atmospheric conditions with a single reflector
prism.
d. Tripod Method. The EDM/prism calibration process (i.e., additive constant

determination) can be made using a very short (30-50 m) alignment of at least five tripods
instead of on a permanent baseline. Good results have been obtained by this method; however,
forced centering on tripods is less stable than on pillars. For longer baselines, the stations should
be no more than four minutes of arc out of line, and the tops of the tripods should be set in as
straight a vertical alignment as possible relative to each other (within a few cm or less).
Accurate tripod arrangement minimizes deviations in the LOS from any single instrument setup
station and will speed up the field observations. Precise leveling is used to determine the
elevation of each ground point (monument) and fixed height offset measurements are made to
each (tripod mounted) prism. Elevation and offset measurements are made to reduce the slope
distances to horizontal distances.
e. Stability. If pillars are selected as monuments, it should be recognized that their stability
can be influenced by various types of movements, namely, those due to external forces,
settlement and tilt, dry shrinkage of concrete, swelling, and thermal expansion. The horizontal
instability of concrete pillars due to thermal expansion is based on the operating height, width,
and temperature change. Pillars should be set below the frost line and insulated in cold regions.
The initial observation of baseline distances is delayed until the concrete has set through at least
one freeze-thaw cycle.
f. Site Selection. Permanent baselines should be easily accessible allowing transport and
setup of the instrument and prisms. A roadway alongside the baseline will speed-up the
movement of equipment and personnel between stations. Stations should have about 20 feet
clearance on either side, and should be set back 1/4 mile from high voltage lines and transmitters,
and 100 feet from metal fences. Reconnaissance of the proposed baseline location (site visit,
aerial photographs, topographic, geologic maps, etc.) is recommended to investigate soil type,
relief, atmospheric conditions (avoid completely unvegetated areas with no shade). Once a
suitable location has been found, a preliminary survey and stake out of temporary points can be
made at the proposed distances.
4-16. Equipment for Baseline Calibration. A list of the equipment required for establishing a
calibration baseline is provided below. Excluding the first two items (theodolite and EDM) these
are also recommended for conducting calibration sessions.
-1 Theodolite (Total Station)
-2 Electronic Distance Meter
-Computer
-NGS calibration software
4-26
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
-1 Nadir Plummet instrument
-1 Calibrated prism and mounting bracket
-Tribrachs and tripods for each station
-2 Communication radios
-2 Psychrometers
-2 Barometers
-2 Thermistors (fan driven)
-2 Tripods and poles for thermistors
-2 Thermistor recording and reading units
-12-volt battery power supply
-1 Fixed height measuring rods or hand tape measure
-2 Shade umbrellas
Calibration baselines are established with an instrument that has a higher precision than the
instruments that are intended for calibration (ideally by an order of magnitude), however this is
not always feasible for modern EDM instruments because of their extremely high precision.
4-17. Procedures for Baseline Calibration.
a. General. Procedures for conducting measurements on a calibration baseline consist of

setting the instrument at the baseline initial station and recording the distances to all of the others
in sequence. The instrument is then moved up to the next pillar in line and the process is
repeated until all of the baseline stations have been occupied (all distance combinations forward
and backward are usually observed from each instrument setup). With a four-monument
baseline, a total of 12 distances are used to solve four unknown baseline coordinates and each
calibration parameter. Refer to Section 4-15 b.
b. Preparation. First, set up the tripods and tribrachs over each station on the baseline. The
tripods should be close to the same elevation (i.e., in an alignment or with a slightly up-sloping
tilt away from the zero station to maintain visibility throughout the length of the baseline). The
tripod is leveled by eye so that the tripod head on which the tribrach is mounted is as near level
as possible. The tripod head is further leveled by mounting a calibrated Wild type target (with
precise level bubble) into the tribrach, and then adjusting the legs to the position where the
bubble is level in four positions under rotation.
c. Collimation. Accurate centering is critical for the measurement of baseline distances.

After the tripod head is level, the target is replaced by a precision Nadir Plummet having an
internal level compensator. The tribrach and Nadir Plummet assembly is then translated (without
rotation) until it is centered. The collimation is then checked in four positions (90 degree
rotations) around the center point. If the centering is not well-established, then slight
adjustments are made to the centering and leveling of the tribrach until it is collimated. The
leveling screws of the tribrach should be moved as little as possible because the offset from the
tripod head to the top of the tribrach mounting plate needs to be measured and recorded, so if it is
4-27
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
kept constant, a pre-calibrated value for the prism height above the tripod head can be used
(reference marks are sometimes painted on the leveling screws and on the upper tribrach housing
to verify the offset is correct for the setup). The height of the tripod head is measured in four
positions using the hand tape measure and a mean value is added to the constant height offset
value between the theodolite optical center and the base of the tribrach (known beforehand),
giving the height of instrument above the monument. This value is then added to the known
elevation of the baseline monument.
d. Calibration Procedures. The procedures for the baseline calibration presented below are
to be repeated for each instrument setup. The observing procedures used to establish coordinates
on a new baseline follow the same basic methodology used for actual instrument calibration.
(1) The instrument is placed at the baseline initial point and powered on while the prism is
set up at the next station along the baseline. Thermistors are mounted on a vertical 3 m pole, one
at the top, and one at the level of the instrument, perpendicular to the direction of the sun, and
oriented so that the front end faces into the prevailing wind. The two thermistors measure the
temperature gradient, and are capable of reading to a tenth of a degree Celsius. A barometer is
placed near the instrument and is capable of reading to one hundredth of an inch of mercury
(Hg). A similar thermistor and barometer arrangement is set up at the prism station. A
psychrometer reading (Figure 4-8) is initially recorded, and thereafter, repeated only when the
instrument is moved to the next setup. The top/bottom thermistor and barometer readings are
recorded on both ends of the measured line at the start and finish of the measurements for each
EDM setup (two different EDM instruments are used at each station when establishing a new
baseline).
(2) Mount the first EDM to the theodolite and point it in the direct position at the center of
the forward target (Note: it is important that the EDM ppm value is set to zero). Obtain adequate
return signal strength and then measure five consecutive distances to the forward target. The
values are recorded to the tenth of a millimeter. Reverse the scope and read five more distances.
At the conclusion of the set, read and record the temperatures and pressure at both the instrument
and prism stations, (the exact same procedure is then followed for the second EDM instrument
when establishing a new baseline).
(3) Once the measurements for one baseline distance segment are finished (i.e., one station
pair), the instrument stays at the same station and the prism moves to the next point along the
baseline.
(4) At each instrument setup distances are measured to every other monument forward and
back.
(5) If computed values for the instrument-prism constant exceed instrument tolerances, then
the measurements must be repeated.
4-28
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
e. Calibration Results. Field book records should include the following information:
-distance measurements,
-from station name,
-to station name,
-instrument serial number,
-prism serial number,
-date and time of observation,
-height of instrument/prism,
-meteorological observations,
-units of measurement,
-geometrical reductions, and
-calculation of calibration parameters.
This information is compiled into a calibration report for use in data reductions.
4-18. Sources of Error in GPS Measurements.
a. General. The observation equation for the GPS carrier phase can be written in length
units as:
 =  + c ( dT - dt ) +  N - d ion + d trop + d mp + noise (Eq 4-29)
where  represents the geometric range between the satellite and receiver, c represents the speed
of light in a vacuum, dT and dt represent the receiver and satellite clock errors respectively, 
represents the signal wavelength, N represents the integer cycle ambiguity, d ion represents the
phase advance due to the ionosphere, d trop represents the delay due to the neutral atmosphere
(predominantly the troposphere), and d mp represents the delay due to multipath in the antenna
environment, and noise in the signal. Additional small terms such as satellite and receiver
hardware delays have been ignored. By differencing observations recorded simultaneously at
two receivers from two satellites, any common mode errors at either the satellites or the receivers
should cancel. The error terms left in the double difference observable are d ion, d trop, and d mp—
as the effect of receiver error, satellite clock error, and satellite position error are almost
completely removed. A differential ambiguity term (DN) is retained in the double difference
equation. The noise component has been amplified in the double difference, by assuming that
noise is equal for the raw observations at two receivers, and the noise of the double difference
observation is then approximately twice as large. This increase is the trade-off accepted for
greatly reducing the impact of the clock errors. Over very short baselines with negligible height
difference, the trade-off is even more worthwhile, since atmospheric effects almost completely
cancel.
b. Cycle Slips. Correctly fixing ambiguities requires continuous carrier phase observations
with no cycle discontinuities over the observation time series. Any cycle slips must be removed
4-29
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
prior to estimating the station coordinates. The data sets from each occupied station are pre
processed individually to scan the carrier phase observation time series for large jumps and
excessively noisy data. An output file of the pseudorange and carrier phases is produced that is
free of large cycle slips. Cycle slips of a small magnitude (at the level of several tens of cycles)
are best detected from the time series of double difference observations, where many of the
potential biases have canceled. Cycle-slip detection is generally implemented as an automated
data cleaning process that depends on high quality data and sufficient redundancy to allow lots of
data to be rejected (sometimes unnecessarily).
c. Baseline Length. A simple expression for relating common mode GPS range error
( r) to baseline error ( b) uses the ratio of baseline length (b) to satellite range (R):
(  b / b) = (  r / R ) (Eq 4-30)
For satellite range of 20,000 km and baseline length of 1 km, a common mode error of 20 m is
necessary to produce 1 mm of baseline error. This relationship emphasizes the advantage to
maintaining short baselines on high precision networks. Short baselines should limit common
GPS errors to less than 20 m and permit cancellation of highly correlated errors.
d. Atmospheric Delay. Ionosphere and troposphere delays are expected to be highly

correlated over short baselines, although small residual effects may persist depending on
atmospheric differences between receiver stations. For this error to increase to harmful levels
would require baselines over 1 km, or very substantial station height differences (which may
occur on some dam sites). Uncorrelated delay bias is modeled and removed from the data on
medium range baselines (10-100 km). However, these correction schemes are not accurate
enough to determine slight differential biases at short baseline noise levels.
e. L1/L2 Data Combinations. GPS software will allow the user to process data in
combinations of L1 and L2 carrier frequencies, each having different levels of observation noise.
Any combination of these two observables (e.g., ionosphere-free L1/L2) will increase noise
levels due to error propagation. Over short baselines the ionospheric effect is expected to cancel
so there is no advantage to be gained by using anything other than the L1 observations for
positioning purposes. L2 observations however, could be useful for cycle slip detection and data
quality control. The L2 residuals are approximately 1.5 times noisier (RMS 6.6 mm) than the L1
residuals (RMS 4.4 mm), and the L3 residuals are approximately 3 times noisier (RMS 12.8
mm). Figure 4-10 shows how some of the structure in the L1 residuals is magnified by the L3
combination. The symmetric pattern of the residuals is due to the particular formulation of the
double difference observations.
f. Satellite Geometry. The spatial distribution of satellites in the sky will influence how
random error propagates into the final position. Since GPS satellites are not uniformly
distributed, certain areas of the sky will have less satellite coverage at a given time. If GPS
satellites are evenly and widely spread out, then stronger geometric intersections are possible for
4-30
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
code range positioning and carrier phase measurements. Because there is total lack of sky
coverage below the GPS antenna, vertical Dilution of Precision (DOP) values and GPS height
errors can be 1.5–2 times greater, respectively, than Horizontal DOP (HDOP) and horizontal
position errors.
g. Blunders. Operator mistakes produce large discrepancies in processed GPS data. Only
system redundancy built into the observing scheme can detect blunders—see Section IV. Two
common survey blunders are incorrect antenna height measurements and incorrect filenames
entered into the receiver.
h. Multipath. GPS signal interference is a major source of systematic error in GPS

monitoring surveys. Multipath signals are a predominant cause of interference in GPS carrier
phase measurements over short baselines. See Chapter 8 for more information on GPS
multipath.
Figure 4-10. Typical carrier phase residual noise levels from double difference processing;
from top to bottom, (a) GPS L1 frequency, (b) GPS L2 frequency, and (c) GPS L1/L2
widelane. combination.
4-31
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
4-32
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
CHAPTER 5
Angle and Distance Observations: Theodolites, Total Stations, and EDM
5-1. Scope. This chapter describes the field procedures for measuring angles with precision
theodolites and measuring distances using electronic distance measurement (EDM) systems.
Both these operations are combined when using electronic total stations.
Figure 5-1. Total Station set up to collect data on Libby Dam (from USACE AGC).
5-1
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
5-2. Instrument and Reflector Centering Procedures. Accurate centering of instruments,

reflectors, or tribrachs, over the monument reference marks (as illustrated in Figure 5-1) is a
critical procedure for collecting deformation measurements. Specifications for instrument/prism
centering are presented below for tribrach optical plummets, nadir plummets, and forced
centering.
a. Built-in optical plummet. Tribrach centering procedures apply to equipment with an

optical plummet incorporated in the instrument or with a detachable tribrach that will rigidly
attach to the instrument.
(1) Calibration. Tribrach optical plummets must be calibrated at the beginning of each
project using the procedures outlined in the manufacturer's manual. Failure to perform, certify,
and record this calibration process can be grounds for rejecting all subsequent data obtained with
an uncalibrated tribrach.
(2) Tolerances. Tribrachs must be collimated over the object point mark to an accuracy of
±1mm using the built-in optical plummet. Tripod heads must be aligned as nearly horizontal as
is possible prior to final centering procedures.
(3) Leveling. Final tribrach leveling and centering must be performed using a level vial from
either a mounted theodolite or a standard Wild target. The built-in circular level bubble is not
considered accurate enough for this process and should only be used for rough tripod head
alignment. All centering leveling vials should be calibrated at the beginning of each project and
this fact recorded.
(4) Equipment mounting. Once the tripods and tribrachs have been accurately centered over
each end of the line, then the instrument and reflector may be inserted into the tribrachs without
further adjustment. Extreme care must be taken to avoid disturbing the tribrach during the
insertion and measurement process.
(5) Check observations. Upon completion of all observations from a particular tripod, a final
level and centering check must be performed to insure no movement has occurred during this
process. If significant movement is detected during this final check, then the entire observation
process must be repeated.
b. Nadir plummet. A nadir plummet (Figure 4-2) can be used for centering instead of the
tribrach optical plummet. A nadir plummet is a precision centering device with a built-in
automatic level for use in vertical sighting and collimation. Some models have the capability to
define the plumb line to 1 part in 200,000. These plummets have up to five (5) times greater
magnification than the optical plummet supplied with the standard tribrach. The station
reference mark (no larger than 1 mm in diameter), may need to be artificially illuminated under
low light conditions for optimal viewing under this increased magnification. Nadir plummet
centering should be conducted as follows.
5-2
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(1) After the tripod is set up over the reference mark, the tripod head is leveled as closely as
possible in two perpendicular directions using a tribrach with a target and its sensitive level
bubble.
(2) Once the tribrach is leveled, the nadir plummet is exchanged with the target in the
tribrach and then precisely centered over the mark by a series of fine translation adjustments of
the tribrach.
(3) Final collimation is confirmed by observing the mark under rotation in four perpendicular
directions about the plummet axis and by re-observing the tribrach level in two perpendicular
directions with the target level vial.
c. Forced centering. The highest centering accuracies can be achieved using forced
centering techniques. A centering uncertainty of 0.1 mm/m can be expected for trivet/pillar plate
combinations, permanent threaded pins, and machined sleeve-type insert pins. If possible, both
the instrument and reflector should be mounted by forced-centering.
(1) Forced centering pins. Threaded pins on pillars will be used in forced centering mode.
Tribrachs with standard target level vials may be used to level tribrachs directly on threaded pins
or over plugs.
(2) Tribrach and tripod combinations. With tripods, standard tribrachs should be used as a
forced centering mount. Interchangeable tribrachs will be used such that the instrument or
reflector may be readily exchanged without affecting centering of the tripod/tribrach mount.
(3) Reflector rods. Threaded aluminum rods for direct insert in monitoring plugs may be
used to support reflectors. When reflector rods are screwed directly into grouted plugs, the same
rod will be used for each successive project survey. Therefore, the rod number should be
recorded so that the same rod is always used at a particular plug. Reflector HI should be kept as
low as possible to minimize the effects of potential non-verticality of the rods.
d. Instrument stability. In precise surveys, towers, stands, and tripods must be substantial.
The use of driven stakes or some type of quick setting cement or dental plaster for tripod leg
support may be required. Catwalks that provide support away from tripod legs may be necessary
under some soil or platform conditions to ensure that the instrument/reflector is unaffected by
nearby motion. Use of fixed pillars is always preferred over less-rigid tripods, if possible.
5-3. Angle and Direction Observations.
a. General. When using an optical or electronic theodolite for angle measurement, it will be
accurately plumbed over the occupied point by either forced centering, attaching the theodolite to
the point with a tribrach, or using a tripod and tribrach with an optical plummet, as applicable.
5-3
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
b. Specifications. The following specifications are provided for angle and direction
observations:
(1) Repetitions. Both horizontal and zenith angles will be observed in at least four sets. The
instrument will be re-centered and re-leveled between each set. With well-designed targets and
proper methodology, an angle measurement accuracy of 1" is possible with precision electronic
theodolites if four sets of observations are taken in two positions of the telescope.
(2) Double centering. Face left and face right (direct and reverse) point and reads will be
made for all targets in all theodolite work. The requirement of two positions must always be
followed to eliminate errors caused by mechanical misalignment of the theodolite’s axial system.
(3) Reading precision. All horizontal and vertical circle readings will be recorded to 0.1 arc
second.
(4) Horizon closure. For each station pair (i.e., angle between the backsight and foresight),
the method of observing independent angles will be used. A full set will consist of a direct angle
measurement and a separate horizon closure angle measurement. Their sum will be taken to find
the closure to 360 degrees.
(5) Parallax. Sighting parallax must be minimized during each pointing operation. The
reticule should be focused first and then the objective lens.
(6) Magnification. The theodolite must have a minimum telescope magnification of 30 times
or better.
(7) Leveling sensitivity. Theodolites must have a plate level vial with a sensitivity of 20
seconds per 2 mm graduation or better. Once measurements are made, the level of the
instrument will be checked. If found to be greater than 10 seconds, the measurements will be
repeated with a leveled instrument. When using an electronic theodolite and biaxial
compensator, the instrument will be leveled within 2 minutes of arc.
(8) Observing conditions. Avoid measurements close to any surface that has a different
temperature than the surrounding air (walls of structures or soil exposed to the sun’s radiation,
walls of deep tunnels, etc.). If any suspicion of refraction influence arises, the surveys should be
repeated in different conditions to randomize its effect. Ideally, observations should be limited
to days when the weather conditions are fairly neutral (e.g., cloudy day with a light breeze).
Days with temperature extremes should be avoided. If the instrument must be used when the
temperature is hot, then it should be protected from the sun by an umbrella.
c. Data Reduction Procedures. Angles collected by the method of repeated sets will be
reduced to a mean value using the station adjustment technique (see example below).
5-4
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(1) Mean value. For each sighted direction in the set, determine the face-left and face-right
mean direction value, starting with the backsight observation.
(2) Reduced value. Subtract the initial or backsight circle reading from the mean direction
value of the foresight in the measurement set (backsight value will then be reduced to zero).
(3) Independent sets. Repeat the above procedures for each of the four, independent, direct
angle sets and calculate the mean value for each direction,
(4) Horizon closure. Repeat each of the above steps for each corresponding horizon closure
angle set.
(5) Closure correction. Difference the sum of the means of the direct and closure sets from
360 degrees. Distribute the misclosure equally to correct the final mean reduced value from each
set. The general form for the misclosure is expressed as:
W = 360° - (  d +  c ) (Eq 5-1)
where
W = horizon misclosure
d = mean direct angle
c = mean closure angle
and the correction value is determined as:
C=W/2
where
C = correction value
W = horizon misclosure
d. Example data reductions. The station adjustment procedure for reduction of horizontal
angles is demonstrated in the following example.
SET 1: Direct SET 1: Closure

PT FL FR Mean Reduced PT FL FR Mean Reduced
1 0-0-30.0 0-0-38.6 0-0-34.3 0-0-00.0 2 0-0-30.0 0-0-38.6 0-0-34.3 0-0-00.0
2 3-0-36.6 3-0-40.8 3-0-38.7 3-0-04.4 1 357-0-25.4 357-0-27.2 357-0-26.3 356-59-52.0
Reduced Mean Value = 3-0-04.4 Reduced Mean Value = 356-59-52.0

5-5
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
1 0-0-30.0 0-0-34.4 0-0-32.2 0-0-00.0 2 0-0-30.0 0-0-34.4 0-0-32.2 0-0-00.0

2 3-0-38.4 3-0-40.8 3-0-39.6 3-0-07.4 1 357-0-26.4 357-0-26.8 357-0-26.6 356-59-54.4

1 0-0-30.0 0-0-37.4 0-0-33.7 0-0-00.0 2 0-0-30.0 0-0-34.2 0-0-32.1 0-0-00.0
2 3-0-40.6 3-0-43.0 3-0-41.8 3-0-08.1 1 357-0-23.3 357-0-26.5 357-0-24.9 356-59-52.8

1 0-0-30.0 0-0-32.2 0-0-31.1 0-0-00.0 2 0-0-30.0 0-0-35.2 0-0-32.6 0-0-00.0
2 3-0-36.3 3-0-38.5 3-0-37.4 3-0-06.3 1 357-0-24.2 357-0-25.8 357-0-25.0 356-59-52.4
Resulting in the following reduced values:
Direct Mean value = 3-0-06.6

Closure Mean value = 356-59-52.9
Misclosure = 360 - ( 359-59-59.5 )

Horizon Closure value = + 0.5"
Correction value = + 0.25"
Final Direct Angle value: 3-0-06.9

Final Close Angle value: 356-59-53.1
5-4. Distance Observations.
a. General. Distances of 10 m or less can be measured with a steel or invar tape. Distances
of 30 m or less can be measured with a tensioned steel tape, invar tape (or invar wire that can be
attached to the steel bolt or insert directly), subtense bar, or an EDM. An EDM is the preferred
instrument for distances beyond 30 m. Microwave-based EDM systems must not be used.
b. Distance measurement with a tape. Distances measured between monuments will be

made point-to-point whenever possible. If unable to measure point-to-point, a tripod and
theodolite will be plumbed and leveled over the points and the distance measured between the
trunnion axis of the setup. If tensioned equipment is used, the uncorrected distance should be
measured to 0.01 mm. Distance measurements by tape will be independently made at least two
times by repeating the required setup. When a mean uncorrected distance is determined using a
steel tape, invar tape, or invar wire measuring unit, the following corrections will be applied,
when appropriate, to determine true distance.
(1) Temperature correction. The correction for thermal expansion of steel tapes between the
observed and standardized tape distance (ignore if using an invar tape) will be:
5-6
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
dL = k a · L · ( T - T o ) (Eq 5-2)
where
ka = 0.0000116
L = measured length (m)
T = measured ambient temperature (°C)
To = standardized temperature (°C)
(2) Tension correction. The tension correction between the observed and standardized tape
distance will be:
dL = ( P - P o ) ( L ) / ( a ) ( E ) (Eq 5-3)
where
P = applied tension (kg)
Po = standardized tension (kg)
L = measured length (m)
a = cross-sectional area of tape (cm 2)
E = 2.1 · 10 -6
(3) Sag correction. T

he correction due to the unsupported length(s) of the tape will be:
dL = ( w 2 ) ( L 2 ) / ( 24 ) ( P 2 ) (Eq 5-4)
where
w = weight of tape per unit length (kg/m)

L = distance between supports (m)
P = applied tension (kg)
(4) Slope correction. The slope distance and height difference correction if applicable will
be:
H = sqrt ( S 2 - dH 2 ) (Eq 5-5)
where
H = horizontal distance
S = slope distance
dH = height difference
5-7
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(5) Standardized tape. The correction due to calibrated standardization error will be:
dL = true length - nominal length
c. Distance measurement with a subtense bar. If measuring the distance with a subtense bar,
the subtense bar and theodolite will be plumbed and leveled over the points defining each end of
the line of observation as described in the previous paragraphs. The optical sight will be used to
set the subtense bar perpendicular to the line of observation. The angle subtended by the
subtense bar will be measured with four independent sets by the theodolite. Record the height of
the instrument and height of the target to at least one (1) mm for later reduction of the point-to
point distance. Procedures for angle and direction setups will be followed for optical theodolites.
5-5. Electro-Optical Distance Measurement.
a. General. If measuring the distance with an EDM, including those incorporated within
total stations, the instrument will be accurately plumbed and leveled over the point, as shown in
Figure 5-2, or force-centered in a monument.
Figure 5-2. EDM observations with a total station at Libby Dam. (from USACE AGC).
5-8
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
b. Specifications. The following specifications are provided for making EDM distance
observations:
(1) Warm-up period. Prior to its use, an EDM should be allowed to "warm up" per
manufacturer specifications. An EDM should be operated with fully charged batteries in the
manufacturer recommended range of operating temperatures.
(2) Signal strength. Prior to measurements with the EDM, the target prism will be set
perpendicular to within 10 degrees of the LOS. Distances will be measured after electronic
pointing has yielded a maximum signal strength return. If necessary, the prism will be adjusted
to maximize the strength of the signal.
(3) Repetitions. EDM measurements made to target point reflectors will be repeated at least
three (3) times by re-setting and re-pointing the EDM instrument and performing the
observation. Five separate distance readings for each pointing will be recorded to determine
their mean value. Modern instruments will usually make these redundant readings automatically
to obtain their mean value.
(4) Reading precision. Repeated observations will be recorded to the least count on the EDM
or to the nearest 0.001 or 0.0001 m. The mean result will be recorded to the same degree of
precision.
(5) Forward distances. Distances will be observed in one direction when the instrument is set
up on positive centered concrete instrument stands. If required, measurements in both directions
will be made between fixed instrument stands or when using tripod supports if the one-way
distance deviated over 5 mm from previous survey observations.
(6) Meteorological data. Barometric pressure, dry bulb temperature, and wet bulb
temperature should be measured at the instrument stations and at the target station.
(a) Temperature and pressure will be measured in a location shaded from the sun, exposed to
any wind, at least 5 feet above the ground, and away from the observer and instrument.
(b) Barometers must be capable of 2 mm mercury precision or better (record pressure to 1

mbar). Total Station instruments that contain a built-in barometer should periodically be
independently verified.
(c) Thermometers and psychrometers will be capable of 1 degree Celsius precision or better
(record temperature to nearest 1°C).
(d) When refractive index corrections are calculated using the formulas listed in Section 5–7,
a zero (0) ppm value for refraction should be entered into the EDM instrument.
5-9
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(7) Instrument-Reflector combinations. An EDM instrument must be paired with a specific

(numbered) reflector. Only one instrument/reflector combination will be used for a particular
line. The serial numbers of the instrument and reflector will be recorded for each observation to
verify this fact.
(8) Eccentricity observations. These offset measurements will be made for each EDM
distance.
(a) The height of EDM and height of prism will be measured to 1 mm, and similarly for the
theodolite and target if used—see Figure 5-3. A vertical height is measured between the ground
control point (CP) and the top surface of the tripod base plate. The distance between the bottom
of the tribrach and the center of the target is added to the height of the tripod base plate to
determine the height of target. Some prism assemblies may be adjusted for lateral eccentricities,
as shown in Figure 5-4.
Tripod base plate

Target
Height from CP up to Height from base

top of tripod plate of tribrach to
measured with tape or target point.
graduated rod to 1 mm.
Tribrach
Control Point
Figure 5-3. Reference points to measure height of target or GPS antenna height.
(b) Engineer scales or pocket tape is used for measuring instrument/reflector heights over
base.
(c) Instrument stands with elevations determined relative to domed plugs must be corrected
when height of instrument (HI) measurements are relative to the plug base.
(d) The EDM instrument must have the mechanical center marked such that accurate
instrument heights may be determined for each observation. The center of the reflector must be
similarly marked.
(9) Instrument/prism constant. For each EDM/prism combination used, the calibration
constant must be recorded in the field book for each observation. Accordingly, the instrument
5-10
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
and reflector serial numbers also must be noted in the field book. Incorrect instrument/reflector
serial numbers or constants will result in rejection of all data. Use of a Nodal Prism, a reflector
having the optical and mechanical centered aligned at the reflector pivot point, allows the
manufacture to specify a constant prism offset removing the need for a separate calibration.
(10) Instrument scale factor. The constant scale factor for EDM distances must be recorded
in the field book for each survey. Accordingly, the instrument serial number must be noted in
the field book.
B
A C
D E
Figure 5-4. Typical EDM reflector mounted in precision adjustable tribrach. Reflector (A),
5/8–11 Adapter (B), Adapter ring (C), Translation Stage (D), and Tribrach (E) used for
alignment-offset measurements.
5-6. EDM Reductions.
a. Field corrections. Horizontal distances will be computed and verified/checked in the field
against previously surveyed values with the application of the following corrections and
constants.
(1) Instrument/Prism Constant

(2) Horizontal and Vertical Eccentricities
5-11
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(3) Slope-to-Horizontal Correction

(4) Scale Factor
(5) Refraction correction
No corrections to sea level need be applied in projects involving short lines (i.e., less than 1,000
m) or projects near sea level. For horizontal distances, slope distances must be reduced using the
elevation differences determined from differential or trigonometric levels. Field notes and
computation/reduction recording forms must show the application and/or consideration of all the
correction factors described above.
b. Tolerances. The spread from the mean of the observations (3 sets of 5 readings each)
must not exceed 0.002 meters, or else re-observe the series. Measurements taken in both
directions should agree to 0.002 m after measurements are corrected for slope and atmospheric
refraction, as required. If the distances are not rejected, a single uncorrected distance will be
computed as the mean of the three independent distance measurements.
c. Distance reductions. 3D mark-to-mark spatial straight line distances will be computed for
use in network adjustments based on the following corrections.
(1) Refraction correction. EDM distances will be corrected for atmospheric refraction using
standard reduction formulas. A determination of the refractive index correction for ambient
atmospheric conditions will be made based on meteorological data collected on-site.
(2) Additive constant. Zero error corrections determined from instrument/reflector

calibration will be applied to distances measured with a particular EDM and prism combination.
(3) Scale error. Correction for EDM frequency scale error will be applied to the EDM
distances.
(4) Geometric corrections. Instrument to station eccentricities will be eliminated for both
stations using corrections for EDM, prism, theodolite, and target heights.
5-7. Atmospheric Refraction Correction.
a. General. EDM distances must be corrected for the actual refractive index of air along the
measured line. Measurement of atmospheric conditions at several points along the optical path
must be performed with well calibrated thermometers and barometers to achieve the 1 ppm
accuracy. If the meteorological conditions are measured only at the instrument station (usual
practice), then errors of a few parts per million (ppm) may occur, particularly in diversified
topographic conditions. In order to achieve the accuracy better than 1 ppm, one must measure
meteorological conditions every few hundred meters (200m–300m) along the optical path.
5-12
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
b. Field ppm corrections. Distance reductions that employ a ppm correction for atmospheric
refraction are useful for preliminary checks on the distance data—see example at Figure 5-5.
The effective ppm value can be dialed into the instrument, but it is not recommended because
final reductions for atmospheric refraction should be made using rigorous formulas, which
requires a zero (0) value for ppm to be entered during measurement. A field check can still be
made by finding the appropriate ppm correction value and applying this numerically to the
distance recorded in the field book (instead of within the instrument).
DCORR = [ (ppm / 1·106 ) (D MEAS) ] + D MEAS (Eq 5-6)
where
D CORR = field corrected distance
ppm = ppm term
D MEAS = measured distance set with zero ppm
Distance checks in the field are made by comparing the ppm corrected measurements to the
corrected results from previous observation campaigns. Ppm correction values are supplied by
look-up tables or simple nomogram type graphs that are specific to each instrument. Ppm
methods only give approximate refraction correction values based on local temperature and
pressure measurements.
c. Measurement of Temperature and Pressure. When greater accuracy in distance

measurement is required, temperature, pressure, and relative humidity measurements are critical
for calculating a rigorous refractive index correction. One should always use rigorous formulas
to calculate the refractive index correction rather than diagrams or simplified calculation
methods supplied by the manufacturers.
(1) Pressure. Pressure should be measured with a barometer at both ends of the line. The
mean of the two values is used in the refractive index correction equation. If it is not possible to
place barometers at both ends of the line, place a barometer at the instrument end, and use the
elevations of the two ends together with the pressure measured at the instrument to calculate the
pressure at the other end.
5-13
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure 5-5. Typical field EDM recording form—Inglis Lock, Cross Florida Barge Canal
(Jacksonville District).
(2) Temperature. Temperature should be measured with a psychrometer at both ends of the
line. The mean of the two values is used in the refractive index correction equation. It is more
5-14
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
difficult to properly measure temperature. Thermometers must be well shielded from the sun's
radiation by enclosing in a reflective insulating shield. However, this permits heat to build up
within the shield, and thus a small fan or some other means must be used to move air over the
temperature sensing device so that the true air temperature is read. Measurements near the
ground can be a poor indication of the true temperature.
(3) Relative humidity. The influence of relative humidity is important in the highest
precision measurements. Psychrometers with wet and dry thermometers should be used to
determine correction components for water vapor content.
d. Refractive index correction formulas. Distance reduction calculations for determination

of the refraction (first velocity) correction for precise electro-optical distance measurements are
presented below. The formulas and derivations are developed fully in Rueger, 1990—see
Appendix A. The refraction correction is as follows:
d = (nR / nL) dMEAS (Eq 5-7)
where
d = corrected distance
nL = ambient refractive index
nR = reference refractive index
dMEAS = measured distance
The reduction is essentially an application of the scale factor (nR / nL) to the measured distance.
The scale factor relates the instrument reference refractive index to the refractive index based on
ambient atmospheric conditions. The ambient refractive index (nL) is:
nL = 1 + [ (A + B) / (1 · 10 8 ) ] (Eq 5-8)
where
A = { [ E1 · (E2 / E3) ] + [ E4 · (E5 / E6) ] } · DS
E1 = 1646386.0
E2 = 238.0185 +  2
E3 = ( 238.0185 -  2 ) 2
E4 = 47729.9
E5 = 57.362 +  2
E6 = ( 57.362 -  2 ) 2
B = [ F1 + F2 - F3 + F4 ] · DW
F1 = 6487.31
5-15
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
F2 = 174.174  2
F3 = 3.55750  4
F4 = 0.61957  6
DS = ( PS / T ) · [ 1 + PS · (G1 - (G2 / T) + (G3 / T 2) ) ]
G1 = 57.90 · 10 -8
G2 = 9.325 · 10 -4
G3 = 0.25844
DW = (Pw / T) · [ 1 + Pw · ( 1+ ( H1 · Pw ) ) · H2 ]
H1 = 3.7 · 10 -4
H2 = H3 + H4 - H5 + H6
H3 = -2.37321· 10 -3
H4 = 2.23366 / T
H5 = 710.792 / T 2
H6 = (7.75141· 10 -4) / T 3
where
 = 1/
 = instrument carrier wavelength (in micrometers)
DS = density factor of dry air
DW = density factor of water vapor
P = total atmospheric pressure (mbar)
Pw = partial water vapor pressure (mbar)
PS = (P - Pw) = partial pressure of dry air (mbar)
T = Temperature in Kelvin (K) = (273.15 + t)
t = temperature in Celsius (°C)
The reference refractive index value (nR) is obtained from the manufacturer’s specifications for a
given EDM instrument. Water vapor pressure (Pw) is determined by the difference between wet
and dry bulb (psychrometer) temperatures as follows:
Pw = ep - [ ( 0.000662 ) ( P ) ( tD - tW ) ]
where
P = pressure (mb)
tD = dry bulb temperature (°C)
tW = wet bulb temperature (°C)
ep = ( C + D ) ( E ) exp ( F / G )
5-16
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
C = 1.0007
D = ( 3.46 · 10 -6 ) ( P )
E = 6.1121
F = ( 17.502 ) ( tW )
G = ( 240.97 ) + ( tW )
e. Reference line ratio methods. Using a special observing procedure, one may account for
the influence of refraction without explicit use of temperature and pressure measurements.
Corrections are obtained by using the ratio of a measured and a known distance to find the
effective scale change due to refraction. These procedures are described in Chapter 10.
f. Summary data sheets. A summary data sheet for EDM distance observations is shown in
Figure 5-6.
Figure 5-6. Data sheet for periodic distances to fixed points on spillway. 42 observations
made during period 1990 through 1998—only last three tabulated in report. Note some
monitor points have moved some 3 to 4 cm since initial construction of the dam. Cerrillos
Dam, Puerto Rico. (Jacksonville District).
5-17
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
5-18
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
CHAPTER 6
Settlement Surveys—Precise Differential Leveling Observations
6-1. Scope. This chapter covers standards and specifications for performing precise differential
leveling surveys, as required to monitor settlements in concrete and embankment structures. The
standards described are developed around precision leveling instruments used for long-distance
geodetic leveling runs. For many structures where level runs are relatively short, adequate
results may be obtained with traditional leveling methods with optical instruments, or bar code
leveling with digital levels.
Figure 6-1. Precise leveling runs near/on structure in Little Rock District. (Little Rock
District).
6-2. Precise Geodetic Leveling. Vertical settlement determined by precision differential

leveling is performed using compensatory auto-collimation leveling instruments with fixed or
attached parallel plate micrometers, and observing invar double (offset) scale metric rods with
supporting struts. In general, 1 to 3 fixed reference points (bedrock benchmarks) are used to
check for potential movement of various points on the structure. One of the reference points is
held fixed with all subsequent vertical changes tabulated relative to this fixed reference point.
6-1
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Vertical ties between reference bedrock benchmarks are performed only to monitor potential
movement on the reference points, and to enable selection of the best reference point to hold
fixed when two or more benchmarks (BM) are available. Leveling should be referenced to stable
benchmarks placed in close proximity to the structure to minimize systematic errors that can
accumulate during the transfer of elevation from vertical control outside the project area. A
stability monitoring program designed specifically for the network of benchmarks should be
established by leveling through each project benchmark. Deep bench, rod extensometers
(preferably at least two), placed directly on the structure and anchored at depth in bedrock
(isolated from surrounding soil), will also provide a stable vertical reference. If benchmarks are
located within the zone of deformation, the vertical network should be made to close on the same
benchmark it started from so that relative height differences and closures will provide a measure
of internal precision.
a. Leveling standards. Precision leveling must be performed in conformance with the

methods and accuracy specifications contained in NOAA Manual NOS NGS 3, June 2001,
Geodetic Leveling, unless modified in the following guidance. Those performing settlement
survey work are expected to be thoroughly familiar with the contents of this reference manual.
Other applicable reference manuals include:
-ER 1110-2-1806, Earthquake Design and Evaluation for Civil Works Projects,
-EM 1110-2-1911, Construction Control for Earth and Rock-Fill Dams,
-EM 1110-2-2300, General Design and Construction Considerations for Earth and Rock-Fill
Dams,
-EM 1110-1-1005, Control and Topographic Surveying, and
-EM 1110-1-1904, Settlement Analysis.
This last reference provides guidelines for calculations of vertical displacements and settlement
of soil under shallow foundations supporting various types of structures and under embankments.
b. Equipment specifications. Specifications applicable to differential leveling equipment for

deformation monitoring surveys are presented as follows.
(1) Instruments. Instrumentation used should meet requirements for First-Order geodetic
leveling, employing either spirit levels or compensator levels with micrometers or bar code
digital levels. For detailed information on digital leveling, see Chapter 3 of EM 1110-1-1005.
For spirit leveling, the instrument will be an automatic level with telescope magnification of 40
times or better, a compensator with a sensitivity of 10" per 2 mm level vial graduation, and a
parallel plate micrometer capable of 0.1 mm readings.
(2) Leveling staves. The rod to be used should be an invar, double scale rod, or one with a
permanently attached circular level, both having graduations equal to the range of the parallel
plate micrometer (Figure 6-2). Choice of equipment should be guided by the intended/required
accuracy for conducting deformation surveys.
6-2
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Parallel plate
micrometer attachment
Invar plate inside

left and right rod scales
Figure 6-2. Zeiss Ni1 automatic level with parallel plate micrometer attached. Double-scale
Invar rod with constant 3.01550 m difference in left and right scales.
(3) Turning plates (pins). Turning plates should not be used on turf; driven turning pins will
be required in this type of terrain. Turning plates should only be used on pavement or hard
packed soil.
c. Instrument calibration requirements. Prior to conducting leveling operations, the

following calibrations will be performed.
(1) Maintenance. Precise level rods and instruments will be cleaned and lab calibrated-
maintained at least annually.
(2) C-factor collimation calibration. The C-factor must be determined at the beginning of
each structure observation campaign per the procedures outlined in Section 3 of NOAA Manual
NOS NGS 3. The C-factor determination is made using Kukkamaki's method, also referred to as
a Peg Test (Figure 6-3). A slightly different calibration format used by the Jacksonville District
is shown in Figure 6-6 at the end of this chapter.
6-3
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure 6-3. C-factor determination using Kukkamaki method.
(3) Rejection criteria. The C-factor must conform to the reject/readjustment criteria of Table
3-1 of NOAA Manual NOS NGS 3, which is 0.005 cm/m. Daily C-factor calibrations are not
essential provided if the instrument is consistently falling within 0.004 cm/m and
backsight/foresight distances (individual setup and accumulated) stay within 1m/2m respectively.
C-factor calibrations must be performed at least twice weekly when continuously leveling at a
single structure, upon commencing leveling at a new structure, or daily if the C-factors exceed
prescribed limits.
d. Leveling procedures. When determining elevation by precise spirit leveling, the

following guidelines will be followed.
(1) Double-run level sections. Sections must not exceed one kilometer in length. Level lines
will be run in two directions. Either one or two double scale invar rods will be used. For short
runs, traditional three-wire procedures are allowable. Section runs will be conducted via the
shortest route between benchmarks.
(2) Sighting convention. Each section must start and end with the head rod (Rod A) on the
BM or reference point. The head rod (Rod A) is always observed first on each setup, whether it
6-4
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
is a backsight or foresight observation. The instrument will be leveled with the telescope
pointing toward the head rod (Rod A), thus alternating towards the backsight and foresight at
alternate instrument stations.
(3) Rod readings. Observing and recording are similar to conventional leveling procedures.
The readings will be recorded manually in the field book or electronically to 0.01 mm. An
acceptable version of the NGS Micrometer Leveling form may be used (8.5-inch by 11-inch
loose leaf format—Figure 6-4). Field books and data recorders are also acceptable. Level
sketches and abstracts must also be prepared.
(4) Stadia distance. The maximum length of the LOS should not be more than 50 m.
Foresight and backsight distances should be balanced. If the distances cannot be balanced, they
will be recorded so that the height difference can be adjusted during data reduction.
(5) Foresight sideshots. Sideshots must start from a rigid BM and not from a Temporary
Benchmark (TBM). Multiple foresight shots are allowable from a single backsight assuming
distances are allowable.
(6) Rod settlement. If using one level rod, it will be moved from backsight to foresight as
quickly as possible to minimize the effects of rod and instrument settlement.
(7) Rod index error. An even number of setups will be made for all differential level section
runs to eliminate possible rod index errors.
(8) Ground refraction. The LOS will not be less than 0.5 m above the ground to minimize
line-of-sight refraction due to higher temperature gradients near ground level.
6-3. Differential Leveling Reductions.
a. Field checks. Leveling data sheets will be checked in the field with the resulting
differential elevation for each run clearly noted, along with pertinent plug offset characteristics,
if any, and accumulated stadia lengths per circuit/section. See the example at Figure 6-4. A
slightly different recording format developed by Jacksonville District is shown in Figure 6-7 at
the end of this chapter.
b. Leveling tolerances. Measurement and closure checks will be made on site with the
following tolerances. For additional information on leveling reductions consult NOAA Manual
NOS NGS 3.
(1) Single observation. The setup will be re-observed if the disagreement between the left
and right side scale elevations on either rod exceeds 0.25 mm for that setup.
6-5
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure 6-4. Sample precise level notes--parallel plate micrometer leveling with invar rods.
(2) Stadia distance. Backward and forward stadia distances can differ by no more than 2 m
per setup and 4 m accumulated along a section to achieve balanced distances between
foresight/backsight turning points.
(3) Re-observation criteria. Re-run level line if external misclosure exceed tolerance value,
for newly established points, or for re-observations when misclosures are rejected on single runs.
(4) Closure requirements. Section level run closure tolerances are calculated as follows.
(a) Misclosure tolerance (TOL) for a section run is not to exceed:
TOL = + 3 mm · sqrt (K) (Eq 6-1)
where K is measured in kilometers (km).
(b) For short lines, the minimum tolerance for a section run is not to exceed:
TOL = + 1 mm (for K less than 0.33 km).
6-6
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(5) Height difference. If data collected with an automatic level is not rejected, a single
height difference will be computed as the mean of the height difference computed from the left
scale readings and the height difference computed from the right scale readings. If the foresight
and backsight readings are unbalanced, the single height difference will be corrected for vertical
collimation error.
(6) Tabulation accuracy. Record elevations to the nearest ten-thousandth (0.0001) meter on
the final reported elevations and settlement. Elevations (and elevation differences) on field
sketches and abstracts should be tabulated to the nearest 0.0001 meters.
c. Final height difference reductions. Redundant elevations (i.e., computed from different
level loops on circuits from the reference BMs) may be simply averaged regardless of lengths
run. Since most leveling surveys will involve lines run directly from a reference BM, final
adjusted structure elevations are simply algebraic sums of height differences from the BM using
field verified sketch/abstract data.
d. Additional processing. More extensive leveling adjustment procedures, such as least

squares processing, may be necessary in the case of:
-complicated section loop connections,
-three dimensional adjusted networks,
-newly established projects,
-settlement anomalies,
-abnormal movement of BMs, or
-redefinition of BM elevation using past data.
e. Report tabulation. Tabulated (carried forward) elevations or averaged elevations will be

made from the field sketch/abstract, holding the BM elevation fixed and computing changes in
elevation from prior observations. Anomalies should be noted on the report tabulation.
Recommendations to change the reference BM (to another BM) should be noted and pursued
accordingly.
f. Sketches. Field sketches (see sample at Figure 6-5) of level circuits, section, loops, or
spurs will be made to clearly show observed elevation differences, leveling direction, and stadia
distances—all taken directly from the (checked) Micrometer Leveling recording forms. From
such a sketch, elevations may be easily carried forward from the reference BM—an essential
computation in verifying external misclosures and should be stapled to all the data sheets
acquired for an individual structure. Elevations carried forward (from the BM) may be listed on
a separate sheet (i.e., an Abstract).
6-7
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure 6-5. Sample sketch of level loops and level lines around a lock & dam structure on
Cross Florida Barge Canal (Jacksonville District).
6-4. Total Station Trigonometric Heights. EDM/Total Station trigonometric heighting can be
used to determine height differences in lieu of spirit leveling. In general, these elevation
differences will not be as accurate as those obtained from spirit/differential levels. Exceptions
would occur in mountainous terrain where differential leveling is difficult to conduct. EDM
trigonometric height observations conducted over terrain where atmospheric extremes may be
present (e.g., across a large valley or river) must be observed using the technique of simultaneous
reciprocal measurements.
a. Weather conditions. Observations with an EDM should be limited to days when favorable
atmospheric conditions (e.g., slightly cloudy with a light breeze) are prevalent.
b. Setup requirements. Proper targets and instrument height (HI) measuring instruments, as
well as sound HI measurement procedures, should be followed at all times.
6-8
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
c. Measurements. Zenith angles and slope distances should be measured in both the direct
and inverted telescope positions. Recording and reductions follow similar procedures for
horizontal angle and EDM distance measurements. Shots of over approximately 1,000 feet must
have curvature and refraction calculations factored in. Extreme care must be taken to obtain
accurate instrument heights during trigonometric leveling. Use of a true center height stick to
obtain the instrument height in conjunction with the use of fixed height rods on the backsight and
foresight are required.
MICROMETER OBSERVATIONS
* Y R M O DAY CODE INSTRUMENT SERIAL NO. M CODE ROD SERIAL NO. CODE ROD SERIAL NO. TIME
* SITE:
TIME F TEMPERATURE
COLLIMATION CHECK - KUKKAMAKI'S METHOD BEGIN END C BEGIN END OBS
BACKSIGHT FORESIGHT
LOW SCALE LOW SCALE
STADIA HIGH SCALE SB (H - L) STADIA HIGH SCALE SF (H - L)
LB HB   LF HF  
3 0 1 5 5 0 3 0 1 5 5 0
MEAN BS1 = MEAN FS1 =
BS1 - FS1 = h1 =
3 0 1 5 5 0 3 0 1 5 5 0
MEAN BS = MEAN FS =
e20 - .0 0 2 7 e40 - .0 1 0 8
BS2 FS2 =
BS2 - FS2 = h2 =
C = h1 - h 2 = If C < + 0.005 CM/M, no adjustment is

SF2 - SB2 required.
Adjustment : The new correct reading for the high scale foresight rod reading is computed by
New high scale = old high scale - ( C X 40 ) =
Figure 6-6. Recording form for Kukkamaki Method of collimation calibration

6-9
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT
LEVELING
STATION THREAD ROD READING READING ROD

NUMBER READING STADIA CHECK AND
BACKSIGHT RIGHT LEFT TEMP
Figure 6-7. Micrometer leveling observations recording form—left side (Jacksonville
District).
6-10
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
FROM BM TO BM
WIND/SUN TIM E DA TE
THREAD ROD READING REA DING

READING STA DIA CHECK REM A RKS
FORESIGHT RIGHT LEFT
Figure 6-7 (continued). Micrometer leveling observations recording form—right side

6-11
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
6-12
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
CHAPTER 7
Alignment, Deflection, and Crack Measurement Surveys:
Micrometer Observations
7-1. Scope. This chapter describes micrometer observation methods for accurately measuring
small relative deflections or absolute deformations in hydraulic structures.
Figure 7-1. Alignment micrometer measurements relative to fixed baseline.
7-2. Relative Alignment Deflections from Fixed Baseline. Deflections of points along structural
sections can be monitored by observing their offset from an alignment established by two
baseline control points. The deflection of a point relative to a fixed baseline is observed either
by micrometer target methods (translation stage—Figure 7-1) or by directly observing the
deflection angle to the alignment pin with a theodolite. The lateral movement is computed
relative to the alignment using trigonometric identities. Alignment requirements for each
structure will be listed in tabular form on project instructions, identifying the baseline reference
points used (instrument/target stands), the deflection points to be observed, and structure loading
requirements (e.g., lock fill elevations). Requirements for establishing new alignment points,
and constructing reference baseline instrument/target stands will be detailed as required.
Additional background on relative deflection techniques is described in EM 1110-2-4300,
Instrumentation for Concrete Structures.
7-1
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
a. General. Relative deflections on structures are monitored by measuring the position of a

series of alignment pins set at regular intervals along an alignment section—for example, the
reference baseline "A" shown in Figure 7-2. Baselines typically range from 30 to 300 meters in
length, depending on the structure. The baseline is established perpendicular to the direction in
which deflection observations are required—for example, along the axis of a dam. Alignment
control points located on the structure form a sub-network where each pair of structure control
points acts as a separate alignment section for making deflection measurements. The alignment
control point (CP) positions are tied directly to the reference network pillars using the established
project coordinate system. Separate or adjacent alignment sections should be tied together using
conventional measurements from at least two other nearby control points and from at least two
reference network stations. Precision distance ties between alignment section CPs should be
made to strengthen positioning of the alignment CPs.
Reference point
Fixed target
Reference point
Theodolite
Reference line “A”

Target point 50A Target point 51A
Micrometer set in plug
at target point 51A and
deflection from fixed
reference line “A” is
observed
Figure 7-2. Typical relative alignment deflection measurements of concrete structures

relative to fixed baseline. Micrometer deflections relative to line between theodolite and
target set on external points. Port Mayaca Spillway (S-308C), Central and Southern Florida
Flood Control Project, Jacksonville District.
b. Instrumentation specifications. Guidance on recommended alignment survey equipment

and procedures are presented as follows.
7-2
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(1) Instruments. Optical or electronic theodolites such as the Wild T-2 or T-3 theodolite or
other similar instruments such as electronic total stations may be used.
(2) Targets. An inverted "V" or conic plug inserts, prism tribrach combinations with target
housings, or other specialized metrology type targets are acceptable.
(3) Monuments. Permanent alignment pins or other permanent disk type monuments are
acceptable. Structure monitoring target points (or plugs) are normally set (grouted) within ±0.5
inch from the reference baseline. Established CP monuments on the structure should be used
instead of temporary point-on-line reference marks.
(4) Alignment micrometer. A translation stage type mechanism with forced centering plug
insert with a tribrach or an inverted "V" or conic target mount on the micrometer is acceptable.
See EM 1110-2-4300, Instrumentation for Concrete Structures, for details on forced-centering
monument construction and monolith alignment marker design.
c. Observing procedures. These guidelines are provided for determining offsets using
theodolite-based methods for measurements of deflection angles or with a micrometer-based
translation stage.
(1) Equipment set-up. The theodolite and reference target(s) must be set up on concrete
instrument stands or stable tripods using forced centering devices. After force centering the
theodolite, accurately level theodolite to its reversing point and re-level to the reversing point
before each observation—this leveling/re-leveling procedure is critical. Next, remove parallax
from the theodolite's cross-hairs. The reference target on the opposite end of the reference line is
aligned by forced-centering, ensuring the target is aligned vertically over the plug center. For
each alignment pin, the orientation of the stage axis to the alignment should be perpendicular to
within 5 degrees to the alignment. This alignment tolerance is easily achieved in the field.
(2) Establishing alignment. Both the theodolite and target are force-center mounted at each
end the reference baseline to establish the alignment and measure a reference line distance tie.
When using two instruments, each respectively is centered over a monumented control point that
establishes the alignment section, and each instrument backsights the center circular element
within the other theodolite objective lens.
(3) Deflection angle method. A series of small deflection angles can be measured between
the initial position of the micrometer target when centered over the alignment pin and the
reference line. For the deflection angle method, the instrument is set up at either end of the
alignment section, and the prism or micrometer assembly is centered over the alignment pin
closest to one end of the alignment. The theodolite's vertical cross-hair is centered on the
reference target and four (4) alignment deflection sets are observed with the theodolite in both
direct and reverse positions. Redundancy can be increased by combining both the micrometer
offset measurement method with the small deflection angle method by also sighting the
7-3
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
translated position of the target when it is collimated with the alignment section reference line
and recording the micrometer offset measurement and in-line distance. The procedure for the
combined method would be as follows. For each alignment pin, establish the initial alignment as
usual. Turn the instrument onto the prism target centered directly over the alignment pin, read
and record the small deflection angle and measure the distance to the alignment pin, then turn the
instrument back onto the original alignment and observe the conventional micrometer offset and
in-line distance.
(4) Micrometer offset measurements. Sight the alignment reference target and move the
alignment micrometer/target into to collimation with theodolite alignment. Radios may be
required for communication between the instrument man and micrometer operator. Five (5)
independent offset measurements should be observed with the alignment micrometer in the
LEFT position (i.e., micrometer is to the left of baseline as viewed from the theodolite's
position). The offset distance from the alignment pin is measured by moving the target on-line,
and recording the offset distance with the micrometer scale. Read alignment micrometer to
nearest + 0.001 (thousandth) inch. Rotate alignment micrometer 180 degrees to its RIGHT
position and observe five (5) additional offsets. Always run the micrometer against the spring
such that after each offset measurement, the micrometer should be backed off a few hundredths
of an inch. Reversing the micrometer to the LEFT and RIGHT positions eliminates index error
in the device.
(5) Alignment pin in-line distances. Extensional (in-line) movement components for each
alignment pin are determined by measuring the in-line distance to the prism/target when
collimated over the alignment pin and when collimated to the reference baseline. When using
two instruments for the alignment, the offset reading and in-line distance is repeated and
confirmed by the instrument at the other end of the line when the offset bar is rotated 180
degrees.
d. Field computations and tolerances. A mean value for the LEFT and RIGHT micrometer
observations (5 each) will be calculated and reported to the nearest 0.001 inch—see sample field
notes at Figure 7-3. The difference between the mean of the LEFT set and the mean of the
RIGHT should not exceed + 0.02 (two-hundredths) inch. If the difference between the two
means does exceed this limit, then both the LEFT and RIGHT set must be re-observed. Large
variations probably indicate poor target centering, instrument parallax not eliminated, or mis
levelment of the theodolite. The final left/right deflection angle will be computed in the field
after each alignment observation. All field reductions must be independently checked in the
field.
e. Final micrometer data reductions. From the mean value for the micrometer left/right
readings, compute the adjusted deflection as follows:
(1) Deflection Calculation. The deflection (D) will be calculated as:
7-4
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
D = ( ML - MR ) / 2 (Eq 7-1)
where
ML = mean value of the five (5) LEFT micrometer readings on baseline

MR = mean value of the five (5) RIGHT micrometer readings on baseline
D = the calculated value for the "+" Right deflection off baseline to structure
point as viewed from theodolite position
(2) Recording. Round adjusted deflection to the nearest 0.01 inch. Additional accuracy and
recording requirements for micrometer based measurements are found below.
(3) Check sum. The sum of the micrometer LEFT and RIGHT means will not necessarily
total to the (whole) 1.000 inch, given the micrometer index errors.
Figure 7-3. Field alignment micrometer alignment observations and reduction—Inglis

Bypass Spillway, Cross Florida Barge Canal, Jacksonville District.
7-5
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(4) Tabulation. Tabulate field computed deflection values for the final report using a
standard field survey book or similar recording form for both observations, computations, and
adjustments of data. A sample micrometer alignment field record is shown in Figure 7-3.
(5) Summary sheets. Figure 7-4 depicts a typical summary data sheet for sequential
alignment observations.
Figure 7-4. Data summary sheet for alignment observations between 1990 and 1996. Only
the first (1990) and last (seventh) observations are recorded. The change is measured relative
to the previous observation in 1995 (shown in left margin). The cumulative change is relative
to the original (1990) measurement. Hurricane Gate Structure 5, Jacksonville District.
7-3. Micrometer Crack Measurement Observations
a. General. This section describes absolute micrometer joint or crack measurement

procedures using micrometers. Crack/joint observations are measured relative to grouted bronze
plugs set 12 inches (±) on center across a concrete crack or structural construction joint where
periodic monitoring is required. Monitoring points are usually set on each adjacent monolith.
Monitoring is performed periodically for long-term trends or during short-term load deformation
studies. Often, three plugs are set across each crack or joint in a triangular pattern. In most
cases, two opposite plugs set perpendicular to the joint/crack plane will be adequate. Expected
short-term accuracy is on the order of ± 0.0005 inch, relative to the fixed calibration reference
7-6
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
bar. Errors due to the nonalignment (vertical) of the crack plugs relative to one another could
affect observational accuracy (and long-term repeatability) upwards of ±0.01 inch. Given all of
the above errors and uncertainties, estimated long-term crack measurement accuracy is at the
±0.005 to 0.010-inch level; totally independent of short-term movements in the structure due to
load or temperature influences. Crack and joint measurement requirements are typically listed in
tabular form, including instructions for varying hydraulic head levels against the monoliths, if
applicable. Requirements and instructions for setting new monitoring points will be provided as
required. Structure loading requirements will also be provided for each new observation point.
b. Equipment specifications. The following equipment and instruments are used for crack
and joint extension measurements.
(1) Inside micrometer. Any standard machine tooling inside micrometer may be used for
crack measurements. Precision calipers and precision rulers may also be employed in lieu of an
inside micrometer (Figure 7-5).
Figure 7-5. Starrett vernier caliper crack measurements between monoliths. Central &
Southern Florida Flood Control Project (Jacksonville District and Arc Surveying &
Mapping, Inc).
(2) Inside micrometer calibration bar. 12-inch center to center standard reference for all
micrometer observations. An independent re-calibration of this bar is necessary to monitor long
term stability.
7-7
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(3) Plug inserts. Stainless steel threaded half-inch inserts are used and inserted into the dual
or triad points across monolith joints or cracks—Figure 7-6. Inserts are stamped to ensure
consistent use on periodic measurements. The 0.500-inch O/D inserts should be precision
machined to an accuracy of ±0.001 inch, and verified by micrometer measurement. Precision
straight edges may be used to determine offsets between aligned joint bolts.
Figure 7-6. Typical monitoring point scheme across existing cracks on a concrete structure—
HGS-1, Central and Southern Florida Flood Control Project (Jacksonville District).
c. Crack measurement techniques. The following procedures are used for crack and joint
extension measurements.
(1) Micrometer measurement. Insert plug pins and measure crack or joint distance using an
inside micrometer or caliper. Hold micrometer ends as low as possible on each plug pin. Gently
rotate each end for minimum distance observation.
(2) Reading procedures. Read micrometer/caliper values to nearest 0.001 (thousandth) inch.
Read in both directions (i.e., reverse micrometer ends) between crack plugs and mean result to
7-8
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
nearest 0.001 (thousandth) inch. Do not attempt to interpolate between 0.001-inch values.
Record a single minimum reading for each direction and mean as required.
(3) Tolerances. Readings in each direction should not vary by more than ±0.001 inch unless
it can be verified that the crack plugs are grossly misaligned vertically. This can be verified by
raising the micrometer at both ends to confirm non-verticality of the grouted plugs.
(4) Dial micrometer. The following applies to an inside micrometer with dial. Lock
micrometer to nearest 0.025-inch division and use dial indicator to obtain minimum distance.
(Maximum reading on scale, which is subtracted from the preset micrometer value). Ensure dial
range is within 0.025-inch micrometer setting range to avoid misreadings and ensure relatively
constant spring tension. The following example illustrates crack measurement data.
Micrometer set at: 11.475 inches
Maximum dial scale
reading (minimum distance): -0.021 inch
Observed uncorrected
micrometer length: 11.454 inches
(5) Triad crack/plug configurations. Three marked pins must be used in the same plug upon
each inspection, per the following convention:
"L" Lowest numbered crack plug
"H" Highest numbered crack plug
"b" "Blank"—in medium numbered crack plug
For example, at "Inglis Lock," the following naming convention might be used:
PLUG PLUG
IL19N4 "L"
IL19N5 Blank
IL19N6 "H"
Normally, only one forward/reverse observation will be required for each pair of plugs—
approximately a 1 to 2-minute procedure. Additional observations under different structural
loading conditions or temperature conditions will not be performed unless specifically requested
in the project instructions. In cases where observations are taken over varying points in time or
condition, they will not be meaned; given the external structural variability on the measurements.
(6) Tolerance specifications. The measurement rejection criteria are ±0.001 inch between
each direction reversal and ±0.001 inch from nominal calibration bar constant. Failure to obtain
7-9
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
agreement in each direction may be due to non-verticality of the plugs; in which case, no re-
observations are necessary.
(7) Recording formats and reductions. Standard field survey books for both observations and
corrected/adjusted lengths are normally used. All observations and reductions will be computed
and verified in the field—and recorded directly into the field survey book. Micrometer data are
corrected for calibration constants as shown above. Quick comparisons should be made with
previous observations to preclude against blunders. Tabulate field reduced distance into final
reports and compute changes from past readings, as shown in the example at Figure 7-7.
Standard forms for periodic crack measurements are also found in EM 1110-2-4300.
Crack measuring plugs

PML 24, 25, & 26
Figure 7-7. Port Mayaca Lock (St. Lucie Canal) crack measurements—981 to 1995.
Distance changes are tabulated for successive readings. Cumulative changes are recorded
relative to the initial observation in October 1981.
d. Micrometer calibration bars. The calibration bar is used to ensure the micrometer is
accurate by verifying a 12.000-inch center to center distance. The calibration bar should be kept
shaded to prevent dimensional changes. Calibrate caliper/micrometer prior to structure
observation using an independent reference. The single, meaned, forward/backward micrometer
positions on the calibration bar should be observed/recorded to the nearest 0.001 inch.
7-10
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(1) Calibration example. The following example illustrates calibration of a Starrett

Micrometer. The resulting micrometer and caliper calibration correction is then applied to all
subsequent crack readings.
FORWARD BACKWARD
Micrometer 11.475 11.475
Dial -0.021 -0.020
Reading 11.454 11.455
Meaned Calibration Reading = 11.454 inches
CALIBRATION CORRECTION
(Nominal Calibration Bar Length) 12.000
-(Calibration Reading) -11.454
Calibration Correction 00.546 inches
(2) Observation record example. The following is a typical example of a field book entry for
a crack observation using a Starrett Inside Micrometer:
Cross Florida Barge Canal, Inglis Lock & Spillway

Points: IL19N4 to IL19N5
19 July 1984 0845
Mic-Bergen, Notes-Noles, Bergen
T - 86o F, Rain
Lock Full @ 36.0' elev.
FWD BACK
11.475 Mic 11.475
-0.019 Dial -0.020
11.456 11.455
Mean = 11.456 in
Calibration Correction = +0.546 inch
Corrected Plug Reading = 12.002 inches

(IL19N4 to IL19N5)
The corrected plug-to-plug reading (12.002 inches) may be directly inserted on tabulation report
with no further adjustments required.
e. Periodic micrometer calibration. Independent annual calibrations should be performed on

the following components:
7-11
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
-Inside Micrometer or Calipers,
-Reference Calibration Bar, and
-Threaded ½ inch Plug Inserts.
(1) Temperature effects. Calibrations should be checked over the normal temperature range
that these devices are subject to in order to determine if expansion (temperature dependent)
corrections become significant.
(2) Non-verticality of plugs. There is no method for eliminating the error due to non
verticality of the plugs other than using identical inserts on each visit. Use of inside/outside
precision calipers will eliminate most independent calibration requirements other than the
calipers themselves and insure true roundness and alignment of the threaded plug inserts. The
need for a reference calibration bar may also be eliminated
7-12
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
CHAPTER 8
Monitoring Structural Deformations Using the Global Positioning System
8-1. Purpose. This chapter provides technical guidance on the use of the GPS for monitoring
and measuring 3D displacements on large engineering structures. Applications of GPS for the
determination of long-term stability and movement on dams, navigation locks, and other similar
types of construction projects are described. Technical guidance on procedures, standards, and
specifications recommended for data collection and analysis are included.
8-2. Background. The specialized surveying practices described in previous chapters tend to be
time and labor intensive. GPS surveying techniques for structural monitoring have a high
potential for reduction in manpower needed for conducting deformation surveys. Although GPS
can yield positions that are comparable to (and may even exceed) the accuracy levels expected
for conventional surveys, its use in the past was limited because of a requirement for lengthy
station occupation times. Reduced occupation times have now been realized through the use of
specialized instrumentation enhanced software analysis, resulting in reliable sub-centimeter
accuracy from much shorter observing sessions. In modern usage, satellite positioning systems
for monitoring deformations are based on Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS)
technology, which includes GPS and additional satellite systems. GNSS satellite signals have
been enhanced and supplemented with additional signals being broadcast by the United States.
Most current GNSS equipment and software used to conduct high accuracy surveys have also
been enhanced with the ability to track additional GNSS systems, including Glonass, Galileo,
and BeiDou. The technical guidance presented in this chapter contains the procedures and
standards for the use of GPS measurements on deformation monitoring projects.
a. GPS overview. For detailed information and background on GPS, see EM 1110-1-1003.
Specialized receiver-antenna equipment adequate for use on monitoring surveys is widely
available as COTS products. Multiple GPS receiver units can be deployed and operated for
many hours to conduct monitoring project surveys. Processing outputs and collected data supply
high reliability and statistical assessments routinely applicable to network adjustment position
determination. Simultaneous positioning can be obtained on stations normally configured for
conventional surveying operations. No highly specialized data collection requirements are
needed; however, data processing can become technically complex in more advanced
applications of data filtering and data cleaning.
b. GPS Applications and Precautions. With further refinement of the data processing
strategies presented in this chapter, lower cost and better performance on monitoring surveys can
be expected from current GPS technology. At the present time, GPS surveying can be used to
substitute conventional monitoring techniques using the standards presented in this chapter.
Attention to actual GPS data quality and prevention of systematic biases in the measurements
must be made to ensure adequate results. GPS signal disturbances may be unavoidable under
certain field conditions. Appropriate measures should be taken to obtain clean (unbiased) GPS
data through mission planning, reconnaissance, and careful data post-processing and evaluation
8-1
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
of the results. GPS is highly recommended for conducting surveys of the reference network of
stable points surrounding the project structure. With high accuracy coordinates on at least two
reference stations, and reasonably clean GPS data collected at monitoring points, high accuracy
relative positioning can be routinely achieved. GPS users should take special care to minimize
signal obstructions at sites that are prone to generating multipath signal reflections. Methods for
accomplishing this are presented in this chapter.
8-3. Scope of Chapter. This chapter is divided into four sections, as summarized below.
a. Section I: Monitoring Structural Deformations with GPS. This section presents practical
guidance for GPS monitoring survey operations. Surveying requirements for accuracy, system
performance, and equipment are discussed. Surveying procedures and specifications for
planning, fieldwork, and data collection are covered. Data processing procedures are covered,
which describe the software and processing requirements for baselines and networks, including
least squares adjustment techniques. GPS monitoring applications included in this section cover
planning surveys for reconnaissance, and criteria for the installation of GPS monitoring
networks. Also included are procedures for performing reference network surveys that are
conducted for separate high accuracy positioning tasks, and production surveys configured to
follow conventional survey procedures and layouts. In addition, procedures for performing
specialized GPS surveys are described—as may be required for continuous monitoring, or
monitoring under hazardous conditions.
b. Section II: GPS Performance on Monitoring Networks. This section presents results of
field tests conducted to evaluate GPS surveying capabilities on monitoring networks. Principles
of GPS carrier phase measurements are summarized, including operational components and user
survey controls. GPS system performance, including random and systematic error sources, are
discussed. Sources of error in GPS measurements are described relative to GPS system status
and site specific effects that present major problems over short baseline networks. Examples are
included of GPS performance in actual USACE project monitoring cases, which demonstrate
comparable results to conventional surveys.
c. Section III: Data Quality Assessment for Precise GPS Surveying. This section presents
examples and techniques for describing problems with GPS data quality in monitoring
applications. Quality assessment tools, including statistics and quality control software, are
discussed. Data post-processing, software, and statistics used to solve for baseline position
components and the evaluation of the results are described. This section also demonstrates how
external network quality can be determined by closure and station checks using multiple inter
connected baselines.
d. Section IV: Mitigation of Multipath Signals. This section presents information for
minimizing and removing multipath errors, which are a major source of systematic error in
precise short baseline surveys. A description of multipath effects on GPS carrier signals is
discussed. Possible techniques for data cleaning and data re-processing are presented, as are data
8-2
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
filtering techniques that can be used to minimize errors and improve solution quality. Also
covered are tests on using signal strength values for carrier phase measurement weighting that
indicate improvements in removing bias and more robust ambiguity resolution.
8-3
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Section I
Monitoring Structural Deformation with GPS
8-4. Surveying Requirements.
a. System Requirements. A successful GPS-based deformation measurement system should

meet the following performance requirements:
(1) The system should provide relative horizontal and vertical positioning accuracies
comparable to those obtained from existing conventional deformation surveys.
(2) Station occupation times should be reduced to minutes per station, approximately the
amount of time required for completion of a typical monitoring survey in one working day. Each
station should be occupied once and then have the rod rotated 180° and then observed again to
remove any bias that may be created by the rod errors. Fixed height rods and tripods should be
used whenever possible to help reduce possible height errors.
(3) The system should operate with COTS equipment having nominal power requirements,
such as the geodetic quality GPS equipment and computers available from commercial sources.
It is desired that the system not require classified access for full performance.
(4) The system should collect data that conforms to Receiver Independent Exchange
(RINEX) standards for subsequent data post-processing. At a minimum, the system should have
the capability to log data, at a one second logging rate, over a continuous eight-hour period for
multiple reference stations.
(5) The system should provide redundant observations of monitoring point positions so that
reliability, statistical assessments, and detection of outliers are enabled. Applicable GPS
positions, baselines, and measurement weights should be compatible with requirements for
geodetic network adjustment processing.
(6) The system should provide localized coverage over a network of survey points that would
be typically installed on project sites. The system should be capable of simultaneously
positioning multiple receivers/users on the structure.
(7) It is desired that no specialized operational procedures be required to initialize the system
and conduct a mission. Any needed pre-mission operations should be within the capability of the
survey crew to perform.
b. Equipment requirements. Only precise carrier phase relative positioning techniques will
yield accuracies sufficient for GPS structural deformation surveys. COTS geodetic type
receiver/antenna equipment has the operational capabilities necessary for collecting high-quality
carrier phase data. An inventory of recommended components for such a system are as follows:
8-4
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(1) Receiver. A geodetic quality GPS receiver should have at a minimum: L1/L2 phase
measurement capability, with at least a one second data logging rate; up-to-date receiver
firmware version, and hardware boards that include any features available for high fidelity
carrier tracking, and radio frequency (RF) suppression in static surveying mode; internal raw
data storage with a port connection enabled for logging to a computer, data collector, or data
communications system; and other accessories for protection and transport, such as carrying
cases.
(2) Antenna. At a minimum, the antenna should be a dual frequency GPS L1/L2 microstrip
antenna with flat ground plane or choke ring, and type-matched to GPS receiver. Both L1/L2
antenna phase center offsets should be published within 1 mm as measured along the mechanical
axis to the antenna reference base-plate. Typically, a standard antenna base attachment rod/bolt,
with 5/8-inch diameter, 11NC tooling, or other precision forced centered attachment system is
used. Standard antenna-to-tribrach mounting adapters and tribrachs may be used as a forced
centering assembly. GPS equipment that combines the GPS receiver and antenna into one unit is
acceptable to use provided the equipment is of geodetic quality and can meet the operational
performance requirements.
(3) Transmission cables. Antenna-receiver, and data communications, connector cables as

required.
(4) Power supply. Power supply (AC/UPS) and/or 12V DC battery power with compatible
charger units and cables. System may need to operate for 10 hours or more without recharge,
therefore, power requirement design should include peripheral device load.
(5) Software. Data downloading, logging, or processing software needed for retrieving raw
data files, and/or for communication with an external computer and/or other permanent data
storage media. GPS survey data and baseline processing software and network adjustment
software.
(6) Computer. Computer equipment should be consistent with minimum requirements to

perform GPS data processing (see manufacture/software developer requirements). A separate
computer (as an AirGap) might have to be used to download data from the data collector and/or
GPS device. Make sure this computer has the proper ports to allow connection to data collector
devices and/or GPS receivers. Once downloaded, the data can be placed on an external hard dive
for transfer to the processing computer. If needed, a notebook or laptop computer is beneficial to
perform field collection and processing. Computer equipment should include external hard
drives for backup and storage of data.
(7) Field equipment. Miscellaneous equipment may include: steel tape or rods for antenna
height measurements, wide base opening tribrachs, and nadir plummet for precise tribrach
centering; stable surveyors tripod; meteorological instruments; field book; and ground tarp.
8-5
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
For multiple equipment systems deployed on a project, efforts should be made to replicate each
unit as closely as possible. This includes specifications for hardware manufacturer, model, and
physical specifications (e.g., cable lengths), firmware version, and software. Variations in
measurement performance between different receiver-antenna systems are reduced because
equipment related biases are common to each system.
8-5. Surveying Procedures.
a. GPS has several advantages over conventional surveys. It provides flexibility in the
location of monitoring stations, semi-automated data collection and processing, reliable 3D
relative positioning between two points, built-in error analysis and export capability for survey
adjustments, and potentially faster hands-off field survey operation. The fieldwork and
procedures for GPS deformation surveys can be conducted in ways that are very similar to
conventional surveying field operations described in earlier chapters of this manual. Following
is a discussion of recommended procedures for conducting GPS deformation surveys, including
preparation, fieldwork, processing, and monitoring applications.
b. Preparation for fieldwork. Data collection efforts with GPS equipment require a moderate
level of planning and coordination.
(1) Mission planning. Typically, a GPS monitoring survey will require occupations of
multiple station points. If multiple receiver units are employed, then coordination of different
occupation sequences should be specified prior to the fieldwork. The schedule of station
occupation times is based on GPS mission planning. Satellite constellation status and local
observing conditions are determined from two main sources of information: (1) GPS mission
planning software and, (2) Notice Advisory to NAVSTAR Users (NANU) bulletins. Both
should be consulted prior to performing fieldwork.
(a) Mission planning software. Software is used to predict the number of visible satellites,
DOP values, the location of each satellite (azimuth and elevation above horizon), and continuous
coverage for each Space Vehicle (SV) over a given time period. The software requires a recent
GPS satellite ephemeris file, a specific date and time period, and the geographic location of
interest.
(b) NANU. GPS constellation status information is reported by announcements known as

NANU. The U.S. Air Force Space Command Master Control Station distributes NANU
messages as frequently as new information becomes available. Automated Data Services (ADS)
can be checked daily for current outages and scheduled events through the U.S. Coast Guard
Navigation Center (NAVCEN) at: http://www.navcen.uscg.gov. The information contained in
the archived NANU files include the NANU message number, relevant start and stop date
referred to the Day of Year (DOY) that begins at 0000 UT, Message Type (Forecast Outages,
Unscheduled Outages, Other), SV and code (PRN), reported Condition, and POC for further
information. Standardized message types are designated by abbreviations that describe the
8-6
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
condition being reported. NANU bulletins should be checked in advance of and after completion
for the times scheduled to conduct GPS monitoring surveys.
(2) GPS equipment. Sufficient time should be budgeted to assemble and organize GPS
surveying equipment for transport and/or shipping to the project site immediately prior to the
scheduled work. Access to project AC power may require coordination with on-site personnel
and all portable DC battery units should be fully pre-charged. A standard property inventory or
packing list should be prepared to ensure all necessary equipment is available. Maintenance and
inspection of this inventory should be completed before and after each monitoring survey.
c. Fieldwork procedures. Data collection efforts depend on consistent fieldwork practices.

The recommended sequence of events for each monitoring station occupation is as follows.
(1) Preparation. Set up tripod, forced centering device, or other stable antenna-mounting
frame over the monitoring point at the station mark. Attach tribrach/trivet assembly, level, and
precisely center over reference mark to within 1 mm accuracy.
(2) Receiver user-defined parameters. Mask angle should be set to zero (0) degrees, Position
Dilution of Precision (PDOP) cutoff set to 20 or higher, and data logging rate set to one (1)
second. Field collection parameters should be set to allow the greatest amount of satellite/signal
data collection, which if necessary, can be filtered/removed during post-processing.
(3) Station set up and measurements. Antenna heights should be measured twice to within
less than 1 mm and recorded on the station data sheet. When possible, fixed height tripods and
rods should be used. The antenna ground plane is oriented to magnetic/true north, and secured.
Once the receiver unit has acquired at least five satellites (L1/L2 tracking), the survey session
can begin. Initiate data logging using the appropriate user controls. Filenames should reflect
station names and antenna heights are designated as vertical or slant range to the ground plane.
(4) At the end of the station observing session, antenna heights should be re-checked.
Equipment is disassembled and transported to the next station setup.
d. Data collection procedures. The following data collection scheme may be used at each
station to conduct the monitoring survey.
(1) Session length. A session length of at least 3-5 minutes (L1/L2 carrier phase data) is
required to meet minimum positioning accuracies using two simultaneously observed reference
stations. On stations where unfavorable signal quality is expected, session lengths may need to
be increased to 15-30 minutes or more based on the outcome of reconnaissance surveys.
(2) Redundancy. Monitoring stations are positioned relative to at least two stable reference
stations in the reference network. Simultaneous data collection at all three stations (monitoring
point and two reference stations) is required. Greater redundancy can be obtained by observing
8-7
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
each station twice at different time periods. This ensures that the satellite constellation has
changed over a significant time period (2-4 hours minimum).
(3) Coverage. A minimum of eight (8) visible satellites should be tracked at all times—
preferably five or more satellites will have continuous tracking throughout the session. GPS
mission planning software should be used to maximize the number of continuously tracked
satellites in each session.
(4) GPS data types. At a minimum, dual frequency data should be recorded by the receiver
at specified logging rates. Dual frequency data enables data quality checks and provides
additional GPS observations that enhance survey reliability.
(5) Station data. Specific information related to the data collection should be noted and
recorded on the appropriate log sheets. These include: station name, receiver and antenna serial
numbers, observer name, date of survey, start and stop times of each session, notes about
problems encountered, entered filename and antenna height (phase center heights recorded if
needed), antenna cable lengths (m), and session number if occupation is repeated.
(6) Recording interval. A one (1) second data logging rate should be used in all data
collected for monitoring surveys. The logging rate is defined as the time interval (in seconds)
between each data value recorded in the receiver's internal memory or written to an external
storage device.
8-6. Data Processing Procedures.
a. General. Guidance for processing raw data is designed to meet the monitoring accuracy
requirements. A variety of software applications are available for GPS data post-processing and
adjustment. Commercial software is adequate for most GPS monitoring surveys, with some
limitations. Various software packages provide different levels of customized processing and
output statistics. Recommended procedures for GPS data post-processing on monitoring surveys
are summarized below.
b. Software requirements. Most GPS post-processing software has standard features for
loading data and processing baselines. Capabilities for baseline processing software should
include the following considerations. Both static and kinematic (for examining epoch by epoch
solutions) mode post-processing should be available using a standard session input data file (e.g.,
RINEX). Satellite data deletion and data editing should be available that is indexed by SV
number or by session measurement (indexed by time epoch). A standard text editor or user-
developed software programs such as Translation Editing Quality Check (TEQC) or Windows
TECQ (WinTEQC) should be able to carry out measurement editing in the RINEX file. GPS
carrier phase measurement and civilian code position solutions should be available. The option
for using only L1 signal or L2 signal data should be selectable for position solution output.
RINEX data and ephemeris file input data should be enabled without any special problems.
8-8
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Extraction of ASCII format position data in X-Y-Z, Cartesian WGS84 coordinates, with
subsequent conversion of solution data to WGS84 geodetic coordinates, and to projected
northing, easting, and vertical coordinates, should be available.
c. Raw GPS data. Information required for post-processing raw GPS observations and GPS
ephemeris files are summarized below.
(1) Observation files. Raw data is downloaded from the GPS receiver and imported to the
processing software. Data files stored in binary form should be translated to RINEX format for
editing and archiving. The RINEX stores data as an ASCII text file format containing a header
section followed by time tags with blocks of GPS observations.
(2) Ephemeris files. Orbit data is broadcast in real-time (by the GPS satellite) in the GPS
signal navigation message. This broadcast ephemeris can be extracted from the raw GPS data
file or is sometimes stored separately with a conventional file name extension (e.g., *.eph). A
more refined orbit, known as the precise ephemeris, contains smoother, more accurate post-
processed orbit data. Precise ephemeris data is available in three types, Final (12-day latency),
Rapid (17-hour latency), and UltraRapid (released 4 times each day) from the International GPS
Service at https://igscb.jpl.nasa.gov/components/prods_cb.html.
d. Baseline processing. Processing steps for a single GPS baseline are outlined below.
(1) Baseline input data. Computation of baselines requires the following information
supplied by the user: station names specified for each endpoint of the baseline, antenna heights in
meters for both baseline stations, separate filename for GPS data collected at each station,
approximate coordinates for each station with position quality, receiver and antenna type with
known phase center offset, and session start and stop times for each station observation set.
(2) Baseline processor controls. Setup functions for baseline processing require the
following control values. Fixed station geodetic coordinates must be supplied for at least one
occupied station. Accuracy at the fixed station should be close to the centimeter level for best
results (e.g., ambiguity resolution). Generally, fixed station coordinates (in WGS84) from initial
GPS installation surveys or prior monitoring surveys can be used. Satellite elevation mask angle
is set between 15-20 degrees. For poor quality data, the mask angle may need to be increased (if
selectable for each SV). An alternative is to directly edit the RINEX file to remove satellite data
at periods with low satellite elevations, based on data quality assessment statistics or other
criteria. GPS baselines are processed for L1 solution only, with the output log file option set to
calculate residuals for each double difference combination that was used in processing. Double
difference residuals will not be reported for at least one satellite throughout the processing
session, as it will be fixed internally as a reference. Set the software to use both L1 and L2 phase
and code data if available. This additional data is used by the software to improve ambiguity
resolution. Select at least a 95% confidence level for reporting all statistical outputs and for
measurement outlier detection. The software may supply a default statistical testing value that is
8-9
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
equivalent to using a 95% confidence in the statistics. Select options for full information
reporting for each solution output file.
(3) Evaluation of processing output. The results of each baseline solution are examined for
completeness and then compared to survey design specifications. Acceptable mean and standard
deviation of residuals are generally in the range of 3 mm and 4 mm respectively, with a fixed L1
phase only solution. Standard deviations of each X-Y-Z baseline component are less than 2.0
mm (one-sigma). Processing variance factor should be between 0.5 and 2.0, and the ratio of
fixed to float RMS should be greater than seven (7). Distribution of all double difference
residuals should pass the Chi-squared goodness-of-fit test at the 95% confidence level. Scaled
point confidence ellipse major semi-axis should be less than 3-5 mm (95%) for each station. The
baseline processor software must remove all cycle slips and measurement outliers in data.
e. Network processing requirements. The steps used for processing multiple baselines in a
monitoring network are outlined below.
(1) Reference network. The reference network is processed before the monitoring network to
establish high accuracy control coordinates for each reference station. All simultaneously
observed baselines are processed separately between each reference station that was occupied
during the survey. One station is selected as a master station having an averaged code position
or transferred area control known, preferably in WGS84 Geodetic coordinates. These
coordinates are established during network installation surveys. Control coordinates on the
master station are held fixed in a minimally constrained network adjustment of all reference
network baselines. Static session mode solutions are all that is generally required for processing
the reference network baselines. Data and post processed results should be examined to remove
any obviously poor data following session status evaluation and data editing. Input controls and
output statistics listed above should be satisfied for all reference network baselines. If there are
four or more reference stations, then stable point analysis can be applied to detect movements in
the reference network. Processing outputs and edited data files are saved separately as part of
the project data archive.
(2) Monitoring network. All stable reference network stations are fixed with control
coordinates established by the reference network survey processing results. Each monitoring
station data file is processed baseline-by-baseline using each simultaneously observed reference
station data file. Input controls and output statistics listed above should be satisfied for all
monitoring network baselines. Misclosures and data quality checks should be made for baseline
post-processing involving each monitoring point following criteria presented above. Processing
outputs and edited data files are saved separately as part of the project data archive. Solution
files are prepared for export to network adjustment software. An initial adjustment using only
minimal constraints can be run between the master reference station and all of the monitoring
points to examine initial survey quality.
8-10
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
f. Network adjustment requirements. Once all of the data has been processed and validated,
GPS baseline ties will connect the entire surveyed network of monitoring points. All post-
processed GPS solution vectors are processed using least squares network adjustment software.
Weights are usually supplied by the baseline processing covariance matrix of parameters. The
resulting coordinates for each point in the monitoring network define the final 3D position of
each monitoring station. Stable reference station coordinates are fixed in the project coordinate
system. Standard network adjustment procedures and outputs are obtained for the GPS
monitoring survey. At a minimum, error ellipses (95%) are compared to accuracy requirements,
and residuals examined for systematic bias.
g. Position displacements. Final coordinates for each monitoring point are differenced from
the previous survey adjustment coordinates to determine the 3D displacement at each survey
station. An examination of plotted movement trends (coordinate differences) and comparison of
direction and magnitude to the maximum expected displacement is made to summarize
deformations of the structure. Any unusual or unexpected movement trends should be traced
back so that the supporting GPS data is validated a second time.
8-7. GPS Monitoring Applications.
a. General. Various kinds of GPS project surveys are made to obtain specialized
information about the structure and its surroundings. These can be classified into four different
application types, namely: planning surveys (including reconnaissance and installation surveys),
reference surveys, monitoring surveys, and specialized surveys.
b. Planning surveys. Reconnaissance and installation surveys are made before implementing
an extensive program for GPS monitoring. In most cases, it will be necessary to collect
information about site-specific GPS performance. This involves limited fieldwork and
measurement tests conducted in the planning stages of the design to check proposed new or
upgraded project monitoring systems.
(1) Reconnaissance surveys. After it has been established that GPS surveys are adequate for
obtaining deformation measurements, a site visit is required for reconnaissance. These surveys
are made to determine possible locations for monitoring stations, to identify any site-specific
data collection problems, and to estimate system installation and future operation/maintenance
requirements.
(2) Station placement tests. The objective is to collect GPS test data at locations where
monitoring is requested (as specified in the monitoring plan). A second objective is to establish
temporary points within the area of interest where the best quality data can be obtained. The
reconnaissance survey should reflect the proposed permanent survey system as closely as
possible using only enough points to check data quality. Baselines are observed at each major
section of the structure, especially if site conditions change or where data may be suspect. As
few as 2 to 3 baselines on the structure, and, at minimum, one session on each reference station,
8-11
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
should be observed. Session lengths should be at least one hour for each test station, and at least
one baseline session on the structure should be greater than 3 hours. Once the data has been
collected and processed, a suitability analysis is carried out for each proposed location. If
problems are encountered with a particular station, these will be relocated or be reported to the
monitoring system designers for alternative placements.
(3) Example placements. Typical station placement tests might include: stations at the crest
and toe of embankment structures; across the total length of the crest of concrete dams, with
separate baseline ties to rock abutments made from at least one of the crest monoliths; and for
navigation locks, station ties from the bank area to the riverside wall, along the length of one
wall, and in any areas where stations must be located near walls or obstructions. One test
method is to use multiple GPS units deployed over a cross-section of 2 to 3 GPS monitoring
points, with simultaneous logging on at least one reference station. Most important is that all
reference network stations should be occupied and observed for at least one session during
reconnaissance surveys.
(4) Maximum baseline length. GPS baselines should not exceed 1 to 2 km from the furthest
reference station, if possible. Better results are obtained if only hundreds of meter distances
separate the stations. A test should be made over the maximum length baseline on the project to
determine the expected low-end precision for the surveys. The GPS baseline length test is at
least 3 hours in duration to ensure the solution converges to a stable accuracy level. Baseline
accuracy can be examined to determine if the test results meet monitoring requirements.
(5) Multipath detection tests. Baseline results and statistics are examined per methods to
detect the presence of multipath error.
(6) Receiver signal tests. Two GPS stations located near each other on the structure—say
within 10 meters—allow both receivers to collect data that should be nearly identical. Data
processing results can verify signal error levels where there are large nearby obstructions
(several meters away) or vertical walls extending above the antenna.
(7) Mission planning. Reconnaissance surveys can verify mission planning results through
comparison with actual GPS data. Data types such as, number of satellites, continuous coverage,
DOP values, elevation angles, and visibility windows for specific satellites are examined to
confirm design values. Any potential trouble spots in the observing area should be identified
before making permanent station installations.
(8) Installation surveys. After permanent monitoring stations are selected (and
monumented), an initial GPS network survey must be made to complete the installation. This
procedure involves a site visit with all field equipment required to conduct the installation
survey. The initial survey of project baselines should be made to higher standards than those
designed for production monitoring. Additional GPS data will yield high accuracy initial
positions and supply a relatively large amount of data for a final system performance checkout.
8-12
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
The surveying methods used for the initial survey of the reference network are identical to those
used for production work. Data collected at each of the monitoring points on the structure may
have 25–50% longer sessions, or at least one hour of data (whichever is greater).
c. Reference network surveys. The reference network consists of stable monuments set near
the structure as a permanent reference frame for tracking movement of the structure. Surveys of
the reference network require the highest accuracy measurements on monitoring projects. The
precise relative position of each station in the reference network is needed to produce better
accuracy during production surveys. The following design specifications for reference network
surveys are recommended.
(1) Number of stations. A minimum of two reference stations must be occupied during the
entire data collection phase of the production surveys. Three or four stations may be required for
project sites where station placement is limited due to terrain, sky visibility, long baselines, or
need for higher reliability. At least one (preferably two) continuously occupied control points on
the structure (tied into the reference network surveys) allows for shorter baselines to be observed
to the remaining monitoring points.
(2) Session length. At least 3–4 hours continuous occupation time at each reference station is
required. More than 4 hours will improve the reliability of the positioning. Reference station
surveys are conducted at the same time as production surveys. Data editing for reference surveys
is less critical than for production surveys because there is usually a larger percentage of high
accuracy data. A reasonably clean data set should be obtained for the reference network but this
is not usually a problem because observations are made over much longer sessions.
(3) Visibility. Wide-open areas with sky visibility in the south direction are preferred. Large
objects (buildings, walls, fence lines) in the vicinity of the station should not extend above the
antenna ground plane if possible. Areas free of any obstructions that produce signal reflections
(e.g., buildings, water bodies, and metal structures) are most favorable
(4) Structure reference points. It is recommended that at least one control point station be
placed on the structure itself. With this structure (reference) point scheme, there will always be a
high-order station at a short distance to the monitoring points. The structure station is tied into
the surrounding permanent reference network using long observation GPS baseline data. The
longer observing session provides better positioning accuracy and better ambiguity resolution to
the monitoring points.
(5) Station occupation. Reference stations should be constructed and maintained per
guidance presented in previous chapters. Antennas should be force-centered to within 1 mm
tolerance. Antenna heights should be no less than 1.5 meters from the ground. Obstructions in
the immediate area should be no closer than 1 m to the antenna. Geodetic antennas capable of
receiving multiple frequencies with ground plane are required. Choke ring antennas can be used
to improve multipath suppression.
8-13
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(6) Project datum selection. National Spatial Reference System (NSRS) coordinates are
recommended for USACE monitoring projects. Coordinates in other datums (such as WGS84
system) can be derived from these NSRS values. Observing ties to NGS or other local high-
order control networks can be used to establish initial NSRS coordinates on monitoring reference
networks.
d. Production surveys. GPS production surveys share many practices with conventional
surveying. For example, setting station monuments, occupying these stations, data processing
and reductions, and archiving results. Advantages over conventional surveys include less
reliance on station intervisibility, automatic data collection, semi-automatic data processing,
electronic data transfer and storage, and flexibility in deployment. GPS techniques presented in
this section attempt to match the work flow and field procedures familiar in conventional surveys
as closely as possible. Processing production survey data includes both kinematic and static
mode solutions. Kinematic mode allows the user to examine and edit positioning data within a
series of discrete position solutions. Static processing provides adjustment residuals and robust
session statistics. Results of both types of processing could be compared during the evaluation
of the survey.
(1) Kinematic surveys. Kinematic positions are processed sequentially from the raw data to
obtain an output at every measurement epoch, provided the integer ambiguity for each satellite is
resolved. Kinematic processing involves downloading data from each receiver as would be done
for a static session file and then either converting to RINEX or retaining as a binary file.
Selecting the kinematic processing option will force a solution in kinematic mode. All other
processing options are set as if it were a static session. One reference station is held fixed with
its high accuracy coordinates. Next, process the carrier phase data for each two-station baseline
and extract the time series positions for the monitored point as an American Standard Code for
Information Interchange (ASCII) file. Export the data in columns to a spreadsheet or similar
software package. Various statistics can be computed such as a mean value for each coordinate
component (X, Y, and Z), point differences from the mean, and plotting the position deviation
time series. Clean data is separated by selecting time epochs associated with the best data
quality statistics and then reported or re-processed. An average of the highest quality kinematic
positions is made to obtain the final position for the monitored point with respect to the reference
station.
(2) Static session processing. Data collected in static survey mode is processed as a block to
produce an average position over a given time span. This has the advantage of providing a high
degree of redundancy over the entire GPS observing session. Interpretation of statistical outputs
is simplified when using a static session mode; however, biases can more easily corrupt the
processing session as a whole. Static surveys work best at stations where GPS data has been
confirmed to be of high quality such as where the observing conditions are historically very
favorable.
8-14
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
e. Specialized surveys. GPS can be used for continuous deformation monitoring as a

permanent installation, during temporary repair work, or where human occupations are
potentially hazardous.
(1) Continuous monitoring systems. GPS can produce real-time continuous positioning for
monitoring applications. Generally, continuous GPS monitoring is used for plate motion and
tectonic studies that cover wide regional areas. For example, there is the seismic monitoring
array in the western U.S., and the extensive global GPS tracking networks established by the
International GPS Service for Geodynamics (IGS). Localized GPS networks have also been
developed that track movements on structures in a continuous operating mode. These systems
are configured for either static or real-time survey operations with a GPS receiver, antenna, data
communications system (e.g., radio-link, fiber-optic line), and a power supply. Off-site GPS
base stations are used to survey and process outputs from multiple GPS units mounted on the
structure. Batteries are used as either a primary or backup power supply. With adequate power
and receiver system protection, these units are designed to operate continuously for extended
periods of time. Problem situations and data corruptions can arise in continuous operation, for
example, occasional abnormal GPS satellite status, extreme weather, equipment failure,
accidents, bird nesting on antennas, and power interruptions. Software required to process
continuous GPS data will usually have to be specially developed to suit the proposed equipment,
data types, and desired outputs. One of the advantages of continuous monitoring systems is their
ability to collect data over very long sessions that can be processed and archived as daily session
files. Millimeter accuracies are typical for daily GPS sessions collected over relatively short
baselines. Another advantage to continuous GPS monitoring is the ability to customize outputs,
such as for high accuracy, increased sensitivity to movement in a particular direction, or to warn
the user if movement exceeds a safety threshold.
(2) Hazardous conditions. Conventional GPS surveys can be used in situations where the
structure is undergoing repairs. In hazardous conditions, GPS can be set up to log continuously
in kinematic solution mode to provide near-instantaneous movement data to site personnel.
Usually these surveys are a temporary collection of movement data. A typical configuration is
with a GPS rover and a base station providing continuous real-time position output. Each system
is equipped with communications to enable monitoring at a safe distance while providing the
same outputs as conventional GPS monitoring.
8-8. GPS Survey Reporting and Results.
a. General. This section describes survey reporting, data organization, and permanent
storage of GPS data and results.
b. Survey reporting. GPS monitoring surveys produce large amounts of data and processing
outputs. Some of this information is critical to examine and save, other parts are not valuable or
are not required for the overall long-term objectives of the survey. Important types of
information include the final position outputs from the least squares network adjustment. This
8-15
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
includes a numerical summary in the form of tables for the previous and current surveys.
Graphs, charts, and diagrams that document the performance of the survey at each monitoring
station are useful as supporting data. For example, condensed tables of processing results,
statistics, kinematic positioning plots, displacement trends, and reference network survey reports
each as a separate appendix. Statistics should provide survey point positioning error reports for
each station at the 95% confidence level. Plots of station error ellipses in their respective
locations (site plan) help visualize the final survey quality. Sessions that undergo any specific
data editing or have specific data quality problems can be placed in a separate appendix.
Reporting formats should follow practices established for conventional monitoring surveys.
c. GPS data storage. Monitoring survey data and results should be archived for future
reference and possible use. Raw data files, processing outputs, and final results should be
maintained in electronic form. Raw data should be converted to RINEX and stored along with
ephemeris data. Generally, information will be stored in sub-directories per the project name,
survey campaign, and by date it was collected or processed. Most GPS processing software
provides an option to archive the entire survey in a single compressed file. Precautions should
be taken against the processing software (version) eventually going out of date where archived
project files cannot be retrieved. Enough information should be saved to reconstruct the final
results from each survey using a non-proprietary data archiving system. Custom processing
outputs, such as edited output files, plots, and the final report should also be archived in a
separate computer file and directory. An index to the project survey files is critical and should
be placed in a 'readme' file that is easily accessible. For example, have all survey data in a
separate directory, including raw data, ephemeris data, and any edited data files (annotated in the
comment section to describe file edits). Separate directories are reserved for storing the
following: Processed outputs such as the software-specific project archive, session log files
containing error reports, and data quality indicators; The project network adjustment and its
associated results and outputs; and the baseline processing solution files covering static mode
sessions and any spreadsheets used to examine kinematic station position solutions.
8-16
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Section II
GPS Performance on Monitoring Networks
8-9. GPS Receiver System Performance.
a. General. The RMS error of GPS receiver Phase Lock Loop (PLL) carrier phase tracking
can be characterized by the phase measurement precision, and by systematic errors that distort
the clean GPS signal waveform during its transmission, propagation, and reception. Thermal
noise and oscillator deviations are principle sources of random noise in GPS receiver units.
Systematic error is mainly caused by physical correlation between the GPS signal and its path
environment. The adequacy of GPS surveying can be established in part by these internal and
external errors. GPS performance is a major factor in determining whether surveying systems
requirements have been met. Following is a description of performance and operational
limitations that must be accounted for in the design and execution of GPS monitoring surveys.
b. Receiving system noise. Superior phase tracking performance is obtained if the formal
(random) error in the phase measurement, and in the Voltage Controlled Oscillator (VCO) clock
stability, are limited to a sequence of low noise, zero-mean error states. Under healthy observing
conditions, the random error in carrier phase tracking can be modeled directly from the values
for received signal carrier-to-noise power density ratio (c/no), and PLL filter noise bandwidth
(B). These parameters determine an effective tracking channel noise figure in each receiver.
Major random error sources in GPS signal tracking are: receiver system thermal (Gaussian) noise
(which is dependent on received signal frequency), and short-term phase tracking jitter induced
by random deviations in PLL stability and feedback control inputs associated with receiver clock
performance (Allan variance of local oscillator). For most GPS static surveying applications, a
base resolution of 1/100 part of the wavelength is used as a practical limit for best-case tracking
performance. By combining minimum detectable carrier-to-noise (C/N) deviations with a lower-
end PLL noise bandwidth (2 MHz typical), at nominal L1/L2 wavelengths, and accounting for
clock stability performance in modern receivers, a maximum of 2-3 mm of phase uncertainty is
expected for GPS phase measurements.
(1) Thermal noise. The equation for approximating the error on the carrier phase (L1 or L2)
due to thermal noise is:
 PLL = (  / 2 ) ( sqrt [ B / (c/n 0) ] ) (m) (Eq 8-1)
where
B is the carrier tracking loop bandwidth (Hz),
 is the wavelength of the carrier (m),
c/n 0 is the carrier-to-noise density expressed as a ratio,
and
8-17
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
c/n 0 = 10 (C/No)/10 for C/N 0 expressed in dB-Hz.
This equation gives a nominal value for the L1 noise of 0.2 mm for a 2 Hz noise bandwidth and a
C/N0 value of 45 dB-Hz. There is an inherent tradeoff between phase measurement resolution
and dynamic tracking range in the general design of PLL filters. Better performance on
monitoring projects will be obtained from narrow bandwidth correlators. This is because the
ground antenna is stationary for the duration of the observing session and satellite-receiver
dynamics are always well below PLL tracking thresholds. Higher phase resolution at lower PLL
bandwidth is practically limited by received noise power and tolerance to sluggish loop response
times.
(2) Clock stability. The equation for approximating RMS phase jitter in the tracking loop has
been given by:
 2 = (  / 2 ) P ( A) f L / B · (m) (Eq 8-2)
where
P is an empirical constant based on the PLL loop-order,
f L is the frequency of the carrier (Hz), and
 A is the Allan deviation expressed as a function of short-term gate time ().
Allan deviation is determined for a given PLL filter per the expected receiver clock frequency
stability ( f/f ) as a function of the loop filter bandwidth:
 A = (  / 2 ) -1 ( ) / (  L  ) (Eq 8-3)
where
 = B-1 (sec), and

L = 2  f L (rad/sec).
This equation gives a nominal value for the L1 noise of 0.7 mm for an 18 Hz noise bandwidth
and specified Allan deviation (A) of less than 1 ·10 -10 (dimensionless). The performance of the
VCO also contributes to the phase measurement resolution through the random clock drift
tolerance term (Allan variance) that impacts the synchronized reference time epoch value
reported by the VCO. Actual phase measurements consist of a time-smoothed PLL output that is
dependent on the clock stability and PLL correlator bandwidth.
(3) Received signal noise. Signals arriving from GPS satellites are received as continuous,
quasi-periodic waves, composed of code and data modulated carrier signals plus Doppler
frequency shift. Antenna excitation and response is caused by local electric field variations at
the antenna phase center. Pure carrier signals (e.g., sine waves) have a line spectrum of discrete
8-18
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
frequencies (harmonics), described mathematically by Fourier series analysis of the antenna-

input data. The near-field electric field at the antenna also contains signal distortion effects and
noise from: local sources of RF interference; coupled electromagnetic interactions (imaging)
between the antenna/ground plane, local electric field, and nearby conductors; diffraction signal
scattering at the edges of the ground plane; signal reception through side lobes (antenna
illumination below ground plane); and signal multipath. The presence of external
electromagnetic noise and environmental field effects lowers the spectral purity of transmitted
GPS L1/L2 signals. Unwanted noise power components are characterized as random signals,
described statistically by signal power spectral density, and noise field strength parameters of the
antenna. L2 signals are generally noisier than L1 signals, and this noise generally reduces the
precision of carrier phase measurements. Measurement noise is also modeled as random error
produced by physical correlation in the generation, propagation, and reception of GPS signals.
c. Correlation in GPS data. Correlation describes the extent to which measurement errors
will be similar as a result of common external observing conditions and as a result of math
modeling applied to the data. High data correlation reduces the statistical independence between
measurement errors and lowers the significance of random error parameters (mean and variance).
This highlights the importance of using error treatments in post processing that do not neglect
data correlation. Both spatial and time correlation can influence GPS performance.
(1) Physical correlation in GPS data. GPS signal behavior is understood to be highly
correlated when common-mode conditions occur due to geometry, environment, and system
specifications used to mechanize GPS operations. Important sources of physical correlation in
GPS data are: geometry of the satellite constellation, ephemeris (orbit) errors, frequency
dependent atmospheric propagation delays, satellite and receiver clock synchronization, receiver
system throughput latency, spectral receiving system noise, and multipath interference. Spatial
correlation in GPS data can be largely related to baseline length and common mode GPS system
status. Biases are minimized by differencing data and by allowing satellites-in-view to change
position (over time) which yields a range of DOP states throughout the survey. Changing
satellite geometry tends to randomize small residual biases that occur over short baselines.
Correlation times in GPS data are based on both the session length and the data sample rate
needed to span a large percentage of independent (uncorrelated) observations. If the session is
averaged for longer than the total period of the correlated error signal, then short-term
measurement deviations will be evenly distributed about an unbiased mean value. Data sample
rates lower than the data correlation time produce unrealistically low errors.
(2) Mathematical correlation in GPS data. Double difference combinations made during
baseline processing will create mathematical correlation in the processed output—especially as a
tendency to magnify initial measurement errors per statistical error propagation laws ending up
in the covariance matrix of parameters. As a result, error estimates (baseline component
standard deviations) are generally overly optimistic. Other sources of math correlation are
determined by the specific processing scheme implemented in the GPS software. The most
common sources are due to: data differencing (single, double, triple), least squares filtering, dual
8-19
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
frequency L1/L2 atmospheric delay correction, L1/L2 cross-correlation used to recover L2
carrier data under A/S, dual frequency ambiguity resolution techniques (widelane, narrowlane),
choice of reference satellite, specific SV double difference combinations, and the elimination of
nuisance parameters in the normal equations matrix. The manner in which math correlation is
handled is largely dependent on level of rigor used for statistical error treatment in the software
and the proper formulation of error estimates in the covariance matrix of parameters.
d. External data correlation. Studies of the effects of physical correlation on accuracy

estimates in GPS relative positioning have shown that double difference residuals are subjected
to empirical modeling based on various forms of the autocovariance function. The study method
was designed to isolate a distinct error estimate for both mathematical and physical correlation in
GPS double difference residuals. Significant trends in the residuals were modeled to describe
baseline error as a consequence of neglecting physical data correlation. Results over medium
length baselines indicate that standard deviations of coordinate components are typically
reported at much lower than actual values (perhaps by a factor of two). Other relevant findings
include a determination of error correlation times for L1 and L2 GPS double differences
persisting over 4–5 minutes of data. This could be interpreted as the minimum observing time
period needed to produce independent measurement error values where physical correlation is
not explicitly accounted for in the processor's weighting scheme. A corresponding 20% increase
in the standard deviation of each coordinate component is indicated. Other empirical results deal
with fixed and float ambiguity variance ratio estimates that are compared against the
convergence times between math and physical correlation trials. Convergence to typical error
levels reported by the software (variance ratio of 7.0) required about 10 minutes to occur.
Finally, GPS double difference observations can be positively correlated for a period of up to 20
minutes on shorter test baselines. These results are an important indicator of expected
performance on monitoring networks for two reasons. First, baselines are expected to be shorter
than used in the above trials (1–2 km), therefore, the reported impacts of correlation could be
used as an upper limit for tolerance to physical correlation in deformation studies. Second,
guidance presented in Section I is mainly compatible with these independently established GPS
observing tolerance limits.
8-10. GPS Performance on Monitoring Networks.
a. General. Results of accuracy performance and operational adequacy of GPS surveying for
monitoring applications are presented in this section. Data collected under controlled conditions
and at USACE monitoring projects are described. Simulated deformations are used to test GPS
capability to detect movement over short baselines. Comparisons are made against conventional
surveying performance and requirements outlined in Section I of this chapter.
b. GPS performance Trials. Factors used to evaluate GPS performance include: user-set
parameter values for data collection and processing; observing session length; and satellite
constellation status—to determine expected repeatability, accuracy, and/or problems with GPS
use on monitoring projects. Results are empirically based on field tests and GPS data analysis.
8-20
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(1) Coordinate repeatability. Figure 8-1 shows coordinate repeatability obtained from 42
GPS data sets collected in short-session time blocks (15 minutes, 20 degree mask angle) with
fixed values for integer ambiguities. Discrepancies in the height component vary the most, with
the largest variations being correlated to epochs with low numbers of observations. Two-sigma
(95%) repeatability is approximately 6 mm for the height component and a peak height
discrepancy of almost 10 mm. Horizontal coordinate components have generally better
repeatability than vertical components. The level of repeatability and bias are due to systematic
error effects not averaged out over the short time spans and likely caused by multipath. Baseline
component formal errors with the height residuals, determined from the trace of the inverted
normal equation matrix, are representative of the DOP for the satellite constellation over the
solution epochs. Periods of high height residuals correspond to times where no satellites are
below approximately 30 degrees. Therefore, for short observation periods, some pre-observing
planning can minimize the potential DOP values.
Figure 8-1. GPS coordinate component repeatability from 15-minute sessions over short
baselines.
(2) Solution convergence. Solution convergence to millimeter level accuracy defines the
session length requirement for establishing project fixed control in surveys conducted on
reference networks. Reference stations normally would be occupied for many hours during
production surveys. Figure 8-2 shows convergence times for simulated reference network
baselines. Convergence to the millimeter level takes place within several (3–5) hours in low
multipath environments. Horizontal coordinate components converge very quickly (less than
one hour) leaving the height component more variable. In high multipath environments,
convergence can take up to ten or twelve hours. Not only does the convergence take longer, but
there is a greater variation of the position components over the whole position time series. These
8-21
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
results are particularly important for selecting the location of reference stations where high
accuracy control is required, and that the role of multipath is crucial when attempting to use GPS
for positioning tolerances at the millimeter level.
Figure 8-2. Accuracy convergence time plotted as log session length needed to exceed
average baseline position error.
(3) Multipath errors. The plots presented below illustrate some of the signs of multipath in
GPS carrier phase data. Figure 8-3 shows an example of high levels of multipath on one satellite
pair. Figure 8-4 shows three traces from two satellite pairs to see the reduction in multipath as
the mask angle increases. These plots show that considerable multipath can still remain when
the mask angle is set up to 20 degrees.
Figure 8-3. Typical GPS multipath curves found in L1 (left) and L2 (right) signal strength
profiles. Lower series represents high multipath error, upper series represents normal signal
strength profile.
8-22
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure 8-4. Multipath error profile plotted against processing mask angle; satellite elevation top
to bottom, (a) 10 degrees, RMS 6.3 mm (b) 20 degrees, RMS 4.4 mm (c) 30 degrees,
RMS 2.9 mm.
(4) Ambiguity resolution. For a large number of blocks of 15-minute data, fixed integer
ambiguity solutions can have at least one satellite incorrectly fixed in 7% of the blocks. Re
processing with different mask angles may not improve the results. These results can be
considered typical for GPS monitoring applications. Constraining the a-priori station coordinates
to one centimeter so that all of the ambiguities in all the blocks are correctly resolved makes an
improvement.
(5) Satellite ephemeris. Evaluation of monitoring data sets indicates that for static mode
sessions either the broadcast or precise ephemeris can be used without causing significant
changes in the solutions.
(6) Antenna mask angle. Changing the satellite elevation mask angle will produce slightly
different processed coordinates. Discrepancies between solutions for 20 and 30 degree mask
angle are generally less than 1 mm except for the height components thus producing a large
difference in the coordinates. High mask angles (>20-30 degree) tend to eliminate too much raw
data, depending on the number of satellites-in-view. Using lower elevation satellite data will
improve the overall satellite geometry but the data is usually of poor quality. As is the
convention with lower order GPS surveys, a 15-20 degree mask angle is recommended,
especially where additional height control is available on-site. In practice, data quality indicators
can be used to find an optimal mask angle for baseline processing.
(7) Session length. Height coordinates deviations over small networks are at the sub-
centimeter level--sometimes even at stations with high multipath. As long as the integer
ambiguities can be reliably resolved, then short observation sessions of fifteen (15) minutes
should be able to achieve results within 6 mm 95 percent of the time. Simulated displacement
tests show convergence to less than 1 mm in the coordinate components after approximately 15
8-23
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
minutes with one-second data. Small displacements (millimeters) can be detected using two
reference stations, having highly accurate relative positions determined from long observation
sessions, and high quality carrier phase data (low systematic error). Figure 8-5 shows
convergence in northing, easting, and height components every two minutes over a 15-minute
session representing optimal performance for GPS deformation surveys in open areas. Slightly
longer sessions (20-30 minutes) provide additional data redundancy and lower multipath effects.
Very short baselines (10 m) measured directly across the upstream and downstream edges of a
dam crest have compared to about 1 mm with precise leveling data.
5
Discrepancy (mm)
0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15
Session Length (minutes)
Figure 8-5. Convergence of coordinate component discrepancies to the true position with a
simulated displacement of 2.5 mm. For each session, the components are plotted north, east,
and height respectively.
c. GPS monitoring trials. GPS surveys can accurately reproduce positioning with
conventional instruments with 2-3 mm point positioning error at 95 percent confidence level.
Figure 8-6 shows a typical comparison between GPS and conventional surveys with average
discrepancy of 1-3 mm and up to 5 mm can occur under slightly adverse conditions. Typical
baseline component standard deviations are optimistically reported at less than 1 mm, data
adjustment variance factors range from 1.2 to 4.3 (based on software) also optimistic due to a
one second data logging rate. Error estimates in the covariance matrix of parameters are scaled
up by the variance factor value to produce realistic error reporting. Horizontal point confidence
ellipse dimensions range from 0.1 to 0.5 mm, also optimistic by perhaps a factor of ten based on
repeated surveys on monitoring networks. Baseline solutions should have fixed integer
ambiguities, float solution are generally unacceptable. A-posteriori variance ratios (RMS)
between fixed and float solutions are found to range between 10 to 30, with an average of 20,
indicating reasonably high confidence in the fixed integer solution. A minimum value of seven
(7) should be produced or problems with ambiguity resolution might be suspected. Sometimes
GPS data is unusable or will not process due to poor observing conditions
8-24
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure 8-6. Network map of 10 monitoring points compared between GPS and precise
conventional surveying results. Error ellipses are plotted at ten times actual size. Overall
differences are less than 2-3 mm in all cases.
8-25
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Section III
Data Quality Assessment for GPS Monitoring Surveys
8-11. Post-Processing Statistics.
a. General. Statistics are used to assess processing output and position solution quality,
especially with respect to random errors, measurement residuals, and the overall solution fit to
the data. Some of the most critical parameters to check after each post-processing session are
described below.
b. Double difference (DD) residuals. Both L1 and L2 phase measurements will produce DD
residuals from the baseline processing adjustment. The following statistics and descriptors for
each series of DD residuals are checked to reveal possible low quality data.
(1) Shape of residuals. Measurement errors that contain only random error will be
distributed per the normal probability density function (PDF). Histograms of GPS DD residuals
compared with an assumed normal PDF will indicate skewness or systematic error in the data.
DD residual time-series profiles vary between satellite pairs and each pair should be visually
examined for large deviations from the mean or any kind of regular patterns in the residual
values that might reveal systematic error. Clean data will have a zero-mean (horizontal line)
profile containing high frequency random noise (Figure 8-7). An obvious systematic error in a
DD residual plot does not mean data quality for that satellite pair is bad. An error trend in one
residual series can sometimes show up belonging to the other satellites in view because the
solution itself has been biased to an incorrect value as a result of math correlations. A possible
reason for this is the GPS software assigning a greater weight to biased data, and because of
incorrect assumptions made in its pre-set internal data weighting criteria. Signal quality and
session status criteria, independent of math correlations, are recommended for guiding
interpretations about the shape of DD residuals. See also Figure 8-8.
Figure 8-7. An example of GPS (L1) double difference residuals taken from baseline
processing demonstrates a typical profile for relatively clean data.
8-26
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure 8-8. An example of double difference residual taken from GPS baseline processing
showing effects on L1 signal as satellite rises. Residuals become smaller with time and with
higher elevation angle.
(2) Mean value of residuals. Double difference residuals will not be exactly equal to zero
even with the highest quality data. Slight shifts in the mean value (less than 5 mm in normal
data) are evident in most processing results. If the mean values of several different DD residuals
are shifted in the same direction (plus or minus), then this may indicate a low frequency bias in
the data. This trend is seen when double differencing involves one reference satellite where its
associated biases are mathematically correlated with other SVs. A mean shift less than 3-5 mm
indicates good data (however this must be true on all satellites), a shift of 5-10 mm or more
usually indicates the presence of measurement bias.
(3) Standard deviation of residuals. The standard deviation (unbiased RMS) of the DD
residuals specifies the level of random error in the phase data. Signal noise components, time
variable correlations, session length, and GPS processing techniques determine the standard
deviation of the DD residuals. Each satellite pair can be ranked per its RMS value. A standard
deviation greater than 4 mm is a cutoff value for identifying poor data. Although standard
deviation itself is not sensitive to bias, a large standard deviation can indicate trouble with GPS
signal quality.
(4) L1/L2 residuals. Signal disturbance in the local antenna environment is identified by
inspection or cross-correlation of L1 and L2 DD residuals (Figure 8-9). Largely similar (L1/L2)
DD residual profiles indicate L2 is experiencing the same signal effects as L1. If two (L1/L2)
residual profiles are largely different, then the L1 and L2 signals are subject to separate external
influences. If the L1/L2 profiles are highly correlated, then the signals are behaving the same.
8-27
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure 8-9. Comparison between L1 (above), and L2 (below), double difference residuals
taken from GPS data corrupted by multipath.
(5) Reference satellite. Double differencing GPS data can be carried out under different
combinations of satellites. A common DD scheme is to select one high elevation satellite to be
the reference and then differencing its data from all others. Biases in the reference satellite data
will show up in the residual profiles of non-reference satellites because of mathematical
correlation. Most baseline processors do not give the user an option to select or change reference
satellites. If the processor will allow the user to select the DD scheme, then each satellite's data
can be differenced between "neighboring" satellites to lower DD math correlations.
c. Fixed and float solution. The RMS ratio between fixed and float solutions (variance ratio)
is an output statistic used to describe the amount of confidence held in the fixed solution. High
ratio values (greater than 7 and up to 40 or above) indicate the fixed solution ambiguity is far
better than the next best solution ambiguity. Values near one (1) indicate the need for closer
examination of the GPS data for quality problems. Only fixed solutions should be accepted for
GPS monitoring surveys. Float solution data should be edited, using data quality indicators as a
guide, until a fixed solution is obtained, or by increasing the number of allowed processing
iterations in the software. Correct estimates of ambiguity parameters are critical for high
accuracy positioning over short baselines, especially for kinematic solutions to prevent excessive
data dropouts.
8-28
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
d. Cycle slip counts. PLL filtering bandwidth limits signal tracking to a set frequency range.
Large transient shifts in input can exceed PLL tracking design. These events create difficulty
maintaining accurate signal phase lock. Signal disturbances falling within the PLL tracking
range can still cause cycle slips because the PLL only discriminates 2 phase shifts. If tracking
skips any number of whole cycles (0.5% of data or less is nominal), then it is possible for the
PLL to re-acquire phase lock at the new locus of phase well before the next measurement cycle
arrives. Any detected cycle slips indicate periods of rapid change in signal dynamics, which
implies lower phase tracking and measurement resolution.
e. Adjustment variance factor. Prescribed errors are directly influenced by the observation
residuals through the a-posteriori variance factor. This is a scalar quantity with an expected
value equal to one (1.0). The variance factor is used to scale random error as reported in the
parameter covariance matrix. Values more than one indicate an overly optimistic weighting
scheme was applied to the measurements. Values less than one indicate an overly pessimistic
observation weighting scheme. GPS observing sessions will typically have a variance factor
greater than one because physical and mathematical correlations have been ignored. Values
more than 3-5 indicate the need for closer examination of the GPS data for quality problems.
f. Adjustment covariance matrix. The covariance matrix of parameters is an upper triangular

(symmetric) matrix containing the precision values for X, Y, and Z baseline components.
The variance of each coordinate component is found along the matrix diagonal. The statistical
correlation (covariance) between coordinate components is defined by the off-diagonal elements.
Covariance matrix entries are used to determine and report absolute and relative positioning error
ellipses. GPS covariance matrix values should be less than 110-6 for baselines used on
monitoring networks. The covariance matrix that is output from baseline processing is used to
weight the baseline coordinate differences during network adjustment.
g. Error ellipses. A standard output from the baseline processing adjustment is the
confidence ellipse (or error ellipse). An error ellipse graphically (and geometrically) portrays the
region of positioning uncertainty associated with the adjusted coordinates at a given statistical
confidence level. Absolute or point error ellipses apply only to individual stations. Relative
error ellipses apply to the baselines between two stations. Both types are based on the entries in
the covariance matrix of parameters. The largest dimension of the error ellipse is called the
major semi-axis. Its length indicates the maximum expected position error at a selected
confidence level (usually 95%). The major semi-axis of the point ellipse is compared with the
positioning accuracy requirements established for the project. If the value is greater than the
allowed position error, then the survey does not meet the design specification. Generally, this
will not be the case because error levels reported by baseline processing are often much too
optimistic. GPS error ellipses can be oriented toward a particular direction (azimuth) indicating
greater uncertainty in those position components.
8-29
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
8-12. Closure and Station Checks.
a. Baseline misclosures. Loop misclosures are computed by comparing at least four inter
connected baselines. Point misclosures are computed from at least two reference stations and
one monitoring point on the structure. Closures that are statistically different from zero indicate
potential bias in the data. Misclosures are automatically smoothed to an average value for the
baseline component in the network adjustment. A test on the sample mean (i.e., position) is used
to assess bias in misclosures. Baselines with misclosures greater than 5 mm are candidates for
further quality checks. Any three baselines connected in a triangle will contain only one
misclosure value, but two different point misclosure schemes can be checked.
(1) Reference station ties. For production surveys, only short (15–30 minute) observing
sessions are made between any three points (two reference stations and the monitoring point on
the structure). Each reference station is fixed with coordinates from higher accuracy surveys
based on collecting many hours of data just between the two reference stations. The first type of
misclosure assessment uses only the baseline computed between the reference stations. A test on
the mean for position change is made using the long and short GPS sessions between the two
reference stations. Coordinate components from each session are differenced and tested against
an expected value of zero. A test on the variance is used to assess coordinate precision. A
design standard deviation of 1.44 mm can be used as the expected precision for each coordinate
component to ensure positioning is below 5 mm at 95%.
(2) Monitoring station ties. The second type of misclosure assessment compares the two
baselines from each reference station to the monitored point. A test on the mean is made on the
misclosure between each reference station baseline and the mean position of the monitoring
point computed using both baselines. This second test will indicate the combined position
change at the monitored point derived from both reference stations. Fixing the average adjusted
position of the monitored point allows for inspection of short session data propagated back to
each reference station. The position change at each reference station can then be examined. If
there are problems with only one particular reference station (during the short session), then the
raw data should be examined further and either cleaned or the station de-weighted before
processing the final network adjustment.
b. Code positions. Processing code positions at each station can be done separately to
investigate the statistics of the code data. Although code positioning results will not be used to
monitor the structure, data quality for each station and each satellite can be checked. Code
measurement time delays are especially well-related to signal quality. In the TEQC software, an
code multipath (MP) parameter is extracted from code solutions to indicate the relative amount
of multipath on each satellite code range.
c. Kinematic position solution. Static GPS data can be forced to process as a kinematic time
series of positions. Kinematic positions are in some ways more easily inspected and reviewed
for quality than the static session. One test used to identify poor quality kinematic data is to
8-30
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
compute an expected phase error based on the RMS of the signal strength data coming from each
satellite. The expected phase error is determined at each measurement epoch and then ranked in
increasing order. This process is repeated for each satellite-receiver combination, so that the
signal strength RMS is again ranked in increasing order between satellites. If there are time
periods of more than several minutes at each receiver where the RMS is consistently below two
(2) for at least five (5) satellites, then these will generally represent higher quality data blocks.
RINEX file editing with user-developed software can extract and process the signal strength
data. Re-processed results should be checked against the unedited kinematic solution time
series. Only slight improvements should be observed in position output for high quality data.
d. Multipath detection. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) profiles and DD residuals can be

inspected for the presence of multipath by comparing their deviation profiles. To recover these
profiles, L1/L2 SNR values can be extracted from RINEX files, and DD residuals for each
satellite pair are output from the processing adjustment. A multipath signature is verified by
comparing the shape (deviations) of the SNR profile to each double difference residual series at
corresponding time epochs for both L1 and L2 frequencies. They will show similar trends and
relative amounts of deviation if systematic error is present. This is true with multipath because it
affects both L1/L2 signal frequencies in a similar manner.
8-31
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Section IV
Mitigation of Multipath Signals
8-13. Description of Multipath Signals.
a. General. GPS signal interference is a major source of systematic error in GPS monitoring
surveys. Multipath signals are a predominant cause of interference in GPS carrier phase
measurements over short baselines. This section describes the characteristics of multipath
signals as a source of error in precise baseline determination.
b. Properties of multipath signals. Multipath signals are an unavoidable operational trait of

the GPS system in obstructed environments and will occur repeatedly under the right conditions.
(1) Data correlation over sidereal day. The GPS satellite constellation occupies the same
position in orbit with respect to the earth once every sidereal day. A GPS sidereal day differs
from a standard solar day by approximately four minutes less each day (i.e., about 23 hours, 56
minutes). If the local antenna environment is unchanged and the antenna remains stationary,
then multipath reception will be repeated over two consecutive sidereal days. In practice, this
behavior is not perfectly repeatable due to variable signal reception, noise power levels, orbit or
atmospheric changes, and it assumes similar equipment, data collection, and processing
procedures. Inspection of double difference residuals over consecutive days can verify the
presence of multipath (Figure 8-10). Auto-correlation of the double difference residuals for
satellite pairs observed over consecutive days can estimate the time shift more precisely than
inspection.
Figure 8-10. GPS (L1) double difference residuals from sessions separated by exactly one
sidereal day showing correlation of multipath errors.
8-32
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(2) Reflector distance dependence. Large phase errors can occur with small changes in
antenna-reflector distance. At L1/L2 wavelengths, a change in distance of only 5 cm can
produce a maximum phase error of 90 degrees (i.e., 1/4 of L1 wavelength). As GPS satellites
move in orbit with respect to the receiver, signals may strike different reflectors and travel along
different paths to the antenna. A time-varying multipath signal is then expected to occur based
on path difference between direct and reflected signals. A simple geometric model describes this
interference at the antenna site.
 / d sin () = 2  /  (Eq 8-4)
Phase difference () depends on path length difference between direct and reflected signal paths,
and a path length difference of one (L1 or L2) wavelength () corresponds to a phase difference
over one complete wave cycle (2). Dependence of phase on reflector distance from this ratio is:
 = (2/) d sin() (Eq 8-5)
where
 = phase difference
 = wavelength
d = antenna-reflector distance
 = angle of incidence
characterizes the geometric relationship of phase and reflector distance for multipath signals.
(3) Dependence on signal frequency. The duration of multipath in GPS data will vary with
signal frequency. Figure 8-11 shows a characteristic profile for the time period of L1/L2
multipath signals. Long-period multipath is a major difficulty in GPS data because its resulting
bias is absorbed into the baseline solution as a position offset. Since multipath is not expected to
be correlated between different satellites, detection of low frequency bias can be attempted by
inspection of raw GPS data. Figure 8-11 shows that reflectors close to the antenna will most
adversely affect GPS signals.
(4) Session length dependence. Multipath can persist from a few minutes to several hours
based on distance to the reflector. Sampling at least one complete interference wavelength
eliminates long period multipath by averaging its effects by additive and subtractive phase
cancellations. Session lengths less than 30 minutes would have to have a minimum antenna
separation of 1.5 m from surrounding reflectors (see Figure 8-11).
(5) Signal strength variations. A basic characteristic of electromagnetic waves is that energy
is propagated in a direction perpendicular to the surface of uniform phase. Changes in signal
phase are coupled to changes in signal strength through the interference phenomena produced by
multipath. Inspection of observation double difference residuals show an empirical correlation
8-33
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
to associated signal strength values. Both types of data have a quasi-cyclic patterned profile in
receiver-to-satellite data contaminated by multipath. In the context of code phase DGPS
applications, a simple relationship exists between phase variance and SNR. An empirical SNR
value calculated from phase variance could be used as a measure of expected signal strength
deviation in GPS data. SNR observables from GPS receivers can be obtained from RINEX
observation files.
Figure 8-11. Plot of theoretical multipath period against reflector distance for L1 and L2 GPS
signals. GPS L1 frequency is modeled in the lower curve.
(6) Satellite elevation angle dependence. Multipath has a greater chance of occurring and
surviving to reach the antenna from low elevation satellites. This is because multipath signals
are less likely to experience multiple bounces, and because antennas do not receive signals
equally well in all directions. Low elevation direct signals have lower receive power levels due
to antenna gain pattern (lower gain near horizon). Multipath then has relatively higher signal
power compared to low elevation direct signal power. Partial multipath rejection can be built
into the antenna by shaping the antenna gain pattern (choke ring antenna) or increasing the mask
angle.
8-14. Data Cleaning Techniques for GPS Monitoring Surveys.
a. General. Several different strategies are available for suppressing multipath effects in
GPS data. These can be broadly categorized by hardware, environment, and data processing.
b. Modification of antenna environment. Some of the most effective methods for reducing
multipath involve blocking the reflected signal before it is sensed by the antenna.
8-34
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(1) Source modeling. A proposed multipath reduction strategy is to exploit the dependence
of multipath on site geometry and to calibrate its effects using detailed maps of reflections in the
antenna environment. Creating a topographic site model that accurately predicts multipath signal
propagation would be difficult if the nature of local reflectors is highly variable, giving rise to
numerous complicated signal interactions. If there are only simple sources of reflection at each
station, then the modeling process would need to be repeated for many different station
occupations.
(2) Choke ring antennas. Specially designed choke ring antennas are manufactured to
enhance attenuation of surface waves traveling along the surface of the antenna. Choke ring
antennas have a series of precisely sized concentric metal collars mounted on top of the ground
plane that serve to attenuate surface waves on the ground plane caused by ground reflections
under the antenna. Choke ring antenna are not generally useful for stopping reflections coming
from above the antenna, such as from vertical walls, rooftops, etc.
(3) Antenna placement. A universal technique for reducing multipath is to place the antenna
in a low signal reflection environment. This is probably the most important requirement for
reducing effects of multipath in GPS carrier phase data. Even smaller objects and trees near the
station (up to several to tens of meters) can produce significant multipath interference. Site
reconnaissance is essential for selecting premium locations for GPS stations.
c. Robust GPS observing strategies. Optimizing the session observing conditions and
enhancing the likelihood of collecting large amounts of uncorrupted GPS data can reduce
multipath effects.
(1) Session length. GPS performance over specified session lengths is described in Section
II. Increased session length tends to randomize the periodic signature of multipath bias. If the
GPS session length is greater than the total period of the error signal, then the phase deviations
will have a more uniform distribution about the mean. A one-second sampling rate should be
used mainly for the purpose of data inspection and quality control. Actual processing of longer
station occupations with 5–10 second data rates usually provides the same mean baseline
solution.
(2) Data redundancy. Redundant measurements provide checks on the GPS data and
increases overall reliability of the survey. Several different applications of redundancy can be
applied on GPS monitoring surveys.
(a) Multiple reference stations. Measurements from multiple reference stations can be used
to improve positioning accuracy. More accurate positioning is obtained by collecting data at
each monitoring station with more than one baseline tie. Redundant observations by multiple,
interconnected, survey configurations create sub-networks that robustly tie each monitoring point
to the reference network.
8-35
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(b) Multiple station occupations. Multiple sessions and occupations can be used to improve
positioning accuracy. GPS data logged under different observing conditions causes systematic
errors to tend to cancel when repeated baseline solutions are averaged. Surveys with extremely
short observation windows (1–5 minutes) should be re-occupied several times (separated by at
least one hour).
(3) Continuous monitoring. Monitoring sessions that span multiple days can use data
stacking techniques. Double difference residuals associated with repeated daily measurements
(for example over one week) are added together to recover a correlated multipath signature.
Cross-correlation will magnify systematic error that can be isolated from random error in the
residuals.
d. Kinematic solution processing. Kinematic data processing schemes are well-suited for
selective data editing because position outputs are reported at each logging epoch (e.g., one
second). The objective in kinematic solution post-processing is to select the highest quality data
for re-processing. Averaging only clean GPS data and eliminating poor quality data improves
final position accuracy. Data quality indicators can be used to identify periods of corrupted or
less reliable data. The relative data quality for every epoch in the position output series is ranked
and then combined into continuous blocks that represent the best data. Common GPS data
quality indicators are presented in Section III. This process can be defeated in cases where
undetected systematic errors have been absorbed into the baseline solution. It is important to use
data quality indicators that provide independent information about potential systematic error.
Signal strength values and session status parameters are likely to be better sources for position
weighting models than residuals. A data quality hierarchy should be used to clean and reprocess
kinematic data. For example, eliminate satellites that have discontinuous phase tracking, then
low elevation satellites, and then data with low signal strength or erratic deviations in signal
strength. In practice, signal strengths below about 20 dB (out of a range of 30–40 dB) start to be
unreliable. These editing schemes are analogous to weighting schemes that can be applied
directly to the phase data.
8-36
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
CHAPTER 9
Preanalysis and Network Adjustment
9-1. General. This chapter discusses preanalysis and network adjustment techniques for
processing deformation surveying observations. A basic problem in surveying is to determine
coordinates for a network of points using various types of measurements that establish a known
geometrical relationship between them. Points with unknown spatial coordinates are connected
into the network by the measurements. Surveying observation equations provide a mathematical
model that organizes the measurements into a consistent form where methods for finding a
unique solution for the unknown coordinates are possible. Instrumentation surveys should
always be designed to gather more data than is absolutely necessary to determine station
coordinates because this improves the reliability of the results. With extra measurements,
unavoidable random errors create discrepancies depending on which set of measurements is
used, and there is no unique solution for the coordinates. When this is the case, network
adjustment techniques are used to estimate the most accurate set of possible coordinates by the
least squares principle of minimizing errors in the measurements. Network adjustment permits
all of the available survey measurements to be processed together to determine a weighted mean
value for the coordinates. Coordinate accuracy is determined by the application of error
propagation to the observation equations. A pre-determined uncertainty (standard deviation) is
assigned each measurement, which then propagates to the coordinates during the adjustment.
The probable error in the coordinates is reported by the point confidence ellipse for each point or
by the relative confidence ellipse between two points. It is essential to determine the positioning
accuracy, and without adequate knowledge of the probable error in coordinates, the survey
should be considered incomplete.
9-2. Least Squares Adjustment.
a. General. The Least Squares principle is widely applied to the adjustment of surveying
measurements because it defines a consistent set of mathematical and statistical procedures for
finding unknown coordinates using redundant observations. If the number of available
measurements exceeds the minimum number required for a unique solution, then an adjustment
is used to optimally fit a solution to all measurements. Application of the least squares principle
relies on the condition that the weighted sum of the squares of the residuals is a minimum. The
least squares adjusted coordinates are unique and have both maximum probability of being
correct and minimum probable error.
b. Observation weighting. Not all surveying data will be collected with the same level of
precision. Therefore, the measurements are weighted relative to each other per their different
precisions. Weights are based on a standard deviation prescribed to each measurement, and
these are calculated (by the adjustment software) as the inverse of the measurement variance as
follows:
9-1
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
wi = 1 / i2 (Eq 9-1)
where
wi = observation weight value
i = measurement standard deviation
Observation weighting gives greater influence to the most precise measurements during the
network adjustment process. Large standard deviations mean greater measurement uncertainty
and lower precision for the measurements, which are then given less weight in the adjustment.
c. Error propagation. Formulas for propagation of variances assume that standard deviations
of observations are small enough to be approximated by the squared differential changes of the
observables: x2 = dxdx, and covariances by their products: xy = dxdy. For a function x (a,b) of
observations a and b, the squared differential of the function x is:
(dx)2 = (x/a)2 da2 + (x/b)2 db2 + 2 (x/a)(x/b) dadb,
which may be generalized to any number of observables. For another function y (a,b) of the
same observables a and b, the differentials of the functions x and y are:
dx = (x/a) da + (x/b) db, and

dy = (y/a) da + (y/b) db,
which are multiplied to calculate the covariance dxdy:
dxdy = (x/a)(y/a) da2 + (x/b)(y/b) db2 + [(x/a)(y/b) + (x/b)(y/a)] dadb.
Substitution of standard deviations of a and b for the differentials gives the following error
propagation result in x:
x 2 = (x/a)2 a2 + (x/b)2 b2 + 2 (x/a)(x/b) ab
and in the case of uncorrelated measurements, the variances and covariance in x and y are:
x 2 = (x/a)2 a2 + (x/b)2 b2

y 2 = (y/a)2 a2 + (y/b)2 b2
xy = (x/a)(y/a) a2 + (x/b)(y/b) b2 (Eq 9-2)
d. Covariance matrix of observations. Error propagation formulas are used to calculate a

standard deviation for each measurement in the adjustment (see Chapter 4). Once the
measurements have been individually assigned a standard deviation, they are assembled into the
9-2
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
covariance matrix of observations, and the adjustment software converts to measurement weights
by finding the matrix inverse.
e. Covariance matrix of parameters. The network adjustment process computes the probable
error in positioning for each monitoring point. Entries of the covariance matrix of parameters
contain the position accuracy information. The covariance matrix of parameters is derived from
covariance matrix of observations by error propagation using a math model supplied by the
adjustment software. Some degree of correlation of position error will likely exist between
different stations in the network where the points have been tied together by redundant
measurements of the same type.
f. Standard error ellipse. The geometric representation of the entries in the covariance
matrix of parameters is through error ellipses describing the boundary of probable error around
each point position. The maximum uncertainty in position is equivalent to the magnitude of the
major semi-axis of this ellipse (i.e., its greatest dimension) for a given probability level used for
reporting results. Its orientation and shape are also determined from the numerical entries of the
covariance matrix of parameters. The error ellipse concept is illustrated by Figure 9-1, which
depicts the intersection of two lines-of-position.
Figure 9-1. Error ellipses resulting from two lines of position at varying angles of
intersection.
g. Confidence level. For measurements made with the same level of precision, “one
standard error” represents an uncertainty equivalent to the expectation that approximately 67% of
the measurements will fall within a distance of plus or minus one standard deviation from the
mean. The 95% confidence level represents the probability that a data value lies within
approximately two standard deviations from the mean. The probability of 95% (0.05
significance level) is usually accepted for the assessment of deformation measurements, meaning
9-3
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
that the true position of an object point lies within a distance of 1.96- from the computed mean
with 95% probability. Other multipliers can be used depending on the confidence required in the
final positioning accuracy. For example:
1.96- corresponds to 95% probability,
2.58- corresponds to 99% probability, and
3.00- corresponds to 99.7 % probability.
A probability value of 99% is usually accepted in practice as a certainty.
h. Degrees of freedom. The number of redundant measurements in an adjustment is

expressed as the degrees of freedom (dof) of the adjustment. It is calculated as the difference
between the number of independent observations and the number of unknown coordinate
components in the math model.
dof = n – u (Eq 9-3)
where
u = number of unknowns
i. Residuals. The residual (v) is the difference between the adjusted value of an observation
(i.e., as it was fit to the adjusted station position) and the actual input measurement value. Each
measurement will have a residual value after the adjustment process. The residual value
represents the amount by which the measurement failed to match to the adjusted position.
j. Statistical testing. Statistical tests are widely used to determine if a given quantity (e.g.,
residual) is compatible with, or significantly different from, some other quantity (e.g., the mean
or variance of a set of related residuals). For example, one might test whether a particular
measurement is compatible with the mean, or whether it should be removed from the adjustment
as a blunder, based on the statistical testing of residuals. Statistical tests indicate whether one
should accept or reject the null hypothesis. A null hypothesis (Ho) is a statement that is assumed
to be true until proven otherwise, conversely the alternative hypothesis (Ha) will be true if the
null hypothesis is false. For example:
Ho : An observation is compatible with the mean, and
Ha : An observation is an outlier.
Statistical tests on the residuals would determine which of the above statements is supported by
the data. For network adjustments, statistical testing is widely used for data quality assessment.
9-4
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
9-3. Adjustment Input Parameters.
a. General. Background information is provided below for building network adjustment

files. These computer files typically have a standard list of inputs that are needed to produce
results from the adjustment software. Introductory geodesy textbooks or an adjustment software
user's guide can provide further background for understanding of the principles and practice of
network adjustments.
b. Adjustment input data. The following sections describe both necessary and optional input
data for a typical network adjustment. Refer to the adjustment data sample for Yatesville Lake
Dam at the end of this chapter for supporting illustrations.
(1) Authorized project name. This record contains basic information for organizing and
indexing the project such as project name, type of network, date of survey, user comments, etc.
(2) Ellipsoid parameters. The major and minor semi-axes dimension for the reference
ellipsoid are required to define the geodetic reference system. These parameters describe the
size and shape of the reference ellipsoid to be used for 3D adjustments with geodetic coordinates.
Usually a menu-based list of common reference ellipsoids is presented and indexed (by name) to
be selected by the user.
(4) Map projection parameters. Most software will require the user to select a standard map
projection when adjusting plane coordinates. The parameters defining the projection are
specified in the input file by, for example, projection type, name, units of measurement, standard
parallel(s), central meridian, false easting, and false northing, as typical categories. Actual
parameter values used will depend on the type of projection chosen and the project’s geographic
location. See Figure 9-2.
(4) Computation mode. Many adjustment software applications can process either
preanalysis (survey design) files or the actual data in an adjustment. Therefore, either adjustment
or preanalysis mode is selected by the user. The least squares processing algorithm is identical
for both functions but the computational mode must be specified in the input file. The major
difference between these modes is that preanalysis does not require actual observations for its
computations of expected position error.
(5) Measurement units. All data and constants must be entered in the correct linear and
angular units. Never input one variable (e.g., coordinates) in feet and another variable (e.g.,
measurements) in meters. Most software packages cannot accommodate mismatched units.
(6) Statistical confidence level. For adjustment computations use 95% confidence level
(significance level of 0.05) for computing adjustment statistics. It is recommended to use 99
percent confidence for preanalysis and design of field surveys. The significance level defines
how error magnitudes are statistically tested and reported during the adjustment.
9-5
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure 9-2. User option screens to select the reference ellipsoid and map projection for the
adjustment. GRS80 is the ellipsoid that corresponds to NAD83 coordinates. Major and
Minor Semi-Axes define the dimensions of the ellipsoid. Units are in meters with
translations, rotations, and scale change set to zero. Under the map projection record screen,
the projection type and name is selected from a pick list and then automatically populated
with the standard Lambert Map Projection values (e.g., West Virginia South Projection in this
example).
(7) Residual rejection criteria. These criteria define the probability distribution to be used for
data quality assessment and the critical values needed for outlier detection. The Tau distribution
will be used to calculate statistics for most adjustments. Tau test statistics apply to data sets with
prior unknown mean and variance values (which is the typical case for survey data). This means
that normal distribution probability values are converted to Tau values by the software.
(8) Approximate station coordinates (Figure 9-3). To process data in an adjustment, each
station in the network must be given an estimated position. Approximate coordinates accurate to
one (1) meter are sufficient for most networks, although with deformation networks, accuracies
less than 0.1 meter should be available. It is imperative that these values are realistic, otherwise
the adjustment may not converge to the correct solution. Adjustments use iterative methods to
correct the initial coordinates until the change between successive computations falls below a
certain tolerance (this adjustment convergence limit is usually set at 0.1 mm). For monitoring
networks, the station coordinates coming from previous instrumentation surveys are usually well
known, and should be used as approximate coordinates on the current adjustment. If for some
reason there are no existing station coordinates for a given control point, such as for new
monuments, then traverse sideshot data or plotting from large scale maps can be used to roughly
determine new approximate coordinates.
9-6
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(9) Network constraints. Network constraints provide information to the adjustment software
about the absolute position and orientation of the network. In practice, all of the stations in the
monitoring network will have some form of position constraint (by their approximate
coordinates) that defines their relationship to the project datum. In most adjustment software
packages, each coordinate component can be fixed separately, which permits breaking the
network down into separate 2D and 1D adjustment schemes. There are several different types of
network constraints available for adjustment processing, each having different advantages and
uses.
Figure 9-3. Approximate coordinates for each survey station in an example network. PLH
stands for latitude, longitude, and ellipsoid height. NEO stands for Northing, Easting, and
Orthometric height. The code 111 in the second column means each coordinate is fixed, and
the code 000 means each coordinate is unfixed. The third column contains an abbreviated
station name. The next three columns contain the approximate coordinate values for each
station. The last column stands for West Virginia State plane projection 4702.
(a) Minimum constraint. Any station in the reference network can be held fixed for a
minimally constrained adjustment, although usually there is a “master” reference station on each
project that is selected to serve as its main control point. For 3D networks, the coordinates of the
selected constraint point are fixed along with the orientation and scale of the three axes of the
network coordinate system. A minimally constrained adjustment is carried out mainly to
validate the measurement data, check for blunders and systematic errors, and to look at the
internal consistency of the measurements. The results from a minimum constraint adjustment
will show only errors due to measurements without adding in any potential errors coming from
inaccurate control station coordinates. Table 9-1 lists the ordinary minimum constraints for
adjustment of conventional survey observations.
9-7
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(b) Fully constrained. In a fully constrained adjustment all stations in the reference network
are assumed to have well-known coordinates (i.e., are stable points), and these are fixed with
zero error in the adjustment input file. With fully constrained adjustments only the monitoring
point stations are allowed to float and adjust in position. The drawback to a fully-constrained
network adjustment is that any errors due to inaccurate reference station coordinates will be
transferred to the monitoring points. Therefore, it is important that the reference network
stations be surveyed independently with higher precision, and then checked against previous
reference network surveys for stability.
Table 9-1. Minimum constraints.1

Network Type Minimum Constraint
1D (i.e., z) z of 1 point held fixed
2D (i.e., x, y) with distance x and y of 1 point held fixed azimuth of
2nd point held fixed (standard deviation of
azimuth = 0.1")
2D (i.e., x, y) without distance x and y of 2 points held fixed
3D (i.e., x, y, z) with distance x, y, and z of 1 point held fixed azimuth
and zenith angle to 2nd point held fixed,
zenith angle to 3rd point held fixed
(standard deviation of azimuth and zenith
angles = 0.1")
3D (i.e., x, y, z) without distance x, y, z of 3 points held fixed
1
x = x horizontal value
y = y horizontal value
z = z vertical value (i.e., elevation)
NOTE: minimum constraints applied to opposite sides of network.
(c) Weighted constraints. With a weighted constraints adjustment, every station in the
monitoring network, both the reference stations and the monitoring points, are assigned weights.
No station is fixed absolutely with zero error, but the reference stations are usually given higher
weights. The weights are assigned per prior knowledge of their positioning uncertainty (i.e.,
point confidence ellipses) obtained from the results of a previous network adjustment.
-Reference stations are given a weight based on the covariance matrix of parameters
resulting from the most recent project adjustment, or the adjustment of an independent
reference network survey.
-Monitoring point stations are generally given a lower or essentially zero weight in relation
to the reference network stations.
Coordinates for each station are assigned a separate weight matrix for position (e.g., a diagonal
matrix constructed from the standard deviation of each coordinate component). A weighted
constraints adjustment provides the most rigorous form of adjustment error propagation.
9-8
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(d) Specialized constraints. When GPS survey observations are combined with
photogrammetric surveys, the localized 3D coordinates (e.g., x, y, z coordinates) and associated
variance-covariance matrix from the photogrammetric survey observations and subsequent
bundle adjustment will be included. When only using photogrammetric surveys, free network
constraints (i.e., inner constraints) will be used to define the datum. When photogrammetric
surveys are combined only with conventional surveys, the datum will be defined by the
constraints used in a conventional survey adjustment. If photogrammetric surveys are combined
only with GPS survey observations, the GPS survey observations will be used to define the
datum (e.g., location, orientation, scale). In each of these examples where a covariance matrix is
required, it is an example of using a weighted constraints approach.
(10) Observation type. The type of observation must be declared for each measurement.
Standard observation equations are built into the software for each different type of measurement
that defines the adjustment math model. The level of detail and rigor used in defining the
observation equations determines the quality of the adjustment software. Examples of survey
observation types include; distance, angle, azimuth, direction, absolute coordinates, 2D and 3D
coordinate differences, elevation, height difference, geoid height, and others. See Figure 9-4.
Figure 9-4. Adjustment input example showing conventional observations used to tie
between reference stations. Each record contains the type of observation, station names,
measurement, and standard deviation value.
(11) Station connections. Network geometry identifies how the measurements are connected
to each other in relation to distance, height, and orientation. Station names (or other point
identifiers) are referenced to each observation, and are required for every measurement used in
the adjustment.
9-9
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(12) Measurement value. Every observation record will contain the final reduced mark-to
mark measurement value in its prescribed units. The coordinate system expected for most
conventional observations is the Local Astronomic System. This system is defined to correspond
with a level reference plane, as used by most conventional instruments, and a horizontal
reference alignment (i.e., using the local plumb line and Astronomic North for vertical and
horizontal orientation respectively).
(13) Measurement standard deviation. Every observation data record will contain an
estimated standard deviation. Its actual value is pre-computed from variance formulas
prescribed for each observation type (see Chapter 4).
9-4. Adjustment Output Parameters.
a. Adjustment output. The following sections describe typical output data from an
adjustment—refer to the sample adjustment of Yatesville Lake dam in Appendix D.
(1) Degrees of freedom. The degrees of freedom describes the level of redundancy for a
given survey adjustment. Greater degrees of freedom generally means greater statistical
reliability of the solution. If possible, the degrees of freedom should be more than twice the
number of unknown parameters (coordinates) in the adjustment.
(2) Flagged outliers. A measurement is flagged and rejected as an outlier if an observation

residual turns out to be larger than the statistical confidence interval established for the set of
observation residuals as a whole.
(3) Standardized residuals. Higher values for a standardized residual means a low degree of
fit, and indicates the measurement associated with it may be suspect. The value of the
standardized residual for each observation is compared to the standardized residuals of similar
measurements to determine relative data quality.
(4) Confidence ellipse. The point confidence ellipse represents the accuracy of the adjusted
position stated at the probability (significance) level selected for the adjustment. Its dimensions
and orientation (size and shape) are described by:
-major semi-axis,
-minor semi-axis,
-vertical confidence interval, and
-azimuth or orientation of major semi-axis.
The magnitude of the major semi-axis of the point confidence ellipse represents the maximum
expected error in horizontal position. The orientation of the confidence ellipse represents the
principal direction of the maximum position error. The vertical error bar, if shown, would
represent the maximum expected vertical positioning error. See examples at Figure 9-5.
9-10
Complete Set ofEM 1110-2-1009

01 Feb 18
Control Network Ties Survey Monuments
Figure 9-5. Adjustment output plots showing the reference network and monitoring network.
The left-hand plot shows only the reference network stations with their error ellipses. The
right-hand plot shows both the reference stations and the structure monitoring points with their
error ellipses.
(5) Misclosures. (Figure 9-6). Large misclosures can signal problems with initial
approximate coordinates. If an adjustment processing does not converge on a solution, then the
approximate coordinates should be checked for possible data entry blunders. The station
coordinates corresponding to the largest misclosure should be checked first as the most likely
source of error.
Misclosures
Figure 9-6. Adjustment output showing an example of misclosures for some

observations. All misclosures shown are only a few centimeters, which indicates the
approximate coordinates and the observations are a close match.
9-11
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(6) Adjusted coordinates. (Figure 9-7). The main result of an adjustment is the adjusted
coordinates for each station in the network. To directly calculate linear displacements, the output
coordinates should be converted to a Cartesian System (x, y, z).
Adjusted Coordinates
Figure 9-7. Adjustment output showing the final adjusted coordinates for each station in the
network.
(7) Goodness-of-Fit (Chi-square test). Residuals as a whole will either pass or fail the
Goodness-of-Fit test. A Failed Chi-square test can indicate that there are measurement biases
still remaining in the input data or that there are still some unremoved outliers. The Goodness-
of-Fit test compares the shape of the actual distribution of residuals and the standard normal
distribution to determine its degree of fit. If the test fails it indicates that the errors were not
randomly distributed as should be expected in an adjustment. Separate Goodness-of-Fit tests can
be made on the residuals from different types of measurements (e.g., distances, angles, or height
differences, etc.). Partitioning the data into separate groups to make separate statistical tests is a
procedure used to locate problems with particular types of measurements. A lack of fit between
observations and coordinates can be determined for any particular group of measurements by
examining the histogram of residuals. See also the sample output in Figure 9-8.
(8) A posteriori variance factor. The a posteriori variance factor is produced by the
adjustment and indicates the precision for the results by incorporating the observation residuals
into the assessment of coordinate accuracy. If the adjustment weighting scheme is too optimistic
9-12
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
or too pessimistic, then the variance factor provides a scale factor to the adjustment covariance
matrix. A posteriori variance factor values greater than one (1.0) indicate that the observation
weights were overly optimistic, values less than one (1.0) indicate that the observation weights
were overly pessimistic.
Figure 9-8. Histogram plots for the observation residuals. The left-hand plot shows normally
distributed residuals for the GPS observations. The right-hand plot shows a few observations
at the lateral margins indicating there are some outliers present in the conventional survey
data.
b. Test on the variance. The a posteriori variance factor is a global indicator of the quality of
the adjustment and the weighting scheme. It is assessed by comparing its computed value to its
expected value (i.e., 1.0) using a statistical test on the variance. The a posteriori variance factor
is computed for an adjustment by dividing the quadratic form of the residuals by the degrees of
freedom.
 2 = ( VtWV )/dof (Eq 9-4)
where
2 = A posteriori variance factor
V = Residual vector
W = Covariance matrix of observations
dof = Degrees of freedom
The null and alternative hypotheses for the test on the variance are as follows:
Ho : 2 = o2   2 / o2 = 1
Ha : 2  o2   2 / o2  1
The test fails, and the null hypothesis is rejected, if:
9-13
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
dof (2 ) /   2dof, 1-/2 < o2 < dof (2) /   2dof, /2
where
  2 dof, 1-/2 and   2 dof, /2 are critical values from the Chi-square () distribution tables
based on a significance level alpha () and the degrees of freedom (dof).
c. Detection and removal of outliers. An outlier is a measurement that is statistically

incompatible with similar types of measurements from a given survey. Outlier detection is a
quality control procedure essential to pre-processing and data cleaning. An observation is tested
against the confidence level of the mean using a simple statistical test with a known or assumed
variance.
 - (  ) < obsi <  + ( ) (Eq 9-5)
The probability value  is determined from standard normal probability density tables using
degrees of freedom equal to the number of observations and significance level (0.05).
d. Statistical assessment of residuals. Measurement outliers should be removed from the

adjustment processing. Outliers can be identified by sequentially testing each standardized
residual to determine if its value exceeds a defined rejection threshold. The Tau test uses the Tau
distribution to compute rejection critical values.
(1) Tau Test probability. The Tau () distribution can be derived from the Student-t
distribution (t) using the following formula:
 = [(dof ) 0.5 t dof-1] / [(dof -1) + (t 2 dof-1) ] 0.5 (Eq 9-6)
where
dof = degrees of freedom

t = Critical value from the Student-t distribution
Tau test critical values are computed for a significance value () and degrees of freedom (dof).
(2) Standardized Residuals. A standardized residual (v') is defined as the observation

residual divided by the standard deviation of the residual:
v' = v /  v (Eq 9-7)
where
v' = Standardized residual
9-14
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
v = Computed residual
v = Standard deviation of the residual
Standardized residuals are computed to allow direct comparison between residuals of the same
type. A much higher value for one of the standardized residuals indicates that it does not fit well
compared to other standardized residuals, and its corresponding observation may be flagged as
an outlier. When computing standardized residuals, the standard deviation of the residual (r)
can be replaced with the standard deviation of the corresponding observation (r). However,
because the residual standard deviation is smaller than the observation standard deviation,
|v| / l < |v| / v
an outlier might not be rejected. Therefore, it is recommended that the significance value () be
increased for outlier detection to decrease the corresponding confidence level when using the
observation standard deviation (l).
(3) Outlier rejection. The rejection threshold for testing for measurement outliers is
computed for a significance level () using the Tau distribution. The outlier rejection statistic
for the standardized residual:
|v'| < ( dof, 1-/2) v
determines if the standardized residual exceeds the rejection threshold, if so, it is considered an
outlier. The suggested significance value for the technique is  = 0.01. The outlier rejection
technique is based on univariate statistical testing, which is most effective when only one
significant outlier is present in the network.
e. Rejection criteria. The following table provides guidance on assessing rejection

tolerances for various instruments.
9-5. Adjustment Procedures.
a. General. This section provides an overview of processing procedures and data

requirements for using network adjustment software applications.
b. Coordinate system. Network adjustments that solve for coordinate positions do so in a

defined coordinate system. Some software applications will require the use of geodetic
coordinates. Geodetic coordinates are transferred to the reference network if non-geodetic
coordinates are used on the project.
9-15
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Table 9-2. Rejection criteria for preprocessing of deformation survey data.
Type of Type of Test Action if Data Rejected
Instrument Measurement
Theodolite1 Angle Reduced data must be less than 2 seconds Re-observe the portion of the
/Total Station from the mean reduced direction, rejected survey
otherwise, reject
Subtense Bar1 Angle Reduced zenith angle not being used to Re-observe the portion of the
compute a height difference must be less rejected survey
than 4 seconds from the mean reduced
direction, otherwise, reject
Theodolite1 Elevation Reduced and corrected zenith angle not Re-observe the portion of the
/Total Station being used to compute a height difference rejected survey
(Trigonometric must be less than 2 seconds from the mean
Leveling) reduced and corrected zenith angle,
otherwise, reject
Steel or Invar Distance Difference between two independently Re-measure the distance
Tape measured distances must be less than rejected
2 mm, otherwise, reject
EDM Distance Distance Maximum difference among the four Re-measure the distance
independent measured distances must be rejected
less than 5 mm, otherwise, reject
Automatic Elevation Difference between readings on the left Re-observe the portion of the
Level and right hand scale must be within 0.25 rejected survey
mm of rod constant, otherwise, reject
Difference between height difference

determined from the foresight and
backsight readings on the left rod scale and
that determined from foresights and
backsight readings from the rights scale
must be less than 0.25 mm, otherwise,
reject
Network of Elevation Height difference misclosure in a loop Formulate different loops to
Level Setups must be less than 3 mm * (K in km), determine height differences
(Minimum = 1 mm) otherwise, reject between points common to
loops which have been
rejected; or, re-observe the
portion of the survey rejected
Level and Meter HI Difference between two independent Re-measure the distance
Rule readings must be less than 0.5 mm, rejected
otherwise, reject
GPS Receivers 3D Tests as detailed in EM 1110-1-1003 Reoccupy baseline
coordinates
1 When performing these data reductions, no atmospheric, instrumental, standardization, and geometric
corrections are necessary for angular observation made with a theodolite, except in the case of zenith angles,
which are observed for the purpose of determining height differences (in which case, earth curvature and
refraction need be considered). Because a deformation survey is on a localized network, skew-normal, arc-to
chord, and normal section to geodetic correction need not be applied.
9-16
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(1) Geodetic coordinates. North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83) coordinates are
recommended for new projects and projects that incorporate GPS measurements. The project
reference network should be tied directly to established NAD83 control by a separate survey.
This avoids potentially inaccurate coordinate transformations that might be needed when
processing the network adjustment based on local coordinates.
(2) Map projection coordinates. Horizontal positions defined with coordinates based on a
map projection are readily handled by most adjustment software applications. State Plane
coordinates or Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates still require having an
underlying geodetic coordinate system related to a standard reference ellipsoid.
(3) Local coordinate system. Station and offset coordinates, based on a local construction
datum, are often used for reporting survey results. Some software applications are available that
work reasonably well using only simple plane coordinates. However, an arbitrary coordinate
system may restrict user options for processing an adjustment.
c. Three dimensional networks. Measurement data combined from separate horizontal and
vertical surveys are often used to determine 3D coordinates of network stations. Three
dimensional networks yield the most robust adjustment results because there are a large number
of redundant measurements needed to reliably interconnect the horizontal and vertical network
components. Elevations are required on all reference stations for 3D networks, along with zenith
angle measurement ties to common points in the vertical network.
d. Separate horizontal and vertical networks. Horizontal and vertical networks can be
adjusted independently if they are setup in the proper manner. For example, with horizontal
networks, the elevations for all horizontal network stations should be fixed to a constant, average
height, for the entire network (project) and horizontal distances should be used instead of mark
to-mark slope distances. Vertical network stations require approximate horizontal coordinates
for processing the vertical adjustment and for error propagation. Vertical networks should
include zenith angle ties from the reference network stations where possible and establishing
accurate elevations at the reference stations.
e. Configuration defects. Repeated deformation surveys should involve measurements made

over the same station configuration using the same sub-sets of network stations, otherwise the
comparison between epochs may fail to give adequate results due to configuration defects (i.e.,
missing observations). During processing and analysis of the adjustment, the same minimal and
fixed constraints should be applied for both survey epochs and each survey should be adjusted
with the same statistical tests and confidence level.
f. Observation weighting. Observations will be assigned weights per the a priori estimation
of variance for each measurement (i.e., using the standard deviation computed for each
measurement).
9-17
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(1) For conventional surveys, the standard deviations and error models applicable to each
type of measurement are to be used in the survey data adjustment. The formulas for variance
estimation are provided in Chapter 4.
(2) When GPS survey observations are used in the deformation survey, they will be adjusted
with either the GPS-based, 3D coordinates or coordinate differences and their associated
variance-covariance matrices per EM 1110-1-1003, NAVSTAR Global Positioning System
Surveying.
g. Survey adjustment. Final processing of the survey data should be made using least
squares adjustment techniques and software. For each adjustment, the following quantities will
be determined.
-Adjusted point coordinates
-Variance-covariance matrix of parameters
-Point confidence ellipse major semi-axis
-Standardized residuals for each observation
-A posteriori variance factor
-Total redundancy of the network
h. Data quality assessment. For each adjustment, the following data quality indicators will
be checked.
(1) Examination of misclosures. Computed misclosure values should not exceed one (1)
meter, otherwise, examine and correct initial approximate coordinates.
(2) Point confidence ellipse dimensions. The computed major semi-axis of each point
confidence ellipse should not exceed the stated accuracy requirement for the survey. See sample
outputs in Figures 9-9 and 9-10.
9-18
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Point Confidence Ellipse Summary
Figure 9-9. Adjustment output showing confidence regions for each adjusted horizontal and
vertical position of each station in the network. At the 95% confidence level, horizontal
position uncertainty (MAJOR SEMI-AXIS) is between 0.9-1.5 mm, and vertical position
uncertainty ranges between
1.8-3.7 mm.
Figure 9-10. Adjustment output showing relative confidence regions for horizontal and
vertical position between each station in the network. At the 95% confidence level,
horizontal position uncertainty (MAJ-SEMI) is between 0.8-1.5 mm, and vertical position
uncertainty is between
1.4-3.8 mm.
9-19
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(3) Goodness-of-Fit test. The distribution of residuals should pass the Chi-square test for
Goodness-of-Fit at the 0.05 significance level (95% confidence).
(4) Outlier detection. Standardized residuals should be within the tolerance limits for
rejection as an outlier as established by the residual rejection critical value at the 95% confidence
level. Observations flagged as outliers should be removed and the adjustment repeated. Only
the single observation associated with the greatest magnitude residual should be removed before
reprocessing the adjustment. Outlier detection should be carried out only on a minimally
constrained network.
(5) Chi-Square test on variance factor. The computed a posteriori variance factor should pass
the Chi-square test. If the variance factor does not pass because of a value less than 0.5 or
greater than 2.0, then observation weights should be verified, and if found to be realistic, then the
covariance matrix of parameters should be multiplied by the estimated variance factor to scale its
values.
(6) Redundancy number. The computed degrees of freedom should be no less than the
number of unknown coordinate components, preferably two or more times greater.
i. Reference network stability. Examination of a separate adjustment of the reference

network will be done to check whether the reference points were stable between epochs. Any
reference points that are not found to be stable will be left unconstrained in the network
adjustment. All reference network points found to be stable are held fixed.
j. Calculation of displacements. After a network adjustment is completed for two different

instrumentation surveys, the adjusted coordinates for each monitoring point are extracted and
differenced to calculate point displacements, and identify significant movement between the
separate time epochs.
k. Required submittal documents. The contracting officer should require the contractor to
supply the final adjustment for each project. The contractor should supply a list containing any
observations that were removed due to blunders. The contractor must provide USACE with an
analysis explaining the methodology used in the adjustment, assumptions, and possible error
sources, see Chapter 12.
9-20
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
CHAPTER 10
Laser Scanning in Deformation Monitoring
10-1. General. This chapter contains general information about how laser scanning or Light
Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) systems and close range photogrammetry can be used within
the context of deformation monitoring.
a. Uses. Utilizing LiDAR or high definition close range photogrammetry data to create a
full three-dimensional point cloud and/or model of a structure allows the specialist performing an
analysis to gain a full picture of the deformation occurring on or within the structure. Historical
alignment and deformation surveys typically inspect one or two points within a monolith and
show displacement from previous surveys. With three dimensional comparison, not only can the
analysts see displacement across the full structure, but can see rotational values to better evaluate
the performance of the structure.
b. Limitations. Users must perform a detailed analysis of a structure to determine the type of
movement or motion which is expected to be detected or monitored and then make an informed
decision based on the technology and processes that are available. Terrestrial LiDAR may be an
acceptable option whereas mobile or aerial LiDAR may not provide level of detail and accuracy
that is required for monitoring of a concrete structure. As with any survey, a LiDAR or 3D
Model survey should be closely tied to existing site control.
Figure 10-1. A Leica C10 scanner set up for use on a project (USACE Huntington District).
10-1
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
10-2. Instrumentation and Performance. There are various components that make up the
instrumentation used in laser scanning.
a. Terrestrial Scanners. There are two basic types of laser scanning devices, Time of Flight
(TOF) LiDAR scanners and Phased based LiDAR scanners.
(1) Time of Flight (TOF) LiDAR Scanner-TOF Scanners offer a greater distance range while
collecting data at a slower speed compared to other methods. Examples of TOF scanners are the
Leica C10 and Reigl. See Figure 10-1. Scans need to be planned based on the required point
accuracy and density required for the project.
(2) Phased based (PB) LiDAR Scanner- PB Scanners offer faster collection of points but at a
reduced distance range. Example of PB scanners are Faro X330 and Trimble TX8. See Figure
10-2.
Figure 10-2. A Faro scanner set up inverted for data collection. (USACE Huntington
District).
10-2
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
b. Terrestrial Photogrammetry. Several manufactures have equipment’s such as the Trimble

V10 that can produce point clouds from various images captured from various angles. Testing
should be done prior to use to verify the accuracy of the equipment.
c. Orientation and Registration of the Scans in field. Various equipment use multiple
methods to orientate the scans in the field prior to importing into the office software.
(1) Resection. Units such as the Leica C10 will position and orient the location of the
scanner from known coordinate positions in the field.
(2) GPS and Compass. Units such as the Faro X330 are equipped with compass, GPS and
barometers to orient and locate the position of the scanner to assist with registration.
(3) Survey Station. New model scanners from Trimble and Leica are now integrated within
the framework of and body of the robotic total station. Orientation and position are established
by traditional survey methods or instrument location and back sighting.
d. Associated Equipment. This section discusses the supporting equipment associated with
conducting laser scanning surveys.
(1) Targets. Targets can be used to both reference multiple scans together and to
georeferenced scans into real world coordinate systems.
Figure 10-3. Example targets used with laser scanning. (USACE Huntington District).
10-3
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(a) Flat Targets. These types of targets typically contain two colors, having a contrast that is
visible in the scans. Targets can be temporary or permanent, and are typically made from plastic.
Typically, these are 8 ½ by 11 inch targets created with a series of numbers preprinted starting at
1000 and running to 2000 to assist in the registration process (See Figure 10-3 and 10-4). Flat
targets can be acquired from a manufacturer or developed in house.
Figure 10-4. A flat laser scan target. (USACE Huntington District).
(b) Spheres. Scan spheres are polyethylene or aluminum coated with a reflective white
coating. The scan processing software can determine absolute center of the sphere from points
captured on the surface of the sphere. Spheres are typically 100 mm or 230 mm diameter and are
10-4
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
used for registering multiple scans together based on the property that a sphere is visible from
multiple angles. See Figure 10-3.
(2) Accessories. There are various equipment accessories that support the operation of laser
scanning devices. These include:
-Magnetic mounts for use with spheres

-Pipe magnetic mounts for small spheres
-Fixed height rods with tri-pod or bi-pod
-Camera Tripod legs
-Backpack for taking scanning devise in hard to reach places
-Tribach adapter for setting up over know points
-Rangefinder (Binocular type) for planning sphere distances from scanner on large jobs
e. Accuracy. The accuracy of scanning measurements depends on the design and

performance of the scanning device hardware, the software used for processing the point cloud,
and registration of multiple scans.
(1) Typical scanner accuracy on distance measurement for a phased based scanner is 1mm +
1ppm of the range, with an angular accuracy of less than 1 arc second. Time of flight scanners
typically have a longer range with lower accuracy than phase measurement systems.
(2) Scan registration is the second major factor in overall point cloud accuracy. Scan
registration can achieve overall network registrations of less that 3mm over long distances,
equating to a closing accuracy exceeding 1:100,000. To achieve the highest accuracy of
scanning registration, users should place multiple targets at various distances and locations, using
larger 230 mm spheres for longer distances to obtain as much LiDAR coverage on the sphere,
while using the flat targets or 100 mm to reduce LiDAR shadow.
10-3. Data Management. Scan Data files can become extremely large, for example, one single
full resolution scan from a FARO X-330 can run up to 1 GB in file size while an exterior scan
file from a Leica C10 may run up to 500mb. A proficient field crew should be able to complete
10-15 scans daily based on the project size and topology. File names should be coordinated by
location and date to help manage and coordinate files and field notes. On indoor scans, where
GPS is not available to help register the scan, it is important to maintain file names and locations
to help in the registration process. An example file name for a project at the Bluestone Dam
Project (BLN) would be BLN-061317-A for the first scan of the day with corresponding field
notes and sketch showing location of scanner and what targets are available.
10-4. Standardized Reporting. Reports provided for laser scanning data collection/surveys
should include at a minimum the following: General information on the project, including
purpose, location, type of data collection, who performed the data collection and dates of data
collection; Equipment used during data collection to include make, model and serial number and
10-5
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
calibration results if required; Control points used for the data collection with horizontal and
vertical datum defined; Copy of project log sheets or summary; Results from the data collection
with horizontal and vertical datum, units of measurement, and who verified the results; and
Images and pictures/scans of the data collection. Additional information for a delivered report
may include: Description of the data processing methods used including adjustment results;
QA/QC process used in the verification of results and/or procedure for evaluating accuracy
performance; Photos of the control points used during collection; and Data sheets for control
points used.
10-5. Project Example. The following figures are from a report on the Intake Structure
Monitoring Survey at Atwood Lake in Mineral City, OH conducted by the USACE Huntington
District.
10-6
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure 10-5. Sample report cover page.
10-7
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure 10-6. Sample report table of contents.
10-8
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure 10-7. Sample report, report of survey section.
10-9
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure 10-8. Sample report, project log sheet.
10-10
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure 10-9. Sample Report, scan images of intake structure.
10-11
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure 10-10. Sample report, scan comparisons.
10-12
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
10-13
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
10-14
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
10-15
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure 10-14. Sample report, angle comparisons.
10-16
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure 10-15. Sample report, angle comparisons.
10-17
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
10-18
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
CHAPTER 11
Analysis and Assessment of Results
11-1. General. This chapter provides guidance on the interpretation of results from periodic
monitoring surveys conducted on hydraulic structures. Structural deformation surveys are used
to obtain a set of displacement values for discrete monitoring points distributed across a
structure, in relation to fixed reference positions located in stable areas outside the zone of
deformation. Interpretation of structural behavior from displacement data includes geometrical
analysis of deformation, describing the structure’s current position, and change in position,
indicating historical movement trends occurring over time, and describing potential effects on
the condition of the structure by physical interpretation of movements through deformation
modeling.
a. Concept of the integrated analysis. Even the most precise monitoring surveys will not
fully serve their purpose if they are not properly evaluated and utilized in a global integrated
analysis. The analysis of deformation surveys includes:
-Geometrical Analysis: describes the geometrical status of the deformable body, its
change in shape and dimensions, as well as rigid body movements (translations and
rotations) of the whole deformable body with respect to a stable reference frame, or of a
block of the body with respect to other blocks, and
-Physical Interpretation: which consists of:
Stochastic Interpretation: a statistical (stochastic) method that analyzes (through a

regression analysis) the correlations between observed deformations and observed loads
(external and internal causes producing the deformation), and
Deterministic Interpretation: a method utilizing information on the loads, properties of the

materials, and physical laws governing the stress-strain relationship; which describes the
state of internal stresses and the relationship between the causative effects (loads) and
deformations.
Once the load-deformation relationship is established, the results of the physical interpretation
may be used for the development of prediction models. Through a comparison of predicted
deformation with the results of the geometrical analysis of the actual deformations, a better
understanding of the mechanism of the deformations is achieved. On the other hand, the
prediction models supply information on the expected deformation, facilitating the design of the
monitoring scheme as well as the selection of the deformation model in the geometrical analysis.
Thus, the expression "integrated analysis" means a determination of the deformation by
combining all types of measurements, geodetic and geotechnical, even if scattered in time and
space, in the simultaneous geometrical analysis of the deformation, comparing it with the
prediction models, enhancing the prediction models; which in turn, may be used in enhancing the
11-1
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
monitoring scheme. The process is iteratively repeated until the mechanism of deformation is
well understood and any discrepancies between the prediction models and actual deformations
are properly explained.
b. Deformation modeling. Recently, the concept of integration has been developed in which
the geometrical analysis of deformation and both methods of the physical interpretation are
combined into a simultaneous solution for all the parameters to be determined. Implementation
of the method still requires further development. The deterministic and statistical modeling of
deformations have been used in the analysis of dam deformations, at least in some countries, for
many years. As aforementioned, the geometrical analysis has been done so far in a rather
primitive way, with geotechnical/structural engineers analyzing separately the geotechnical
observation data and surveyors taking care of the geodetic survey observations. The
geotechnical analyses have usually resulted only in a graphical display of temporal trends for
individual observables and the geodetic analysis would result in a plot of displacements obtained
from repeated surveys that may not even be properly adjusted and analyzed for the stability of
the reference points. An intensive study by the FIG working group has resulted in the
development of proper methods for the analysis of geodetic surveys and has led to the
development of the so-called "University of New Brunswick (UNB) Generalized Method" of the
geometrical deformation analysis, which can combine any type of observations (geotechnical and
geodetic) into one simultaneous analysis.
11-2. Geometrical Analysis.
a. Identification of unstable reference points. In most deformation studies, the information

on absolute movements of object points with respect to some stable reference points is crucial.
One problem that is frequently encountered in practice in the reference networks is the instability
of the reference points. This may be caused either by wrong monumentation of the survey
markers or by the points being located too close to the deformation zone (wrong assumption in
the design about the stability of the surrounding area). Any unstable reference points must be
identified first, and before absolute displacements of the object points are calculated. Otherwise,
the calculated displacements of the object points and subsequent analysis and interpretation of
the deformation of the structure may be significantly distorted. Given a situation where points
A, B, C, and D are reference points used to monitor a number of object points on a structure; if
point B has moved (but this is not recognized) and it is used with point A to identify the common
datum for two survey campaigns, then all the object points and reference points C and D will
show significant changes in their coordinates even when, in reality, all but point B are truly
stable.
b. Iterative Weighted Similarity Transformation (IWST). A method to detect unstable

reference points has been developed, which is based on a special similarity transformation that
minimizes the first norm (absolute value) of the observed vector of displacements of the
reference points. The IWST approach to stability monitoring can be performed easily for
one-dimensional reference networks and by an iterative weighting scheme for multi-dimensional
11-2
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
reference networks until all the components of the displacement vectors (d i) satisfy the
condition:
 || d i || = minimum (Eq 11-1)
In each iterative solution, the weights (pi) of each displacement are changed to be:
pi = 1/di
After the last iteration (convergence), any transformed displacement vectors that exceed their
transformed point error ellipses (at 95% probability) are identified as unstable reference points.
The displacements obtained from the transformation are, practically, datum independent, i.e.,
that whatever minimum constraints have been used in the least squares adjustment of the survey
campaigns, the display of the transformed displacements will always be the same. Thus, the
obtained results represent the actual deformation trend which is used later on in selecting the best
fitting deformation model.
c. Stable point analysis. Quality control for reference networks requires analysis of the
stability of each reference station, for example by the IIWST.
(1) Data processing setup. Software routines must be coded for automated data processing.
The input data for IWST processing consists of the adjusted station coordinates for the reference
network (for both the current and previous monitoring survey), and each associated covariance
matrix of parameters. Both data sets are available from network adjustment post-processing
results. Test statistic critical values, degrees of freedom, and the pooled adjustment variance
factor are also required for post-processed statistical assessment.
(2) IWST processing algorithm. The following matrix equation is solved iteratively until the
solution converges on a fixed transformation value (e.g., to less than 0.01 mm).
(d)' = [I-H (HT W H)-1 HTW] (d) = [S] (d) (Eq 11-2)
where
d' = transformed displacement vector
d = initial displacement vector
I = identity matrix
H = datum defect matrix
W = weight matrix
S = I-H (HT W H)-1 HTW
The identity matrix is a matrix with ones along the diagonal and zeroes elsewhere. The datum
defect matrix (H) is designed for the particular type of survey datum used. For example, for GPS
11-3
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
surveys, it has a block diagonal structure with a 3 by 3 identity matrix in each block representing
the union of datum defects from each survey (i.e., 3D translations only). The weight matrix (W)
is a diagonal matrix with the entries equal to the inverse of each coordinate component
displacement. The displacement vector contains the displacements between the two surveys for
each point. The dimensions of each matrix must be compatible with n as the number of stations,
for example if (d) is 3n  1, then H, W, and I are 3n  3n. The transformation covariance matrix
is initially the sum of each adjustment covariance matrix, where the covariance matrix (Q) is also
modified at each iteration by:
Q' = S Q ST (Eq 11-3)
with S defined above.
d. Geometrical deformation analysis. In order to be able to use any type of geodetic and
geotechnical observations in a simultaneous deformation analysis, the UNB Generalized Method
of the geometrical analysis has been developed. The method is applicable to any type of
geometrical analysis, both in space and in time, including the detection of unstable reference
points and the determination of strain components and relative rigid body motion within a
deformable body. It permits using different types of surveying data (conventional, GPS, and
geotechnical/structural measurements). It can be applied to any configuration of the monitoring
scheme as long as approximate coordinates of all the observation points are known with
sufficient accuracy. The approach consists of three basic processes:
-identification of deformation models,
-estimation of deformation parameters, and
-diagnostic checking of the models and final selection of the "best" model.
A brief description of the approach is given below.
(1) Deformation parameters. The change in shape and dimensions of a 3D deformable body
is fully described if 6 strain components (3 normal and 3 shearing strains) and 3 differential
rotations at every point of the body are determined. These deformation parameters can be
calculated from the well-known strain-displacement relations if a displacement function
representing the deformation of the object is known. Since deformation surveys involve only
discrete points, the displacement function must be approximated through some selected
deformation model which fits the observed changes in coordinates (displacements), or any other
types of observables, in the statistically best way. The displacement function may be
determined, for example, through a polynomial approximation of the displacement field.
(2) Displacement function. A displacement function can be expressed in matrix form in

terms of a deformation model B c as:
d (x,y,z,t-to) = (u,v,w)T = B (x,y,z,t-to) c (Eq 11-4)
11-4
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
where
d = displacement of a point (x,y,z) at time t (with respect to a reference time to)

u, v, w = components of the displacement function in the x,y,z directions, respectively
B = deformation matrix with its elements being some selected base functions
c = vector of unknown coefficients (deformation parameters)
(3) Deformation models. Examples of typical deformation models (displacement functions)

for a two-dimensional analysis are given below.
(a) Single point displacement or a rigid body displacement of a group of points, say, block B
with respect to block A. The deformation model is expressed by the following displacement
functions:
u A = 0, vA=0
uB = a o , vB=bo
where the subscripts represent all the points in the indicated blocks, and a o and b o are constants.
(b) Homogeneous strain in the whole body and differential rotation. The deformation model
is linear and it may be expressed directly in terms of the strain components (x, y, xy ) and
differential rotation, , as:
u = x x + xy y - y
v = xy x + y y + x (Eq 11-5)
(c) A deformable body with one discontinuity, say, between blocks A and B, and with
different linear deformations in each block plus a rigid body displacement of B with respect to A.
Then the deformation model is written as:
uA = xA x + xyA y - A y
vA = xyA x + yA y + A x (Eq 11-6)
and
uB = a0 + x B (x - x0) + xy B (y - y0) -  B (y - y0)
vB = b0 + xy B (x - x0) + y B (y - y0) +  B (x - x0) (Eq 11-7)
where x0, y0 are the coordinates of any point in block B.
11-5
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(4) Combined models. Usually, the actual deformation model is a combination of the above
simple models or, if more complicated, it is expressed by non-linear displacement functions,
which require fitting of higher-order polynomials or other suitable functions. If time dependent
deformation parameters are sought, then the above deformation models will contain time
variables.
(5) Displacement function. A vector l of changes in any type of observations, for instance,
changes in tilts, in distances, or in observed strain, can always be expressed in terms of the
displacement function. For example, the relationship between a displacement function and a
change ds in the distance observed between two points i and j in two monitoring campaigns may
be written as:
ds i j = [ (xj - xi) / s ] uj + [ (yj - yi) / s ) ] vj

[ (xj - xi /s ) ] ui - [ (yj - yi) / s ) ] vi (Eq 11-8)
where
uj vj
ui vi
are components of the displacement function at points:
xj yj
xi yi
respectively. For example, with a horizontal tiltmeter, the change d of tilt between two survey
campaigns may be expressed in terms of the vertical component (w) of the displacement function
as:
d = (w/x) sin  + (w/y) cos  (Eq 11-9)
where
 = the orientation angle of the tiltmeter.
The functional relationships for any other types of observables and displacement functions are
written in matrix form as:
l = A B l c (Eq 11-10)
where A is the transformation matrix (design matrix) relating the observations to the
displacements of points at which the observations are made, and B l is constructed from the
above matrix B (x, y, z, t-to ) and related to the points included in the observables.
11-6
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(6) Best-fit deformation models. For redundant observations, the elements of the vector c
and their variances and covariances are determined through least-squares approximation, and
their statistical significance can be calculated. One tries to find the simplest possible
displacement function that would fit to the observations in the statistically best way. The search
for the ‘best’ deformation model (displacement function) is based on either a priori knowledge
of the expected deformations (for instance from the finite element analysis) or a qualitative
analysis of the deformation trend deduced from all the observations taken together. In the case
of the observables being the relative displacements obtained from geodetic surveys, the iterative
weighted transformation of the displacements gives the best picture of the actual deformation
trend helping in the spatial trend analysis. In the case of a series of observations taken over a
prolonged period of time, plotting of individual observables versus time helps to establish the
deformation trend and the deformation model in the time domain. In the analysis, one has to
separate the known deformation trend from the superimposed investigated deformation. For
example, to distinguish between the cyclic (seasonal) thermal expansion of a structure with a
one-year period of oscillation and a superimposed deformation caused by other effects which are,
for instance, linear in time, all the measurements can be analyzed through a least-squares fitting
of the cyclic function
y = a 1 cos ( t) + a 2 sin ( t) + a 3 t + a 4 + a 5  (t i) + ..., (Eq 11-11)
to the observation data, where  = 2/yr, and (a 3) is the rate of change of the observation
(extension, tilt, inclination, etc.). The amplitude and phase of the sinusoid can be derived from
(a 1) and (a 2). The constant (a 4) is the y-intercept and the constants (a 5, ...) are possible slips
(discontinuities) in the data series where  (t i) is the Kronecker's symbol which is equal to 1
when t > t i, with t i being the time of the occurrence of the slip, and is equal to 0 when t < t i.
(7) Deformation modeling procedures. Geometrical deformation analysis using the UNB
Generalized Method is done in four steps:
(a) Trend analysis in space and time domains, and the selection of a few alternative
deformation models, seem to match the trend and make physical sense.
(b) Least-squares fitting of the model or models into the observation data and statistical
testing of the models.
(c) Selection of the ‘best’ model that has as few coefficients as possible with as high a
significance as possible (preferably all the coefficients should be significant at probabilities
greater than 95%) and which gives as small a quadratic form of the residuals as possible.
(d) Graphical presentation of the displacement field and the derived strain field.
The results of the geometrical analysis serve as an input into the physical interpretation and into
the development of prediction models as discussed above.
11-7
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
11-3. Statistical Modeling.
a. General. The statistical method establishes an empirical model of the load-deformation

relationship through regression analysis, which determines the correlations between observed
deformations and observed loads (external and internal causes producing the deformation).
Using this model, the forecasted deformation can be obtained from the measured causative
quantities. A good agreement between the forecasts and the measurements then tell us that the
deformable body behaves as in the past. Otherwise, reasons should be found and the model
should be refined.
b. Cause-effect model. Interpretation by the statistical method requires a suitable amount of

observations, both of causative quantities and of response effects. Let d (t) be the observed
deformation of an object point at time t. For a concrete dam, for example, it can usually be
decomposed into three components:
d (t) = d H (t) + d T (t) + d r (t) (Eq 11-12)
where d H (t), d T (t), d r (t) are the hydrostatic pressure component, thermal component, and the
irreversible component due to the non-elastic behavior of the dam, respectively. The component
d H (t) is a function of water level in the reservoir, and can be modeled by a simple polynomial:
2
d H (t) = a 0 + a 1H (t) + a 2 H (t) + ... + a m H (t) m (Eq 11-13)
where H (t) is the elevation of the water in the reservoir. The component d T (t) can be modeled
in various ways depending on the information on hand. If some key temperatures T i (t), for i =
1, 2, ..., k, in the dam are measured, then:
d T (t) = b 1 T 1 (t) + b 2 T 2 (t) + ... + b k T k (t) (Eq 11-14)
If air temperature is used, the response delay of concrete dams to the change in air temperature
should be considered. If no temperature is measured, the thermal component can be modeled by
a trigonometric function.
c. Elastic deformation. The irreversible component d r (t) may originate from a non-elastic
phenomenon like creep of concrete or creep of rock, etc. Its time-dependent behavior changes
from object to object. It may be modeled, for example, with an exponential function. The
following function is appropriate for concrete dams:
d r (t) = c 1 t + c 2 ln (t) (Eq 11-15)

Coefficients (a i, b i, c i) in the above equations are determined using the least squares regression
analysis. The final model suggests the response behavior of the different causative factors and is
used for prediction purposes.
11-8
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
d. Plastic deformation. For an earth dam, the thermal effect is negligible and the irreversible
component becomes dominant. It should be mentioned that the statistical method for physical
interpretation is applicable not only to observed displacements, but also to other monitored
quantities, such as stress, pore water pressure, tilt of the foundation, etc. The only difference is
that the response function for each causative quantity may change.
11-4. Deterministic Modeling.
a. General. The deterministic method provides information on the expected deformation

from information on the acting forces (loads), properties of the materials, and physical laws
governing the stress-strain relationship. Deformation of an object will develop if an external
force is applied to it. The external forces may be of two kinds: surface force (i.e., forces
distributed over the surface of the body) and body forces, which are distributed over the volume
of the body such as gravitational forces and thermal stress. The relation between the acting
forces and displacements is discussed in many textbooks on mechanics. Let d be the
displacement vector at a point and f be the acting force. They are related as:
LT D L d + f = 0 (Eq 11-16)
where D is the constitutive matrix of the material whose elements are functions of the material
properties (e.g., Young's modulus and Poisson's ratio) and L is a differential operator
transforming displacement to strain. If initial strain  0 and initial stress  0 exist, the above
equation becomes:
LT D L d + ( LT  0 - LT D  0 ) + f = 0 (Eq 11-17)
In principle, when the boundary conditions are given, either in the form of displacements or in
the form of acting forces, and the body forces are prescribed, the differential equation can be
solved. However, direct solution may be difficult, and numerical methods such as the finite
element or boundary element of finite differences methods are used. The finite element method
(FEM) is the most commonly used method in structural and geotechnical engineering,
particularly in modeling dam deformations.
b. Finite Element Method. The basic concept of the FEM is that the method involves
dividing the domain of the problem into a collection of subdomains, with each subdomain
represented by a set of element equations to the original problem, followed by systematically
recombining all sets of element equations into a global system of equations for the final
calculation. The global system of equations has known solution techniques, and can be
calculated from the initial values of the original problem to obtain a numerical answer.
Numerous FEM software packages are available in the market, ranging significantly in prices
depending on their sophistication and adaptability to various types of material behavior.
Software packages have been developed for 2D and 3D finite element elastic, visco-elastic, and
heat transfer among many other analyses of deformations. FEM has found many practical
11-9
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
applications in dam seepage and deformation analyses, tectonic plate movements, ground
subsidence studies, and tunneling deformations. See Appendix C for an example FEM analysis.
c. Deterministic modeling. In the deterministic modeling of dam deformations, the dam and
its foundation are subdivided into a finite element mesh. The thermal component (dT) and
hydrostatic pressure component (dH) are calculated separately. Assuming some discrete water
level in the reservoir, the corresponding displacements of the points of interest are computed. A
displacement function with respect to water level is obtained by least squares fitting of a
polynomial to the FEM-computed discrete displacements. Then, the displacements at any water
level can be computed from the displacement function. In computation of the thermal
components, the temperature distribution inside the structure should first be solved. Again, FEM
could be used, based on some measured temperatures (boundary conditions). Both the
coefficient of thermal diffusivity and the coefficient of expansion of concrete are required. The
thermal components for the points of interest are calculated using FEM with computed
temperature at each nodal point. The total deformation is the sum of these two components plus
possible action of some other forces, for example, swelling of concrete due to alkali aggregate
reaction which can also be modeled. FEM is certainly a powerful tool in the deterministic
modeling of deformations. One has to remember, however, that the output from the FEM
analysis is only as good as the quality of the input and as good as the experience of the operator
who must have a good understanding of not only the computer operation but, particularly, good
knowledge in the mechanics of the deformable bodies.
11-5. Hybrid Analysis Method.
a. General. Interpretation by statistical methods requires a large amount of observations,

both of causative quantities and of response effects. The method is not suitable at the early stage
of dam operation when only short sets of observation data are available. Some portions of the
thermal and hydrostatic pressure effects may not be separated by the statistical modeling if the
changes in temperature and in the elevation of water in the reservoir are strongly correlated. The
deterministic method proves very advantageous in these aspects. The deterministic method is of
an a priori (design) nature. It uses the information on geometric shape and material properties of
the deformable body and acting loads to calculate deformations. Due to many uncertainties in
deterministic modeling, e.g., imperfect knowledge of the material properties, possibly wrong
modeling of the behavior of the material (non-elastic behavior), and approximation in
calculations, the computed displacements may depart significantly from observed values d(t).
With the discrepancy produced by uncertainties in Young's modulus of elasticity, E, and the
thermal coefficient of expansion (), the deterministic model can be enhanced by combining it
with the statistical method, in the form:
d (t) + v (t) = x d H (t) + y d T (t) + c1 t + c 2 ln (t) (Eq 11-18)
where v (t) is the residual, d H (t) and d T (t) are the hydrostatic and thermal components,
respectively, calculated from the deterministic or statistical modeling, and the last two terms take
11-10
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
care of any possible irreversible component. The functional model for the irreversible
component may vary and can be changed by examining the residuals. The unknowns (x, y, c1,
and c2) are estimated from the observations using the least squares estimation. The coefficient x
is a function of Young's modulus and y is a function of the thermal expansion coefficient of
concrete:
x = E0 / E
y =  / 0 (Eq 11-19)
where E0 and 0 are the values used in the deterministic modeling.
b. Material properties. There must be a calibration of the constants of the material properties
using the discrepancies between the measured displacements of a point at different epochs and
that calculated from FEM. One must be aware, however, that if the real discrepancy comes from
other effects than the incorrect values of the constants (e.g., non-elastic behavior), the model may
be significantly distorted. A concept of a global integration has been developed, where the
geometrical analysis of deformations and both methods of physical interpretation are combined.
Using this concept, deformation modeling and understanding of the deformation mechanism can
be greatly enhanced.
11-6. Automated Data Management.
a. Advantages and limitations of automation. In the total effort of deformation monitoring,

the quality of the analysis of the behavior of the object being monitored depends on the location,
frequency, type, and reliability of the data gathered. The data includes any geotechnical
observable as well as any conventional geodetic observable (angle, distance, height difference,
etc.). Apart from the location and type of instrumentation, the frequency and reliability of the
data can be enhanced by employing an "automatic" system of acquisition and processing
(including the deformation analysis). A data management system encompasses everything that
happens to the data from the instant at which it is sensed to the time of analysis. Under ordinary
circumstances, the interval of time between sensing and analysis may extend over several days or
more. Under critical conditions, this may have to be nearly instantaneous in order to provide a
warning, if necessary. The volume of data may consist of only several items (in the simplest
routine investigation) to many hundreds or thousands (in very complex, critical situations,
particularly if vibration behavior is of interest). The rate of sampling may be annually, monthly,
weekly, daily, hourly, or even more frequently. The amount of human involvement may range
from total (a "manual" system) to virtually none (an "automatic" system). Neither extreme is
practical. A manual system is labor intensive and liable to errors or blunders and is less flexible
in the re-examination of data. An automatic system is attractive, but has some limitations.
Although a "data acquisition system" strictly involves the gathering of data, the phrase has been
used by many to mean the whole system of data management. Advantages and limitations of an
automatic data acquisition system are summarized in the following two lists.
11-11
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Advantages of an automatic data acquisition system:
-personnel costs for reading instruments and processing data are reduced;
-more frequent readings are possible;
-retrieval of data from remote or inaccessible locations is possible;
-instantaneous transmission of data over long distances is possible;
-increased reading accuracy can be achieved;
-increased flexibility in selecting required data can be provided;
-measurement of rapid fluctuations, pulsations, and vibrations is possible;
-recording errors are fewer and immediately recognizable; and
-data can be stored electronically in a format suitable for direct computer analysis.
Limitations of an automatic system:
-a knowledgeable observer is replaced by hardware;
-an excess of data could be generated, leading to a less than timely response;
-the data may be blindly accepted, possibly leading to a wrong conclusion;
-there could be a high initial cost and, possibly, increased maintenance cost;
-complexity may require an initial stage of debugging;
-specialized personnel may be required for regular field checks and maintenance;
-a reliable and continuous source of power is required; and
-the system may be susceptible to damage by weather or construction activity.
With an appropriate compromise between manual and automatic functions, a properly designed
and working system can minimize the effects of the limitations mentioned above. Therefore, the
advantages of an automatic ("semi-automatic") system easily outweigh its disadvantages.
b. Automated data system. A data management system with a PC computer or programmed

data collector provides for direct connection to (and sometimes control of) instrumentation. The
system should accommodate manually recorded data and data directly acquired from
instrumentation. The raw data is contained in observation files, archived for security, and is
processed or "reduced" (using calibration, test values, etc.) into data files, which are then used by
various analysis and display software applications.
(1) Field checks. Automated systems can compare previously measured positions to the
currently processed value to determine if their difference is greater than a set tolerance from the
most recent value in the data file.
(2) Integrated analysis. Any data or derived data, whether geotechnical or geodetic (repeated
in a suitable time series), can be brought together in the integrated deformation analysis of a
structure. A time series is analyzed for trends with the separation of seasonal and long-term
behavior. The method of least squares fitting provides a full statistical analysis of the trend with
the detection of outlying or erroneous data. It is possible to derive a new series from two
11-12
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
original series or to create a series from repeated geodetic campaigns (e.g., tilt derived from
leveling). The system can also show several series of data simultaneously, without fitting, to
provide a graphical comparison of the series.
(3) Interpretation of results. Geodetic data is treated traditionally in campaigns for

adjustment and spatial trend analysis. Once the observations have been repeated a sufficient
number of times, they can be treated as a time series. Geotechnical series are treated in a similar
manner (e.g., time series analysis, spatial series analysis, and plots). The trend analyses are
automated by command files that are set up to control fitting and automated plotting of several
series in succession. All of the data can be used together in simultaneous integrated geometrical
analyses following the UNB Generalized Method, or several series can be plotted simultaneously
without fitting. With both the observation files and the data files as text files, they are accessible
through any text editor for manual entry or editing and can put into other software applications.
c. Desirable characteristics of an automated system. Overall, the desirable characteristics of

a data management system for deformation surveys includes:
-data integrity (offering checks in the field and later processing),

-data security (automatic archiving and regular data file backup),
-automated acquisition, processing, and analysis,
-compatibility and integration with other observables,
-flexibility in access to the data for possible manual entry and editing,
-data file flexibility (useable by other software),
-flexibility to be modified for additional instrumentation or other forms of analysis,
-on-site immediate access to data or any of the forms of analysis,
-near-real time results of trend or other analyses, and
-testing and calibration is an integral component of the system.
11-7. Scope of Deformation Analysis. Over the past 10 years, there has been significant
progress in the development of new methods for the geometrical and physical analyses of
deformation surveys. FIG has been leading in the developments, particularly in the areas of
integrated geometrical analysis of structural deformations and combined integrated analysis.
However, due to lack of interdisciplinary cooperation and insufficient exchange of information,
FIG developments have not yet been widely adapted in practice. General worldwide use of the
geometrical analysis methods is still poor, including even the basic analysis of geodetic
monitoring networks. The above comments lead to the following:
-the analysis of deformation surveys should be in the hands of interdisciplinary teams

consisting of geotechnical, structural, and surveying engineers specialized in both
geometrical and physical analyses; and
-more use should be made of the concepts and developed methodologies for the
geometrical integrated analysis and combined deterministic-statistical modeling of
deformations.
11-13
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
11-14
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
CHAPTER 12
Data Presentation and Final Reports
12-1. Reporting Content and Format. All surveying field work and analysis leads to a final
presentation of the results. Contained in the final Survey Report are the field notes, supporting
analysis, results, and a report of conclusions. Project survey deliverables should include any raw
data collected during the field work. The report format should include the following standard
components.
a. Title page. The title page should list summary project information such as, the authorized
project name, document reference number, date, and reference to the survey.
b. Introduction. This section summarizes the main results in abstract form, and presents an
outline of the project report describing the purpose and execution of the survey.
c. Project description. Includes a description of the monitoring network using text, tables,
and figures.
(1) Site plan that shows the layout of the structure superimposed with the monitoring
network. Figures with plan or cross-sectional views showing the outline of the structure,
location of deformation network points, and their names. All reference points shown in the
figures will be denoted by one symbol, while all monitoring points will be denoted by a different
symbol.
(2) List of approximate coordinates for each network station giving:
-station Name,
-point ID, and
-3D coordinates.
(3) Project features described and indexed in a summary paragraph, including:
-nature and definition of project datum,
-number of stations,
-designated sub-networks,
-date of present survey, and
-list of previous surveys completed.
(4) Monument descriptions as to:
-type of monument,
-recovery information,
-physical condition, and
12-1
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
-reference marks.
d. Equipment. Inventory of equipment used to complete the survey, including:
-identification of each instrument model, and
-serial number.
e. Survey designed. This section describes the features used in the design of surveys,
including:
-types of measurements,
-redundancy,
-stations measured, and
-observation weights.
If preanalysis was conducted, a summary of the resulting output files can be substituted.
f. Computations and results. The results section will contain the following components.
(1) A summary list of:
-methods for data reductions,
-calibration values, and
-initial and final measurement values.
(2) A list of the final coordinates for each station along with associated point confidence
ellipses.
(3) A list of the calculated position displacements for the most recent prior survey. These
results also will be tabulated in digital form independent of the report.
(4) Graphical displays of the network with horizontal and vertical displacements will include
point movements plotted as vectors with their associated error bars and/or error ellipses.
Statistically significant movements will be flagged. Only displacements between two chosen
epochs will be plotted on a given figure. Displacement contours will not be plotted.
(5) Reference network stability analysis showing results of independent monitoring of the
reference network stations.
(6) Cumulative displacements will be reported. Final reports will include figures showing
1D cumulative displacements of all points in critical directions versus time. Examples of
cumulative displacements include movements in the downstream and vertical directions on the
crest of a dam, or movements in the downhill and vertical directions in an earthen dam or levee.
12-2
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
The error bar associated with each displacement will be plotted. Data from all deformation
analyses performed on the project will be included. Statistically significant cumulative
displacements will be flagged.
g. Conclusions. Comparison of the displacements and displacement accuracy to the

expected values for structural movement. Discussion of the overall quality and accuracy of the
survey.
h. References. Any additional source material should be referenced. An index to the

archived digital data and field notes should be provided.
i. Network adjustment. Adjustment results will be reported as a separate section. The final
report will include a tabular summary of each network adjustment including the following
information:
-network constraints applied,
-names of points used, or point ID numbers,
-adjusted point coordinates to the nearest 0.1 mm,
-standard deviations of point coordinates to the nearest 0.1 mm,
-dimensions of error bars to the nearest 0.1 mm at the one standard deviation level for 1D
network points,
-dimensions of the axes of the error ellipses to the nearest 0.1 mm (one standard
deviation),
-orientation angle to the nearest 0.1 degree for 2D network points,
-dimensions of the axes of the error ellipses to the nearest 0.1 mm,
-out-of-plane angles to the nearest 0.1 degree for 3D network point coordinates
-quadratic form of the residuals,
-total redundancy of the network,
-estimated a posteriori variance factor, and
-standardized residuals for each observation.
j. Initial and final surveys. Final reports of calculated displacements will include:
-a summary of coordinate data from both adjustments used to compute final

displacements, and
-displacements reported to the nearest 1 mm and associated direction to the nearest 0.1
degree.
12-2. Displacement Data Presentation.
a. General. Regular use of engineering illustrations and other visual aids such as, graphs and
plots, give an immediate picture of the structure’s behavior. It is equally important to have
tabulated displacement values, accuracy evaluations, and data quality indicators that support the
12-3
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
reliability and significance of the results. Each single epoch displacement vector should be
plotted on a schematic of the structure along with its associated point error ellipse for the base
epoch. To enhance clarity, vertical movement components are plotted on a separate elevation
view.
b. Data plots. Various types of summary data plots can be used for interpreting the
structural displacement time history.
(1) Most recent epoch. For plots of the most recent survey epoch, the displacements are
compared to the initial baseline survey (to indicate total net movement). The actual
displacements are compared against the maximum amount of expected movement.
(2) Critical areas. Detailed plots can be made for areas that require greater attention, such as
structural or foundation interfaces.
(3) Trend plots. Cumulative trends in the coordinate data sets from year to year should be
computed to determine if the movement behavior is consistent over time. Displacement velocity
and acceleration trends can refine the frequency needed for future surveys.
12-3. Data Management.
a. General. The organization and management of historical movement data should be given
high priority on deformation monitoring projects because information about the structure has to
be kept for a long period of time. This information may also need to be retrieved on short notice
in the event of problems with the structure. One strategy for data management is to create a
dedicated database file system to archive project survey information.
b. Data management. Database systems can quickly extract and summarize dam status
information, and the data can be used to produce graphs, written reports, or specific status
summaries on demand. These systems sort and organize large volumes of data for generally any
attributes that can be listed in table form. It is also an ideal format to archive raw survey data
and to store processed results in a permanent file. The database also simplifies project
management tasks by tracking annual progress, setting work priorities and schedules, and
recording costs. Standardized dam status record-keeping also enables comparisons of structural
performance from projects throughout USACE.
c. New and existing survey control. Newly established or existing monumented control used
to provide horizontal and/or vertical positions will be entered into the USACE Survey
Monument Archival and Retrieval Tool (U-SMART) as required in ER 1110-1-8170. See ER
1110-1-8170 and EM 1110-1-1002, Survey Markers and Monumentation, for more information
on accessing and entering survey control point data into U-SMART.
12-4
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
12-4. Example Report.
a. The following is an example report provided by the Huntington District for a deformation
survey performed on the Cochiti Dam in Pena Blanca, New Mexico for the Albuquerque District.
The entire report was 125 pages so only samples of each section are provide below.
12-5
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
12-6
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
12-7
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
12-8
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
12-9
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
12-10
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
12-11
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
12-12
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
12-13
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
12-14
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
12-15
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
12-16
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
12-17
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
12-18
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
12-19
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
12-20
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
12-21
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
12-22
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
12-23
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
APPENDIX A
References
A-1. Required Publications.
PL 92-367
United States Code (1972) National Dam Inspection Act.
http://uscode.house.gov/statutes/pl/92/367.pdf
ER 1110-2-103
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1981) Strong-Motion Instruments for Recording Earthquake
Motions on Dams. ER 1110-2-103. Washington, DC: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
http://www.publications.usace.army.mil/Portals/76/Publications/EngineerRegulations/ER_1110
2-103.pdf?ver=2013-09-08-233412-823
ER 1110-2-1150
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1999) Engineering and Design for Civil Works Projects. ER
1110-2-1150. Washington, DC: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
2-1150.pdf
ER 1110-2-1156
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2014) Safety of Dams – Policy and Procedures. ER 1110-2
1156. Washington, DC: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
2-1156.pdf
ER 1110-2-1806
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2016) Earthquake Design and Evaluation for Civil Works
Projects. ER 1110-2-1806. Washington, DC: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
2-1806.pdf
ER 1110-1-8170
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2017) Policies for Using the USACE Survey Monument Archival
and Retrieval Tool (U-SMART) for Project Control and Boundary Monumentation. ER 1110-1
1-8170.pdf?ver=2017-05-05-132910-107
A-1
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
EP 1110-2-13
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1996) Dam Safety Preparedness. EP 1110-2-13. Washington,
DC: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
https://planning.erdc.dren.mil/toolbox/library/EPs/EP1110-2-13_28Jun1996.pdf
EM 1110-1-1000
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2015) Photogrammetric and LiDAR Mapping. EM 1110-1-1000.
Washington, DC: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
http://www.publications.usace.army.mil/Portals/76/Publications/EngineerManuals/EM_1110-1
1000.pdf?ver=2016-03-25-080019-613
EM 1110-1-1002
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2012) Survey Markers and Monumentation. EM 1110-1-1002.
1002.pdf
EM 1110-1-1003
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1996) NAVSTAR Global Positioning System Surveying. EM
1003.pdf?ver=2013-09-04-075011-243
EM 1110-1-1005
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2007) Control and Topographic Surveying. EM 1110-1-1005.
1005.pdf?ver=2014-04-01-094204-880
EM 1110-1-1904
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1990) Settlement Analysis. EM 1110-1-1904. Washington, DC:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
1904.pdf?ver=2013-09-04-070854-997
EM 1110-2-1911
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1995) Construction Control for Earth and Rock-Fill Dams. EM
1911.pdf?ver=2013-09-04-161128-287
A-2
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
EM 1110-2-1003
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2004) Hydrographic Surveying. EM 1110-2-1003. Washington,
DC: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
1003.pdf?ver=2014-01-06-155809-307
EM 1110-2-1908
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1995) Instrumentation of Embankment Dams and Levees. EM
1908.pdf
EM 1110-2-2200
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1995) Gravity Dam Design. EM 1110-2-2200. Washington, DC:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
2200.pdf
EM 1110-2-2300
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2004) General Design and Construction Considerations for
Earth and Rock-Fill Dams. EM 1110-2-2300. Washington, DC: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
2300.pdf
EM 1110-2-4300
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1980) Instrumentation for Concrete Structures. EM 1110-2
4300.pdf
USATEC 1996
U.S. Army Topographic Engineering Center (1996) Handbook for Transformation of Datums,
Projections, Grids and Common Coordinate Systems. TEC-SR-7.
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a307127.pdf
USATEC 1999
U.S. Army Topographic Engineering Center (1999) Design and Evaluation of Geodetic Surveys
for Deformation Monitoring at the U.S. Army Engineer District, Seattle.
Federal Geodetic Control Committee 1984

Federal Geodetic Control Committee (1984) Standards and Specifications for Geodetic Control
Networks. Rockville, MD.
http://maps.gis.co.brown.wi.us/web_documents/LIO/PDF/LION/GeographicFrameworks.pdf
A-3
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Federal Geodetic Control Committee 1988

Federal Geodetic Control Committee (1988) Geometric Geodetic Accuracy Standards and
Specifications for Using GPS Relative Positioning Techniques. Rockville, MD.
https://www.ngs.noaa.gov/PUBS_LIB/GeomGeod.pdf
National Geodetic Survey 1977

National Geodetic Survey (1977) Use of Calibration Base Lines. NOAA Technical
Memorandum NOS NGS 10, Rockville, MD.
https://www.ngs.noaa.gov/PUBS_LIB/TMNOSNGS10.pdf

National Geodetic Survey (1982) Establishment of Calibration Base Lines. NOAA Technical
Memorandum NOS NGS 8, Rockville, MD.
https://www.ngs.noaa.gov/CBLINES/pubs/TMNOSNGS8.pdf

National Geodetic Survey (1988) Guidelines for Submitting GPS Relative Positioning Data to
the National Geodetic Survey. Rockville, MD.
NOAA Manual NOS NGS 3 (1981) Geodetic Leveling. Rockville, MD.
https://www.ngs.noaa.gov/PUBS_LIB/Geodeticleveling_nos_3.pdf
Office of Management and Budget 1990
Office of Management and Budget (1990) Coordination of Surveying, Mapping, and Related
Spatial Data Activities. Circular No. A-16. Washington, D.C.
Chrzanowski and Ahmed 1971
Chrzanowski, A., and F.A. Ahmed (1971) Alignment Surveys in a Turbulent Atmosphere Using
Laser. Washington, DC: Proceedings of the American Congress on Surveying and Mapping. 07
12 March, pp. 494-513. https://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=93616
Chrzanowski 1974
Chrzanowski, A. (1974) Precision Alignment Surveys Using Laser. Proceedings of the XIVth
International Congress of Surveyors, Washington, D.C., 07-16 September, 6 pp.
Discol 1978
Discol, W. (Ed.). (1978) Handbook of Optics, New York: McGraw Hill.
Rüeger 1990
Rüeger, J.M. (1990) Electronic Distance Measurement, An Introduction. Berlin; New York:
Springer-Verlag.
A-4
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Smith 1993
Smith, F. G. (1993) The Infrared & Electro-Optical Systems Handbook: Atmospheric
Propagation of Radiation, Vol. 2. SPIE Press. http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a364018.pdf
Tatarskii 1971
Tatarskii, V. I. (1971) The Effects of the Turbulent Atmosphere on Wave Propagation. Moscow.
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1971etaw.book.....T
Williams et al. 1989
Williams, C.S., Becklund, O.A. and D.C. Williams (1989) Optical Methods of Engineering
Metrology. (ISBN 0-412-39640-8), 477 pp.
Yoder 1986
Yoder, D. (1986) Introduction to the Optical Transfer Function. Wiley-Interscience, (ISBN: 0
471-94770-9), Opto-Mechanical System Design, New York.
A-2. Related Publications.
Although not necessarily referenced in this manual, the following publications contain technical
background information that relates to the performance and analysis of precise structural
deformation surveys.
Baker 1993
Baker, L.R. (1993) Specification and Measurement of Optical Systems. (ISBN 0-8194-0960-X),
250 pp.
Bomford 1980
Bomford, G. 1980. Geodesy. Clarendon, 855 pp.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/gj.3350170108/full
Chen et al. 1989
Chen, Y.C., Chrzanowski, A., and J.M. Secord (1989) A Strategy for the Analysis of the Stability
of Reference Points in Deformation Surveys. CISM Journal ACSGC, Vol 44, No. 2, Summer
1990, pp.141-149.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/296725463_A_strategy_for_the_analysis_of_the_stabil
ity_of_reference_points_in_deformation_surveys
Chrzanowski et al. 1976
Chrzanowski, A., A. Jarzymowski, and M. Kaspar (1976) A Comparison of Precision Alignment
Methods. The Canadian Surveyor, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 81-96.
A-5
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Chrzanowski 1982
Chrzanowski, A. (1982) Use of Tiltmeters in Continuous Monitoring of Ground Subsidence.
Proceedings of the 7th Conference of Southern African Surveyors, Johannesburg, 25-29 January,
9 pp. http://www2.unb.ca/ccge/publications/mines.php
Chrzanowski 1986
Chrzanowski, A., Chen, Y.C., and J.M. Secord (1986) Geometrical Analysis of Deformation
Surveys. Proceedings of the Deformation Measurements Workshop, MIT, Cambridge, pp. 170
206. http://www2.unb.ca/ccge/publications/downloads/CCGE%20-%201986%20
%20Geometrical%20analysis%20of%20deformation%20surveys.pdf
Chrzanowski 1986
Chrzanowski, A. (1986) Geotechnical and other Non-Geodetic Methods in Deformation
Measurements. Proceedings of the Deformation Measurements Workshop, MIT, Cambridge, pp.
207-220. http://www2.unb.ca/ccge/publications/deformationsurveys.php
Chrzanowski 1992
Chrzanowski, A., Avella, S., Chen, Y.C., and J. M. Secord (1992) Existing Resources,
Standards, and Procedures for Precise Monitoring and Analysis of Structural Deformations -
Volumes 1-2. U.S. Army Topographic Engineering Center, TEC-0025.
Chrzanowski and Szostak-Chrzanowski 1995
Chrzanowski, A. and A. Szostak-Chrzanowski (1995) Identification of Dam Deformation
Mechanism. Proceedings of the MWA International Conference on Dam Engineering, Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia, 01-02 August, pp. 179-187.
Department of Defense 1991

Department of Defense (1991) Department of Defense World Geodetic System 1984 - Its
Definition and Relationships with Local Geodetic Systems. DMA Technical Report 8350.2.
Kavanagh 1989
Kavanagh, B.F. (1989) Surveying With Construction Applications. Prentice Hall, 458 pp.
Kuang Shan-Long 1991
Kuang Shan-Long (1991) Optimization and Design of Deformation Monitoring Schemes.
University of New Brunswick, TR No. 157. http://www2.unb.ca/gge/Pubs/TR157.pdf
Leick and Lambert 1990
Leick, Alfred, and Lambert, Steven. (1990) GPS Satellite Surveying, John Wiley, New York.
A-6
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Mayoud et al. 1990
Mayoud, M., E. Menant, and J.P. Quesnel. (1990) Technological Evolution of Measurement
Tools: Dilemmas, Illusions and Realities. Proceedings, International Workshops on Accelerator
Alignment, Argonne, pp. 229-235.
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/econf/C9009106/papers/015.PDF
Mikhail and Ackermann 1976
Mikhail, Edward M., and Ackermann, Friedrich E. (1976) Observations and Least-Squares, IEP
Series Civil Engineering, New York.
Nickerson 1978
Nickerson, B.G. (1978) A Priori Estimation of Variance for Surveying Observables. University
of New Brunswick, TR No. 57, 50 pp. http://www2.unb.ca/gge/Pubs/TR57.pdf
Richardus 1984
Richardus, P. (1984) Project Surveying. A.A. Balkema, Boston, 650 pp.
Secord 1985
Secord, J.M. (1985) Implementation of a Generalized Method for the Analysis of Deformation
Surveys. University of New Brunswick, TR. No. 117.
Soler and Hothem 1988
Soler, T., and Hothem, L. (1988) Coordinate Systems used in Geodesy - Basic Definitions and
Concepts. Journal on Surveying and Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/245291552_Coordinate_Systems_Used_in_Geodesy_B
asic_Definitions_and_Concepts
Trolinger (ND)
Trolinger, J.D. (ND) Optical Inspection and Testing. (ISBN 00-8194-1039-X), 284 pp.
A-3. URL Addresses.
a. URL addresses for selected USACE Commands:
Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers www.usace.army.mil

HQ Publications: Engineer Manuals, Regulations
Pamphlets & Circulars
Engineer Research and Development Center www.erdc.usace.army.mil
Institute for Water Resources (IWR) www.iwr.usace.army.mil
Army Geospatial Center (AGC) www.agc.army.mil
b. URL addresses for selected Governmental agencies; and standards organizations:
A-7
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) www.fgdc.gov

FGDC Bathymetric Subcommittee www.csc.noaa.gov/fgdc_bsc
National Oceanographic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) www.noaa.gov
NOAA National Ocean Service (NOS) www.nos.noaa.gov
NOAA Coast Survey www.nauticalcharts.noaa.gov
NOAA National Geodetic Survey (NGS) www.ngs.noaa.gov
A-8
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
APPENDIX B
Applications: Deformation Surveys of Locks and Dams
Central and Southern Florida Flood Control Project and Lock Dewatering Project
B-1. Example Project. The following A-E Scope of Work illustrates technical requirements for
deformation surveys of typical concrete lock structures. This sample project requires four types
of deformation observations:
-concrete crack measurements with inside micrometer,
-monolith deflection observations with a target micrometer,
-horizontal distance/coordinate trilateration observations with EDM, and
-vertical settlement observations with precise parallel plate differential leveling.
A project sketch is at Figure B-1.
TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS
STRUCTURAL DEFORMATION MONITORING SURVEYS
CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT
Spillway (Caloosahatchee River) S-77
WP Franklin Lock and Dam (Caloosahatchee River) S-79
St Lucie Lock and Dam (St. Lucie Canal) S-80
Port Mayaca Lock and Spillway (St. Lucie Canal) S-308B & S-308C
Moore Haven Lock (Caloosahatchee River) HGS-1
1. LOCATION OF WORK. The project is located in the vicinity of Clewiston, Florida.
2. SCOPE OF WORK.
2a. Perform Structural Deformation Monitoring Surveys (Periodic Inspection and Continuing Evaluation
of Completed Civil Works Structures--i.e., PICES) for determination of long-term structural movements.
Measurements are made from points external to the structure to determine horizontal, vertical, alignment,
concrete crack, and structural joint movement.
2b. The services to be rendered by the Contractor include all the work described in these technical
requirements. Details not specifically described in these instructions are nevertheless a firm requirement
if they can be identified as an item, or items, commonly a part of professional grade work of a
comparative nature.
2c. The Contractor shall furnish all necessary materials, labor, supervision, equipment (other than
furnished by Government), and transportation necessary to execute and complete all work required by
these specifications.
B-1
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
2d. The Corps of Engineers, Survey Section shall be contacted the same day that the Contractor
plans to commence the work. The POC for this project is Bynum Lunsford at (904) 232-1602.
2e. Rights-of-Entry must be obtained verbally and recorded in the field book before entering private
property. Enter the name and address of the property owner contacted.
2f. COMPLIANCE. All Surveying and Mapping products and related work shall be in strict compliance
with the applicable Engineering Manuals and with related technical standards and publications:
 EM-1110-1-1000 (Photogrammetric Mapping)
 EM 1110-1-1002 (Survey Markers and Monumentation),
 EM-1110-1-1003 (NAVSTAR Global Positioning System Surveying)
 EM-1110-2-1003 (Hydrographic Surveying)
 EM-1110-1-2909 (Geospatial Data And System)
 Tri-Services A/E/C CADD Standards, Spatial Data Standards and related Spatial Data
Products
 Florida Statues Chapter 177, Chapter 472 and Rule Chapter 61G17, Florida Administrative
Code.
3. FIELD SURVEY EFFORT. The area of work is outlined on Enclosure 1 Quad map, Enclosure 2
structure drawings, Enclosure 3 PICES historic report tabulation, Enclosure 4 technical requirements, and
Enclosure 5 PICES detailed field measurement procedures.
3a. STRUCTURAL MOVEMENT MEASUREMENTS. Obtain horizontal EODM trilateration

observations and vertical settlement measurements for S - 77 Spillway (Caloosahatchee River), vertical
settlement measurements and horizontal alignment measurements for S - 79 WP Franklin Lock and Dam
(Caloosahatchee River), vertical settlement measurements, horizontal EODM trilateration observations,
and horizontal alignment measurements for S - 80 St Lucie Lock and Dam (St. Lucie Canal), horizontal
alignment measurements, vertical settlement measurements, and crack measurements for S -308B & S -
308C Port Mayaca Lock and spillway (St. Lucie Canal), vertical settlement measurements for Moore
Haven Lock (Caloosahatchee River) structures on Central And Southern Florida Flood Control Project.
3b. VERTICAL SETTLEMENT MEASUREMENTS
3b1. GENERAL. Vertical settlement is determined by precision differential leveling methods. Fixed
reference points (bedrock benchmarks) are used to check for potential movement of various settlement
points on the structure. Leveling shall be performed in conformance with the methods and accuracy of
1st-Order Geodetic Leveling.
3b2. PROJECT REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS. Each structure has a drawing showing
the locations of the benchmarks, structure settlement points and instrument stands along with a tabular
report indicating differential changes from previous reading and columns for this year's data set.
3b3. EQUIPMENT. The Government will furnish a first-order level, self-supporting rods and turning
pins.
3b4. RECORDING FORMATS. Micrometer leveling forms will be furnished. Level sketches and
abstracts shall be prepared on 8 1/2" x 11" sheets.
B-2
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
3b5. OBSERVING PROCEDURES. Levels between reference BM's and structure points shall be
run using single run/double rod precise leveling methods. Double run/double rod leveling methods are
required when single run lines do not meet external misclosure tolerances.
3b6. INTERNAL MISCLOSURE TOLERANCES. Misclosure Tolerance = 3 mm x sqrt K (where K

is distance in kilometers)
3b7. EXTERNAL MISCLOSURE TOLERANCE. If results do not compare with previously published
report elevations double run line to verify that external misclosure excess is due to settlement of points
and not due to internal problems.
3b8. INSTRUMENT CALIBRATION REQUIREMENTS. C - Factor calibrations shall be performed

twice weekly, or at the beginning of leveling at a new structure, or daily if outside prescribed limits.
3b9. FIELD/OFFICE COMPUTATIONS AND REDUCTIONS. Leveling data sheets shall be

checked in the field for resultant differential elevations for each run--sketches internal and external
tolerances. Compile values into the current PICES report.
3c. HORIZONTAL EODM TRILATERATION OBSERVATIONS.
3c1. GENERAL. Distances to structural monitoring points are observed from one or more rigid
instrument stands remote from (not influenced by) the structure. Observed structural movement vectors
generally being perpendicular to the structures probable plane of failure.
3c2. PROJECT REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS. Each structure has a drawing showing
the locations of the benchmarks, structure reference points and instrument stands along with a tabular
3c3. EQUIPMENT. If available a short-range precision Electronic Distance Meter with numbered
reflector and calibrated over a baseline. If unavailable equipment will be furnished by the Government.
3c4. RECORDING FORMATS. Standard field survey books, showing readings, atmospheric
conditions, height, computations and reductions.
3c5. OBSERVING PROCEDURES. Two sets of five observations.
3c6. INTERNAL REJECTION CRITERIA. A spread for mean of 10 observations (2 sets of 5) shall
not vary by more than +/- 0.002 meter' otherwise, reobserve series.
3c7. EXTERNAL REJECTION CRITERIA. Change of +/- 0.005 meter from previous PICES length
observations.
3c8. CALIBRATION REQUIREMENTS. Calibration must be performed with each available

reflector and the resultant system constants for the instrument/reflector pair clearly identified by serial
numbers.
3c9. FIELD/OFFICE COMPUTATIONS AND REDUCTIONS. Final corrected (atmospheric, system

constant, eccentricities, slope & elevation) horizontal distances will be computed and verified/checked in
the field. Compile values into the current PICES report.
3d. HORIZONTAL ALIGNMENT DEFLECTION MEASUREMENTS.
B-3
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
3d1. GENERAL. Horizontal deformation of points on structural sections are monitored by

observing magnitudes (by micrometer) with precision theodolite relative to fixed pints on a baseline not
influenced by the structure.
3d2. PROJECT REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS. Each structure has a drawing showing
3d3. EQUIPMENT. If available Wild T-2 with force centering tribrach targets, plug inserts and
alignment micrometer. If unavailable equipment will be furnished by the Government.
3d4. RECORDING FORMATS. Standard field survey books, showing readings, atmospheric
conditions, height, computations and reductions.
3d5. OBSERVING PROCEDURES. Two sets of five observations with micrometer left and right.
3d6. INTERNAL REJECTION CRITERIA. Plus or minus 0.02" spread from mean.
3d7. EXTERNAL REJECTION CRITERIA. None.
3d8. CALIBRATION REQUIREMENTS. None.
3d9. FIELD/OFFICE COMPUTATIONS AND REDUCTIONS. Mean left and right micrometer
observations to the nearest 0.001". Variation for left or right mean in the 5 set series should not exceed
+/- 0.02; if so reobserve. Compile values into the current PICES report.
3e. CRACK MEASUREMENTS.
3e1. GENERAL. Measurements are made relative to grouted plugs set across a concrete crack or
structural construction joint.
3e2. PROJECT REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS. Each structure has a drawing showing
3e3. EQUIPMENT. The Government will furnish Starrett Inside Micrometer
3e4. RECORDING FORMATS. Standard field survey books, showing readings, computations and
reductions.
3e5. MEASUREMENT PROCEDURES. Read Micrometer in both directions between crack plugs
and mean results to the nearest 0.001".
3e6. INTERNAL REJECTION CRITERIA. One thousand inch between each direction; +/-0.001"
from nominal calibration bar.
3e7. EXTERNAL REJECTION CRITERIA. None.
3e8. CALIBRATION REQUIREMENTS. None.
3e9. FIELD/OFFICE COMPUTATIONS AND REDUCTIONS. Compile checked and verified values
into the current PICES report.
B-4
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
3e. CONTROL. The vertical reference datum is assumed 100.00 meters. A horizontal reference
datum is not required.
3f. All original field notes shall be kept in standard pocket size field books and shall become the
property of the Government. The first four pages of the field books shall be reserved for indexing and the
binding outside edge shall be free of all marking.
4. OFFICE REVIEW AND COMPUTATIONS. The Contractor shall make the necessary computations to
verify the correctness of all measurements and apply the proper theory of location in accordance with the
law or precedent and publish the results of the survey. The contractor shall submit the original field notes
and horizontal and vertical abstract (computation abstract) to Survey Section.
5. CONTRACTOR QUALITY CONTROL/GOVERNMENT QUALITY ASSURANCE.
 The Contractor is responsible for quality control.

 Government personnel may perform inspections of the Contractor's field operations at any
time during the prosecution of this work. The Contractor shall explain calibration procedures
and operational activities related to their field effort.
 If during the Government's review of the Contractor's products it becomes apparent that little
or no review has been done, the Government will return the entire project to the Contractor
for correction.
6. DELIVERIES. On completion, all data required shall be delivered or mailed to Design Branch, Survey
Section at the address shown in the contract, and shall be accompanied by a properly numbered, dated
and signed letter or shipping form, in duplicate, listing the materials being transmitted. All digital data
shall be submitted on CD-ROM's. All costs of deliveries shall be borne by the Contractor. Items to be
delivered include, but are not limited to the following:
6a. Horizontal and Vertical Field Books.

6b. Bound 8-1/2" x 11" abstracts, reductions, computations, adjustments, and tabular summaries fully
annotated with independent checks.
6c. PICES report tabulations.
SUBMITTED BY_____________________B. Lunsford
Engineering Division
Design Branch
B-5
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
SUBJECT: Contract No. DACW17-99-D-0046
Mr. John Morgan

Morgan & Ekland, Inc.
8745 U. S. Highway 1
Wabasso, Florida 32970
Mr. Morgan:
Reference contract number DACW17-99-D-0046 for Surveying and Mapping Services. The
Government desires to execute a delivery order under subject contract for the following project:
STRUCTURAL DEFORMATION MONITORING SURVEYS

CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA
FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT
CLEWISTON, FLORIDA (SURVEY NO. 00-211)
Please review the enclosed Scope of Work outlining the Technical Requirements and submit an
itemized fee proposal for this work within 10 working days of receipt of this document. Please furnish this
fee proposal to the attention of the Chief, Design Branch.
This request does not constitute a notice to proceed for the Delivery Order. Please do
not commence work or incur any costs chargeable to the Government. You are cautioned that
preparation of this fee proposal is entirely at your own risk and the Government can assume no
obligation for payment of any related expenses incurred by your firm.
Bynum Lunsford of the Survey Section is the point of contact. Please call him at 904-232-1602 if
you have questions or need additional information.
Sincerely,
Walter Clay Sanders, P.E

Assistant Chief, Engineering Division
Enclosures
B-6
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Crack Measurement plugs
Alignment points
Figure B-1. Structural monitoring and target points for Port Mayaca Lock and Spillway,
Central & Southern Florida Flood Control Project.
B-2. Project Illustration: Surveying for Lock Structure Dewatering Lock & Dam No. 4. The
following project illustrates plans and procedures for deformation surveys of concrete lock
structures. The most common lock structure uses concrete gravity walls founded on either piling
or rock. Maintenance of navigation locks requires full dewatering of the lock chamber and most
flow passages. Monitoring the relative position of the gate monoliths and wall movement is
made to ensure safety and stability of the structure. This example represents a typical wall
monitoring operation for lock dewatering. Deformation surveys of this type are usually short-
term and include the following types of observations.
-Monolith deflection observations with inside micrometer

-Horizontal distance/coordinate observations with surveying instruments.
-Vertical settlement observations with differential leveling
-Water level measurements read inside the lock chamber
B-7
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
-Peizometer and well observations on the landside embankment
a. Project Location and Description. Lock No. 4 is located in Alma, Wisconsin, at river mile
752.8 on the upper Mississippi River—Figures B-2 and B-3. The lock is 600-feet long by 110
feet wide, and raises and lowers traffic 7 feet. The dam is 6,867-feet long, including movable
gate sections and earth-fill dike. The movable gate section consists of six roller gates and 22
tainter gates. Pool 4 formed by this dam is 44.1 river miles encompassing 22-mile-long Lake
Pepin, a natural lake in the main channel of the Mississippi. Lock and Dam No. 4 was
completed in 1935, with major rehabilitation completed in 1994 adding 50 years to its
serviceability.
Figure B-2. Aerial View of Lock and Dam No. 4, Alma, WI.
b. Preparation and General Procedures. Work will be conducted in 2–12-hour shifts, each
consisting of Party Chief, Instrumentman, Rodman. The Wild T2002 will be checked and
adjusted 48 hours before surveys start and per manufacturer's specifications. Tribrachs will be
adjusted before starting instrumentation surveys. Barometric pressure (station pressure) will be
recorded every hour on the hour. Temperature will be recorded every hour on the hour.
Atmospheric correction (combination of pressure and temperature) will be recorded and applied
to the instrument before each session of measurements. One person will measure the wells and
piezometers, the gauge inside the chamber, and number and size of pumps that are running every
two hours.
c. Equipment List.
Wild Leica TC2002, Di2000 with 2 Charged Batteries.
B-8
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
EDM Battery Charger
2 Single Prisms
8 Tripods
8 Tribrachs
30 Sand Bags ½ Filled with Dry Sand
Barometer (Station Type, Not Sea Level)
Thermometer
Wild TC2002 Hand Book with Graphs for Environmental Corrections
Piezometer Gauge Reader (Eng. Div)
Small Plastic Bags to Cover Tribrachs
Umbrella to Keep Instrument Dry If Raining
Water Gauge and Weight for Inside Chamber
Roto Hammer, Anchors, Washers, and Pedestals
Lead Wool 15#
4 Flashlights
Hammer and Chisel
10 lb. Maul
Field Books
Warm, Dry Clothes
d. Instrumentation Procedures. The following instrumentation procedures were followed

during the Lock #4 dewatering project 2000. (Refer to Figures B-4 through B-9).
(1) A new baseline will be set along the landside parking lot and Hwy 35. The existing
baseline monuments must be abandoned for a location greater than 25’ from the Railroad tracks.
The new base line monuments will be 1 inch steel rebar 4 feet in length with punch holes. They
will be aligned dead center with each other. These monuments will be checked once per day to
ensure there is no movement.
(2) Set Leica TC2002 at monument 0+00 on the Intermediate wall, back sight monument L
3 (Station 0+00) on the old baseline. Then turn right angles up and down the Intermediate wall
(I-wall) and set lead plugs with brass tacks at station 2+97.09A, 3+65.86A, 4+01.32A, 1+73.68B
and 2+68.18B. Align tacks dead center with each other.
(3) Set the instrument at each of the above stations on the I-wall and turn right angles across
the lock chamber and set stainless steel pedestals. Station 0+00 on the landwall is a brass disc,
do not set a pedestal here. At landwall station 4+01.32A and 3+65.86A, set a new pedestal at
each station on Control Building. These pedestals on the building will be heated and bent to the
vertical position on the building.
(4) With the instrument set at Stations 0+00 on the I-wall, back sight monument L-3 (Station
0+00) on the old base line and plunge line ahead to the parking lot to 0+00 on the new base line.
Make punch hole.
B-9
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(5) Move the instrument to station 0+00 on the new base line, back sight station 0+00 on the
I-wall. Turn right angles to the other two base line monuments and make punch marks dead
center with each other.
(6) All measurements will be made from the I-wall to the landwall, to the new base line, and
to the building pedestals.
(7) Start with measuring the alignment on the new base line each day for three days.
-Move the instrument to I-wall station 4+01.32A, measure the distance in meters to
station 4+01.32A on the opposite landwall and to station 4+01.32A on the building.
Measure the distance 5 times to each station and record and average the readings.
-Move the instrument to I-wall station 3+65.86A and measure the distance in meters to
station 3+65.86A on the landwall and to the building. Measure the distance 5 times to
each station and record and average the readings.
-Move the instrument to I-wall station 2+97.09A and measure the distance in meters
landwall station 2+97.09A and to the new base line station 2+97.09A. Measure the
distance 5 times to each station and record and average the readings.
-Move the instrument to I-wall station 0+00 and measure the distance in meters to
landwall station 0+00 and to the new base line 0+00. Measure the distance 5 times to
each station and record and average the readings.
-Move the instrument to I-wall station 1+73.68B and measure the distance in meters to
landwall station 1+73.68B. Measure the distance 5 times to each station and record and
average the readings.
-Move instrument to I-wall station 2+68.18B and measure the distance in meters to
landwall station 2+68.18B on the landwall. Measure the distance 5 times to each station
and record and average the readings.
(8) This procedure will be repeated two to three days before de-watering to initialize the
system. When the drawdown starts, this system will be measured every two hours during
drawdown. After the lock is de-watered, the system will be measured once per day for five days,
then once per week thereafter until the chamber is refilled, then once per day for two days. The
monitoring will then be completed.
e. Special Instructions. The water inside the lock chamber is not to drop faster than ½ foot
per hour. This is a very critical task and pumps may need to be shut down to maintain this ½
foot per hour. There will be 6–8 inch Flyght pumps and 2–6 inch Flyght pumps operating to
dewater the lock. If the water is dropping at a faster rate, shut down the 6-inch pumps first.
Observe the water gauge in the chamber for the next hour and adjust the number of operating
pumps accordingly.
(1) While observing the monitoring system and 0.006 m of movement is determined, notify
the Structural Branch (POC and phone numbers are posted) that you have detected movement of
B-10
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
6 mm or more and then keep repeating the measurements at that station every ½ hour, or until
instructed otherwise.
(2) The water level inside the wells and in the piezometers are very critical. Try to maintain
the target level on the form provided. If large increases are detected, notify Geotechnical Branch
(POC and phone numbers are posted) that you have detected a large change in water levels. If
this happens, you will need to measure the water levels more frequently, and possibly adjust the
valves on the wells.
Figure B-3. Lock and Dam No. 4 showing Intermediate Wall and Land Wall.
B-11
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, ST PAUL DISTRICT
Date Time Temp Pumps Gauge Reading Date Time Temp Pumps Gauge Reading
In Chamber in Chamber
12/10/00 2200 -1 4 - 8" Flyght 14.74 12/11/00 2230 5 - 8" Flyght 8.30
12/11/00 2400 -1 5 - 8" Flyght 14.60 2300 5 - 8" Flyght 8.20
30 -1 5 - 8" Flyght 14.60 2330 5 - 8" Flyght 8.10
100 -1 5 - 8" Flyght 14.60 2400 5 - 8" Flyght 8.10
130 -1 5 - 8" Flyght 14.30 12/12/00 30 5 - 8" Flyght 7.9
200 -1 5 - 8" Flyght 14.10 100 5 - 8" Flyght 7.9
230 -1 5 - 8" Flyght 14.00 230 5 - 8" Flyght 7.5
300 -1 5 - 8" Flyght 13.80 300 5 - 8" Flyght 7.5
330 -2 5 - 8" Flyght 13.70 330 5 - 8" Flyght 7.2
400 -2 5 - 8" Flyght 13.60 400 5 - 8" Flyght 7.0
430 -2 5 - 8" Flyght 13.60 430 5 - 8" Flyght 6.9
500 -2 5 - 8" Flyght 13.50 500 5 - 8" Flyght 6.5
530 -2 5 - 8" Flyght 13.40 530 5 - 8" Flyght 6.4
600 -2 5 - 8" Flyght 13.40 600 -7 5 - 8" Flyght 6.3
630 -2 5 - 8" Flyght 13.40 630 -7 5 - 8" Flyght 6.3
700 -2 5 - 8" Flyght 13.30 700 -10 5 - 8" Flyght 6.3
730 -2 5 - 8" Flyght 13.30 730 -10 5 - 8" Flyght 6.3
800 -2 5 - 8" Flyght 13.20 800 -10 5 - 8" Flyght 6.3
830 -2 5 - 8" Flyght 13.20 830 -10 5 - 8" Flyght 6.3
900 -2 5 - 8" Flyght 13.00 900 -3 5 - 8" Flyght 6.1
1100 0 5 - 8" Flyght 12.40 1000 -3 5 - 8" Flyght 5.8
1130 1 5 - 8" Flyght 12.00 1030 -3 4 - 8" Flyght 5.5
1200 3 5 - 8" Flyght 11.70 1100 -2 4 - 8" Flyght 5.4
1230 3 5 - 8" Flyght 11.50 1230 0 4 - 8" Flyght 5.0
1300 2 5 - 8" Flyght 11.30 1330 1 5 - 8" Flyght 4.8
1330 3 5 - 8" Flyght 11.15 1400 -1 5 - 8" Flyght 4.6
1400 3 5 - 8" Flyght 11.00 1430 -1 5 - 8" Flyght 4.5
1430 3 5 - 8" Flyght 10.80 1600 -2 5 - 8" Flyght 3.9
1500 2 5 - 8" Flyght 10.50 1630 -2 5 - 8" Flyght 3.7
1530 2 5 - 8" Flyght 10.35 1700 -3 5 - 8" Flyght 3.5
1600 2 5 - 8" Flyght 10.10 1730 -4 5 - 8" & 1 - 6" 3.3
1630 2 5 - 8" Flyght 9.90 1800 -4 5 - 8" & 1 - 6" 3.1
1700 2 5 - 8" Flyght 9.70 1830 -4 5 - 8" & 1 - 6" 2.8
1730 2 5 - 8" Flyght 9.50 1900 -4 5 - 8" & 1 - 6" 2.6
1830 2 5 - 8" Flyght 9.30 2000 -4 5 - 8" & 1 - 6" 2.3
1900 2 5 - 8" Flyght 9.10 2030 -3 5 - 8" & 1 - 6" 1.8
1930 5 - 8" Flyght 9.10 2230 -3 3 - 8" & 1 - 6" 1.5
2000 5 - 8" Flyght 8.70 12/13/00 30 -3 3 - 8" & 1 - 6" 1.1
2030 5 - 8" Flyght 8.60 100 -3 2 - 8" & 1 - 6" Iced up
2100 5 - 8" Flyght 8.50 400 -2 2 - 8" & 1 - 6" Iced up
2130 5 - 8" Flyght 8.40 600 -2 2 - 8" & 1 - 6" Dewatered
2200 5 - 8" Flyght 8.30
Figure B-4. Water level (Gauge) readings recorded during dewatering operations.
B-12
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ST. PAUL DISTRICT

Lock #4 Monitoring Measurements
NEW BASELINE SURVEY (NBL)

Date Time Temp F Press. 0+00 NBL 2+97.09A NBL3+65.86A NBL
8-Dec-00 1300 12 Deg F 30.1 0.00 0.00 0.00
9-Dec-00 1400 12 Deg F 30.1 0.00 0.00 0.00
INITIAL SURVEY (Distances in Meters)

0+00 I wall 0+00 I wall 2+97A I wall 2+97A I wall 3+66A I wall 3+66A I wall 4+01A I wall 4+01A I wall 1+74B I wall 2+68B I wall
0+00 L wall 0+00 NBL 2+97A L wall 2+97A NBL 3+66A L wall 3+66A Bldg 4+01A L wall 4+01A Bldg 1+74B L wall 2+68B L wall
8-Dec-00 1400 12 Deg F 30.1 35.2018 86.3114 35.5933 86.3105 34.7282 42.1385 34.7468 42.1747 34.6993 34.6021
9-Dec-00 900 16 Deg F 30.0 35.2027 86.3095 35.5945 86.3125 34.7290 42.1395 34.7477 42.1742 34.6998 34.6065
9-Dec-00 1030 16 Deg F 30.0 35.2042 86.3092 35.5945 86.3122 34.7292 42.1386 34.7463 42.1752 34.7014 34.6065
INITIAL SURVEY (Average Values) 35.2029 86.3100 35.5941 86.3117 34.7288 42.1389 34.7469 34.1750 34.7002 34.6050
MONITORING SURVEY
0+00 I wall 0+00 I wall 2+97A I wall 2+97A I wall 3+66A I wall 3+66A I wall 4+01A I wall 4+01A I wall 1+74B I wall 2+68B I wall
Date Time Temp F Press. 0+00 L wall 0+00 NBL 2+97A L wall 2+97A NBL 3+66A L wall 3+66A Bldg 4+01A L wall 4+01A Bldg 1+74B L wall 2+68B L wall
11-Dec-00 2400 -1 30.05 35.2018 86.3090 35.5990 86.3122 34.7293 42.1395 34.7488 42.1785 34.6976 34.6050
11-Dec-00 200 -1 30.05 35.2032 86.3090 35.5935 86.3127 34.7291 42.1383 34.7557 42.1735 34.6981 34.6030
11-Dec-00 400 -2 30.05 35.2031 86.3086 35.5954 86.3140 34.7355 42.1440 34.7465 42.1736 34.6981 34.6037
11-Dec-00 600 -2 30.05 35.2020 86.3084 35.5959 86.3145 34.7313 42.1397 34.7471 42.1746 34.6996 34.6047
11-Dec-00 800 -2 30.05 35.2021 86.3082 35.5939 86.3136 34.7300 42.1400 34.7491 42.1763 34.6987 34.6031
11-Dec-00 1000 1 30.05 35.2029 86.3084 35.5951 86.3132 34.7320 42.1405 34.7494 42.1773 34.6983 34.6033
11-Dec-00 1200 3 30.00 35.2049 86.3078 35.5941 86.3119 34.7294 42.1392 34.7488 42.1769 34.6980 34.6042
11-Dec-00 1400 3 29.95 35.2038 86.3078 35.5947 86.3126 34.7292 42.1389 34.7479 42.1776 34.6986 34.6038
11-Dec-00 1600 2 29.95 35.2007 86.3077 35.5930 86.3126 34.7304 42.1396 34.7475 42.1752 34.6984 34.6030
11-Dec-00 1800 2 29.97 35.2015 86.3076 35.5945 86.3131 34.7295 42.1419 34.7482 42.1771 34.6978 34.6038
11-Dec-00 2000 2 29.98 35.2006 86.3075 35.5954 86.3111 34.7301 42.1402 34.7475 42.1753 34.6994 34.6028
11-Dec-00 2200 0 29.95 35.2015 86.3075 35.5942 86.3136 34.7288 42.1395 34.7466 42.1765 34.6970 34.6028
12-Dec-00 2400 -1 29.90 35.2025 86.3079 35.5949 86.3130 34.7326 42.1390 34.7470 42.1722 34.6999 34.6044
12-Dec-00 200 -1 29.95 35.2036 86.3079 35.5941 86.3136 34.7298 42.1377 34.7471 42.1746 34.6972 34.6042
12-Dec-00 400 -7 30.00 35.2040 86.3084 35.5937 86.3150 34.7287 42.1388 34.7441 42.1744 34.6989 34.6021
12-Dec-00 600 -7 30.09 35.2011 86.3083 35.5936 86.3122 34.7288 42.1404 34.7425 42.1749 34.6978 34.6030
12-Dec-00 800 -10 30.25 35.2024 86.3072 35.5949 86.3135 34.7288 42.1412 34.7430 42.1753 34.6990 34.6038
12-Dec-00 1000 -1 30.30 35.2021 86.3076 35.5941 86.3145 34.7315 42.1415 34.7497 42.1769 34.7000 34.6044
12-Dec-00 1200 9 30.30 35.2024 86.3077 35.5952 86.3136 34.7305 42.1417 34.7493 42.1770 34.6995 34.6053
12-Dec-00 1400 6 30.30 35.2024 86.3075 35.5945 86.3126 34.7314 42.1413 34.7486 42.1763 34.6996 34.6058
12-Dec-00 1600 0 30.30 35.2032 86.3075 35.5960 86.3139 34.7315 42.1411 34.7496 42.1760 34.7012 34.6060
12-Dec-00 1800 -4 30.30 35.2037 86.3077 35.5963 86.3142 34.7308 42.1412 34.7481 42.1755 34.7007 34.6051
12-Dec-00 2000 -4 30.30 35.2057 86.3075 35.5940 86.3124 34.7307 42.1422 34.7475 42.1780 34.6999 34.6027
12-Dec-00 2200 -3 30.30 35.2005 86.3072 35.5951 86.3132 34.7308 42.1389 34.7456 42.1727 34.6984 34.6019
13-Dec-00 2400 -3 30.30 35.2005 86.3073 35.5938 86.3125 34.7302 42.1403 34.7464 42.1726 34.7002 34.6024
13-Dec-00 200 -2 30.00 35.2004 86.3071 35.5966 86.3133 34.7329 42.1402 34.7473 42.1753 34.6996 34.6038
13-Dec-00 600 -2 30.00 35.2004 86.3068 35.5966 86.3121 34.7318 42.1401 34.7481 42.1750 34.6986 34.6046
Figure B-5. Distances measured across lock chamber walls using conventional
instrumentation.
B-13
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
GPS Wall Monitoring - Baselines (meters)
Hours I-wall 1 I-wall 2 I-wall 3 L-wall 1 L-wall 2 L-wall 3

0 113.9190 53.1768 112.2112 104.0844 25.1903 101.7617
2 113.9219 53.1775
GPS Wall 112.2121
Monitoring 104.0818
- Baselines 25.1895
(meters) 101.7612
5 113.9189 53.1768 112.2126 104.0806 25.1915 101.7619
9
Hours 113.9199
I-wall 1 53.1789
I-wall 2 112.2127
I-wall 3 104.0792
L-wall 1 25.1914
L-wall 2 101.7589
L-wall 3
15 113.9189 53.1782 112.2128 104.0815 25.1906 101.7589
0
22 113.9190
113.9189 53.1768
53.1739 112.2112
112.2113 104.0844
104.0825 25.1903
25.1894 101.7617
101.7599
2
28 113.9219
113.9180 53.1775 112.2163 104.0823 25.1895
53.1775 112.2121 104.0818 25.1890 101.7612
101.7619
5
35 113.9189 53.1768 112.2126 104.0806
113.9160 53.1768 112.2126 104.0798 25.1904 25.1915 101.7619
101.7596
9 113.9199 53.1789 112.2127 104.0792 25.1914 101.7589
15 113.9189 53.1782 112.2128 104.0815 25.1906 101.7589
22 113.9189 53.1739 112.2113 104.0825 25.1894 101.7599
Figure B-6. GPS Wall Monitoring
Processed - Differences
GPS112.2163
baselines from(millimeters)
the reference station.
28 113.9180 53.1775 104.0823 25.1890 101.7619
35 113.9160 53.1768 112.2126 104.0798 25.1904 101.7596
Hours I-wall 1 I-wall 2 I-wall 3 L-wall 1 L-wall 2 L-wall 3
0 0.1 -0.3 -1.5 2.9 0.0 1.2
2 3.0 0.4 -0.8 0.7 -0.8
GPS Wall Monitoring - Differences (millimeters) 0.9
5 0.0 -0.3 -0.3 -0.5 1.2 1.6
9
Hours 1.0
I-wall 1 1.8
I-wall 2 -0.2
I-wall 3 -1.9
L-wall 1 1.1
L-wall 2 -1.4
L-wall 3
15 0.0 1.1 -0.1 0.4 0.3 -1.4
0
22 0.1
0.0 -0.3
-3.2 -1.5
-1.6 2.9
1.4 0.0
-0.9 1.2
-0.4
2
28 3.0
-0.9 0.4
0.4 -0.8
3.4 0.7
1.2 -0.8
-1.3 0.9
1.6
5
35 0.0
-2.9 -0.3
-0.3 -0.3
-0.3 -0.5
-1.3 1.2
0.1 1.6
-0.7
9 1.0 1.8 -0.2 -1.9 1.1 -1.4
15 0.0 1.1 -0.1 0.4 0.3 -1.4
22 0.0 -3.2 -1.6 1.4 -0.9 -0.4
28 -0.9 0.4 3.4 1.2 -1.3 1.6
35 -2.9 -0.3 -0.3 -1.3 0.1 -0.7
Figure B-7. Processed GPS baseline differences from the initial survey.
B-14
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
0+00 (New Baseline)

3+65.86A 2+97.09A
L-3 0+00 (Old Baseline)

Control Bldg
Pedestals
Pedestals L- Wall
18 19 21 28 33 35
3+65.86A
4+01.32A
2+97.09A
1+73.68B
2+68.18B
0+00
55 56 58 I- Wall 66 71 73
(Monoliths)
Flow
LD4 Wall Monitoring Not to Scale
Figure B-8. Instrumentation Plan and Measurement Scheme for conventional

B-15
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
GPS Reference Station
L-Wall 3 L-Wall 2 L-Wall 1
18 L- Wall 28 35
4+01.32A
2+68.18B
0+00
55 I- Wall 66 73
I-Wall 3 I-Wall 2 I-Wall 1
Lock & Dam No. 4 Flow

GPS Wall Monitoring Not to Scale
Figure B-9. Instrumentation Plan and Measurement Scheme for GPS-based

B-16
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
APPENDIX C
Applications: Monitoring Schemes for Concrete Dams
C-1. Background. The following study is taken from a report prepared by the U.S. Army
Topographic Engineering Center "Design and Evaluation of Geodetic Surveys for Deformation
Monitoring at the U.S. Army Engineer District, Seattle." This study of monitoring requirements
for Libby Dam illustrates many of the factors that need to be considered in establishing and
maintaining a monitoring program.
C-2. Project Description. The Libby Dam project is located in Lincoln, County, Montana on the
Kootenai River 17 miles upstream of the City of Libby (USGS 1:24,000 quad map - Alexander
Mountain). Libby Dam (Figure C-1) consists of 46 concrete monoliths including spillway
(monoliths 28-30) and intake (monoliths 20-27).
Figure C-1. Libby Dam.
It has a total length of 880 meters, and a maximum height of about 120 meters. It is classified as
having a high downstream hazard potential in the event of failure. The Seattle District, USACE
designed Libby Dam and its reservoir is used primarily for flood control and power production.
C-3. Reference Network. The reference network (Table C-1) proposed for Libby Dam consists
of four reference stations (R1, R2, R3, and R4) on the surrounding abutments, and four stations
(C06, C23, C35, and C46) located on the crest of the structure on monoliths 6, 23, 35, and 46.
Reference station R1 is located on the southwest pillar of the structure enclosing an existing
weather station upstream of the dam on the right abutment. Reference station R2 is located on an
existing survey observation pillar on the right abutment near the picnic area upstream of the dam.
Reference station R3 is located on the left abutment on top of the rock face used for monitoring
potential abutment instability. Reference station R4 is an alternate located next to a monumented
C-1
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
gravity station near the observation deck on the right abutment. Structure reference points on the
upper deck of the dam crest are located at monoliths 6, 23, 35, and 46, each collocated with
existing suspended and inverted plumb lines. GPS control stations on monoliths 6 and 46 are not
collocated with fixed points for the laser surveys. Alignment fixed points could be either re-
situated to monoliths 6 and 46, or have measured ties to the plumb line station (i.e., at monoliths
6 and 46).
Table C-1. Approximate NAD83 state plane coordinates (MT West projection 1602 in meters),
for Libby Dam reference network.
Station Northing Easting Height
R1 479020.0 170214.0 765.0

R2 478690.0 169884.0 740.0
R3 478010.0 170590.0 838.0
R4 478420.0 169494.0 777.0
C06 478505.0 169771.0 736.0
C23 478315.0 170022.0 736.0
C35 478181.0 170198.0 736.0
C46 478058.0 170360.0 736.0
C-4. Reference Network Reconnaissance.
a. General. Photographs of proposed locations for reference stations are shown in Figures
C-3 through C-5. Pillars have been installed for monitoring with conventional instruments,
which also appear suitable for GPS occupations, being less than 2 kilometers from the farthest
point on the dam crest and acceptable for precision baseline measurement. Monitoring to
proposed locations at the top of the left abutment also would be within acceptable range for GPS
surveys.
b. Intervisibility study. A study was undertaken of the Libby Dam site to identify zones on
the surrounding abutments, and areas upstream and downstream where reference stations could
be situated with a direct LOS to the structure. Figure C-2 shows reference station placements
that will allow dual-use of GPS and conventional surveying equipment. Blue gridlines represent
areas that are visible; red grid-lines represent areas that would be obstructed. The inter-visibility
map was developed from a low resolution USGS Digital Elevation Model (DEM), draped with a
B/W Digital Orthophoto Quarter Quad (DOQQ) raster image. Although the diagram only meets
map accuracy standards, geology and soils maps could be overlain to identify candidate areas for
stable reference points.
C-2
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure C-2. Intervisibility diagram for reference station placements, blue areas visible,
red areas obstructed.
Figure C-3. Reference Station (R1), Libby Dam.
C-3
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure C-4. Reference Station (R2), Libby Dam.
Figure C-5. Existing survey station, Libby Dam.
C-5. Monitoring Requirements.
a. General. Displacements of the dam are related mainly to annual cyclic forces from
changes in reservoir elevation and to a lesser extent temperature of the concrete mass. Measured
displacements under normal operating conditions are typically no greater than 2 cm in the
horizontal plane, and no greater than 0.5 cm in the vertical direction. Both the amount and
direction of movement across different structural components (i.e., monolith sections near the
powerhouse, spillway, abutment contact zones, foundation areas, etc.) can show a significant and
C-4
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
complex variation. Predicting detailed deformations would be difficult without further

engineering analysis.
b. Expected deformation and monitoring tolerances. Libby Dam is exposed to significant

seasonal water level changes of up to 46 m (Figure C-6) and seasonal temperature changes. Data
on the expected deformation of the dam is crucial in evaluating instrumentation. Simplified
analysis of the expected effects of the changeable pool level was conducted to learn what
magnitude of accuracy tolerances should be accepted for designing the deformation
measurements.
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Figure C-6. Water level variations at Libby Dam.
c. Deterministic prediction of displacements. The Finite Element Method (FEM) has been
used in analyzing a typical cross-section of Libby Dam at monolith 23. Figure C-7 shows the
FEM mesh and the distortion of the dam when the water load reaches its highest level. As this
was a simplified analysis, effects from galleries, penstocks, and other openings were neglected.
Since no information on elasticity parameters were available, two FEM analyses of the effects of
the changeable water level were performed for two values of the Young modulus:
(1) E1 = 15 GPa
(2) E2 = 25 GPa
with the Poisson ratio kept at:
 = 0.30.
Figures C-8 and C-9 show the expected tilts of the dam for the maximum (114 m) and minimum
(68 m) expected water levels. The results show that the top of the dam (upper gallery) has a
maximum total horizontal U/D displacement between:
C-5
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
d = -12.5 mm to +13 mm, or 25.5 mm for E1
d = - 7.5 mm to + 8 mm, or 15.5 mm for E2
at the center of the dam when the water level changes by 46 m. On average, one may expect a
total maximum change of displacements between low and high water levels of about 20 mm.
This estimate does not consider the effect of thermal variations of the structure. It may be
expected, however, that temperature induced horizontal displacement in the upper gallery would
be of a magnitude of very few millimeters, while vertical displacements at the top of the dam
could reach about 20 mm (assuming a 20C maximum change of concrete temperature at the
upper levels). The monitoring surveys should be designed to detect:
(20 mm  3)/(2) = 5 mm displacements at the 95% probability level.
The standard deviation of each positioning/offset component in an individual observation epoch

should then be smaller than:
(20 mm)/9 = 2.2 mm.
120
115
110
105
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
Elevation [m]
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
Figure C-7. FEM mesh and displacements (E = 25 GPa, water level = 114 m; displacements
1000 times).
C-6
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
eig
H eig
ht,ht,
Hw H
150 150
100 100
igHhe
t ig
[m h]t [m ]
50 50
0 0
-0
-0
-0
.0
.0
0.0
1
-0
.0
1
-0
5
-0
00
0
-0
.0
.0
50
0
.0
0
.0
.0
08
06
00
420
e
X fo
-Drm
e fo
a tio
rm n
a tio
[m
Figure C-8. Displacement due to water load at high pool.
eig ht,
H eig Hw
ht,
150 150
100 100
igHhet [m
ig h]t [m ]
50 50
0 0
-0
00.0
.0
0
.0
0.0
00
.0
00
5
00
1
05
1
.0
00
.0
05
.0
0
.0
0.0
0.0
00
0
20
41
680
Xfo
-Drm a tio
e fo rm n [m
a tio
Figure C-9. Displacement due to water load at low pool.
C-6. Existing Measurement Systems.
a. General. Instrumentation is placed in Libby Dam to monitor the structural behavior;

ensure safety; determine bending, tilting, and displacement; and check design assumptions and
theoretical computations. Instrumentation includes measurement of interior concrete
temperatures, joint movements, uplift pressures, structural deflections, and internal concrete
C-7
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
stresses. Instruments were also placed in the rock slope adjacent to and above the left abutment
for a distance of 2,000 feet upstream to detect movement in the left bank slope. Some
measurements are automatically recorded via remote phone line connections and the data are
reduced and stored in the District office. A report summarizing the instrumentation evaluations,
with data plots, is published twice a year and provided to Operations Division.
b. Instrumentation. Historical data for all instrumentation readings since 1981 have been
published and are updated on an annual basis. Laser alignment surveys are conducted twice a
year in the upper service gallery section of the dam. Data for plumb lines, uplift pressure cells,
drains, and the left abutment are collected monthly with a review for data quality and
interpretation made by personnel in the District Geotechnical and Environmental Restoration
Branch. A geologist reviews left abutment data on a monthly basis and a structural engineer
performs a quarterly dam information review.
c. Laser alignment surveys. The existing laser alignment system was installed in 1975 for
monitoring the longitudinal alignment of the dam. The lateral offsets of a number of survey
points are measured from a baseline established by a laser beam reference. Surveys are
scheduled during expected maximum upstream and downstream deflections of the dam indicated
by plumb line data.
d. Inverted and conventional plumb lines. Suspended plumb lines are installed in monoliths
23 and 35, both are collocated with inverted plumb lines set in observation rooms connected to
the upper, lower, and drainage service galleries. Inverted plumb lines are installed in monoliths
6 and 46, and in monoliths 23 and 35. Until 1975, both sets of plumb line data in monolith 23
showed gradual downstream deflection believed to reflect structural and foundation stabilization.
Subsequent data indicates movement is primarily related to reservoir pool and concrete
temperature variations. Maximum displacement ranges between 1.5 and 0.5 cm respectively for
suspended and inverted plumb lines. Isolated lateral movement toward the right bank of
approximately 1 mm per year was observed at the base of monolith 35. Inverted plumb line
stations are read automatically using optical sensing-reading systems connected to the local data
communications network. Plumb line readings since 1991 indicate that both monoliths are stable
within "0.25 mm (0.01") in the U/D direction and within "1 mm (0.04") along the axis of the
dam. Monoliths 23 and 35 contain both suspended and inverted plumb lines. At each monolith,
the suspended plumb lines extend from the upper inspection gallery to the drainage and grouting
gallery. The inverted plumb lines extend from the drainage and grouting gallery to an anchor 10
m deep in the bedrock. Suspended and inverted readings at the drainage and grouting gallery can
be combined to give the total displacement of the upper inspection gallery with respect to the
bedrock. The combined readings at these two monoliths indicate very smooth cyclic deflections
of the dam. Movement is well-correlated with the cyclic water load changes, with a maximum
total range of deflections of about 18 mm (0.7").
This value agrees well with the predicted FEM value of about 20 mm. Due to the good
performance of the plumb lines, their data create an excellent control for other instrumentation,
C-8
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
particularly alignment and tiltmeter surveys. Plumb lines indicate that the maximum U/S
deflections occur in March and maximum D/S deflections occur in September, agreeing well
with the time of maximum and minimum water levels.
15.00
13.00
11.00
9.00
7.00
5.00
3.00
Reading (mm)
1.00
-1.00
-3.00
-5.00
-7.00
-9.00
-11.00
U/S - D/S
-13.00 RIGHT - LEFT
-15.00
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Year
Figure C-10. Combined readouts from suspended and inverted plumb lines.
e. Jointmeters. Relative movement across monolith joints is measured by a set of joint

meters embedded in concrete. Gauges are located at monolith joints 21/22, 22/23, and 32/33.
Annual maximum displacements are on the order of 1-3 mm recorded during spring season.
Monoliths adjacent to the left abutment were instrumented in 1992 with an additional twenty,
3D, joint meters to assist in the evaluation of possible deep-seated movement in the left
abutment. As of 1995, no significant movement trends have been observed from these gauges.
f. Foundation deformation meters. Downstream of the axis of the dam (10 and 240 feet),
deformation meters are installed 10, 20, and 60 feet deep in each of the foundation monoliths 18,
23, and 29. These measured foundation movement during construction and initial impoundment.
Currently these meters are read monthly and show only minor movement (1–3 mm cyclic motion
correlated to pool elevation).
g. Uplift pressure cells. Uplift pressure cells are installed at the foundation in monoliths 14,
18, 23, 29, 34, and 41. Pressure cells are used to monitor both drainage effectiveness and
C-9
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
foundation uplift pressure. Gradients downstream of the grout curtain are reported well below
design assumptions.
h. Resistance thermometers. Temperature data to delineate the varying thermal profile

through the monoliths is collected infrequently from resistance thermometers installed in
monoliths 29 and 33. The stabilized mean ultimate interior temperature of the dam is 44–46
degrees Fahrenheit. Changing water and ambient air temperature mainly causes concrete
temperature changes.
i. Strong motion accelerographs. Instruments to record the response of the dam to seismic
motion are installed in the dam (2), powerhouse (1), and downstream above the right abutment.
No earthquakes have occurred of sufficient magnitude to trigger the instruments.
j. Extensometers. Numerous types of wire and rod extensometers are installed to monitor
potential movement in the left abutment nearby a series of rock tendons set after a rockslide that
occurred in 1971. X-type (wire) extensometers are used to monitor movement at specific rock
joints.
k. Tiltmeters. Tiltmeter stations are collocated with plumb lines in monoliths 23 and 35 in
the upper and lower service gallery, and in the drainage and grouting gallery. Data from portable
and installed tiltmeters are collected on a monthly basis. Automated tiltmeter data from the
upper service gallery is collected on a weekly basis from the same elevation as the plumb line
reading station. The portable tiltmeter system operates by a vertically oriented, uniaxial, force-
balanced, servo accelerometer, with a tilt resolution of 10 arc seconds, assuming measurements
are made in two orientations in a horizontal plane (instrument is rotated by 180 degrees between
readings).
C-7. Dam and Powerhouse Structure Alignment Surveys. Laser alignment surveying represents
a major part of the data collected about the overall behavior of the structure. Surveying provides
a comprehensive picture of movement trends and/or anomalies unlike most other types of
instrumentation. Alignment offsets are measured at a series of monuments located next to each
monolith joint. The reference line is established using a projected laser beam between two fixed
points located on monoliths 6 and 46. The laser beam does not directly occupy the alignment
reference line during a given measurement campaign. Instead, four separate alignment segments
are established between the endpoints of the primary alignment. No information is collected to
tie the endpoints of the laser survey to reference monuments in stable areas outside of the
structure.
C-8. Abutments and Surroundings.
a. Left Abutment. Analysis of several years of instrumentation data suggests that movement
is occurring deep within the left abutment rib. Movements define a very large wedge of rock,
failing at its toe by rotation and/or deflection slightly upstream and moving along a complex set
C-10
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
of joint surfaces. Forces from the main portion of the block projecting into the dam foundation
where it could create unacceptable levels of residual stress. Movement of possibly several
inches may be necessary before full resistance of the buttress fill is realized. Jointmeters were
installed in 1992 to verify that the observed rock movement is not affecting left abutment
monoliths. Evaluation of deep seated left abutment movement is not yet complete. Upgraded
monitoring of left bank instrumentation is anticipated depending on the results of the completed
evaluation. One to several monitoring points could be incorporated into surveying scheme to
provide data about surface deformations at the left abutment.
b. Reservoir rim slide activity. Minor erosion, sliding, and isolated areas of rock slope
instability along the left bank of the reservoir have been observed. Inspections indicate that the
reservoir banks appear to be in good condition and any unstable areas pose no threat to Libby
Dam. If the need arises to collect further information on localized settlements or displacements
in upstream areas, some additional monitoring points could be incorporated into the survey
design.
c. Regional effects. Local tectonic activity and cyclic loading of the reservoir were
investigated early on by means of: a regional gravity network; a tiltmeter on the right bank 3
miles upstream; a five station seismic network for microearthquake monitoring; and a
trilateration survey network in the vicinity of the dam to monitor horizontal displacements. In
years of operation no significant seismicity related to impoundment was exhibited.
C-9. Summary of Instrumentation. The deformation monitoring scheme at Libby consists of

two parts: structural monitoring of the dam itself and geotechnical monitoring of the unstable
slope at the left abutment. The main deformation monitoring scheme at the dam consists of:
-Suspended plumb lines in monoliths 23 and 35 (from the top to the Drainage/Grouting
gallery);
-Inverted (floating) plumb lines anchored about 10 m into bedrock and extended to the
upper gallery at monoliths 6 and 46;
-Inverted (floating) plumb lines anchored about 10 m into bedrock and extended to the
drainage and grouting gallery where they meet with the two suspended plumb lines;
-Laser Alignment System in the upper gallery between monoliths 6 and 46 of a total length
of 760 m with two target stations at each monolith;
-Two in-situ installed and one portable tiltmeters in the upper gallery in monolith 35
-Jointmeters between a number of monoliths; and
-In addition, a number of pressure cells, thermistors, piezometers, strong motion
accelerographs, and deformation meters with automatic data recording installed in the
foundation monoliths are observed. No geodetic observations except the laser alignment
system are conducted at Libby Dam. Several borehole extensometers (wire and rod
Multi-Point Borehole Extensometer type) are installed and monitored at the slope of the left
abutment
C-11
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
C-10. Upgrades to Gallery Traversing System.
a. General. The recent development of precision total stations (e.g., Leica TCA1800 and
TCA2003) with self-pointing to corner cube reflectors permits efficient, semi-automatic
measurements to a number of targets in a robotic mode. Monitoring deflections of the monoliths
using geodetic measurement techniques consists of running a traverse along the center of the
inspection gallery. Targets mounted on the monolith walls would be observed from the traverse
stations. For maximum reliability and efficiency, the targets should be permanently mounted
corner cube reflectors. It would then be possible to use ATR to perform the measurements.
With appropriate data collection software, all the observer would have to do at each instrument
setup is point the instrument approximately at each target in one round of observations. The total
station would then be guided by the data collector to do the rest of the observations on its own.
b. Traversing system configurations. Because the measurements are made from tripod
setups, each different survey configurations uses temporary theodolite stations, with control
being defined by selected wall targets. Observations are made between adjacent theodolite
stations, meaning that the surveys will require up to three tripods and the use of forced centering
techniques. Two different possibilities have been considered for providing survey control.
-Endpoint Station Control. The first and last monoliths in the survey are considered to be
stable. These two monoliths each have three permanently mounted prisms with fixed
positions as the only control points in the survey (a datum bias is introduced if one of the
end monoliths is unstable).
-Plumb line Station Control. The second method uses plumb line data control, which
improves reliability and accuracy. Each monolith with a plumb line will have an
additional, permanently mounted, reflector prism serving as control. Movements
indicated by the differences in plumb line readings will be introduced as movements of
these control points in the adjustment of the survey data.
Three different preanalysis trials were made for the traversing system. The first scheme is shown
in Figure C-11, which uses the endpoint monoliths as survey control. Theodolite station spacing
is 100 meters, or every 6th monolith, with a theodolite setup in each of the two end monoliths.
The second scenario is shown in Figure C-12. It is similar to the first, but 200 m spacing
between theodolites is used. The third observation scheme is shown in Figure C-13. It uses 200
m station spacing, but plumb line data is used to control the survey. All scenarios use a standard
deviation of 1.0" for direction measurements, 2.0" for zenith angle measurements, and 1.0 mm
for distance measurements; these specifications are based on, for example, a Leica TCA1800
total station.
C-12
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure C-11. 3D traverse survey with 100 m station spacing.
Figure C-11 shows a 3D traverse survey with sighting between adjacent theodolite stations.
Maximum sight length to target is 60 m requiring 8 instrument setups, and 144 direction,
distance, and zenith angle measurements. The largest U/D stream standard deviation is 1.2 mm
or 3.3 mm at 95% confidence. This configuration gives good results in all three dimensions.
The maximum dimension of any error ellipse for a single epoch is 3.0 mm at the 95% confidence
level.
Figure C-12. 3D geodetic survey with 200 m station spacing.
Maximum sight length to target is 100 m requiring 5 instrument setups, and 99 direction,
distance, and zenith angle measurements. The largest U/D stream standard deviation is 1.4 mm
or 3.8 mm at 95% confidence. This configuration requires considerably less work than the
survey with 60 m station spacing, with slightly lower precision.
Figure C-13. 3D geodetic survey with 200 m station spacing and plumb line control.
C-13
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Maximum sight length to target is 100 m (with plumb line control) requiring 6 instrument setups,
and 108 direction, distance, and zenith angle measurements. The largest U/D stream standard
deviation is 0.7 mm or 1.8 mm at 95% confidence. This configuration gives much better results
than the other schemes because of the plumb line control distributed at points along the traverse.
The survey using 200 m station spacing and plumb line control is the preferred alternative. It
provides excellent precision, with a manageable number of observations. The observation effort
could be further reduced by using only one target per monolith. It would then be very easy to
complete the survey in a few hours by one observer.
C-11. Upgrades to Other Instrumentation.
a. Plumb lines. Suspended and inverted plumb lines are among the most reliable types of
instrumentation that can be used for the measurement structural displacement and tilt. Data from
the suspended and inverted plumb lines should be combined to yield displacements of the top of
the suspended plumb line with respect to the anchor of the inverted plumb line. It would also be
possible to monitor the movement of the suspension point by performing GPS measurements on
the deck immediately above the plumb line.
b. Tilt measurements. Tiltmeters should be carefully calibrated for thermal and temporal
drift. Changes in structural tilt indicated by the plumb line readings are of the order of 30 arc
seconds (variation of approximately 18 mm at monolith 23, with a distance from the anchor point
of 120 m assumed).
c. Geodetic leveling. The level of observed changes in tilt given by the plumb lines could
easily be detected by using geodetic leveling. A good-quality geodetic level and careful
observation procedures should be capable of determining height differences with a standard
deviation of 0.1 mm. If the survey benchmarks are located a distance of 4 m apart, this gives an
angular precision of 5 arc seconds for a single survey. Tilt differences would be determined with
an accuracy of:
(5)(1.96)(2) = 14 arc seconds.
Tilt differences could be evaluated in both the upstream/downstream and left/right directions, as
indicated in Figure C-14. This gives leveling a decided advantage over tiltmeter measurements,
which have a stated standard deviation of 10 arc seconds and need frequent calibration.
C-14
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
plumbline reading station
benchmark
Figure C-14. Tilt measurement with a geodetic level.
d. Vertical movement within galleries. Monitoring schemes are primarily concerned with
upstream/downstream structural movements. However, seasonal variations in water level and
temperature can result in vertical structural movements as well, possibly with a greater
magnitude than the upstream/downstream deflections. Instrumentation can provide verification
of the expected vertical movements and/or structural expansion. Determination of vertical
structural movements, and an evaluation of possible structural expansion, can be accomplished if
an observation scheme is implemented as shown in Figure C-15. Within each gallery, a survey
benchmark can be installed on each monolith to be monitored. Measurements in an individual
gallery will yield the relative vertical displacements between monoliths at the gallery height.
C-15
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Figure C-15. Measurement of vertical structural expansion with invar wire.
e. Vertical movement between galleries. To determine the relative height changes between
the different galleries (caused by expansion of the structure), a suspended invar wire with
attached scales is used. At each gallery, the scale is observed along with the benchmarks. A
change in height difference between the scale and a nearby benchmark (located in the same
monolith) represents the change in height between the benchmark and the wire suspension point.
This is valid only if the wire has a much lower coefficient of thermal expansion than does the
structure, and this is why invar wire should be used.
f. Vertical movement between the dam and bedrock. The inter-gallery changes in height
differences are all made with respect to the structure itself. To determine whether or not there is
a rigid-body movement of the structure with respect to the underlying bedrock, a Multi-point
Borehole Extensometer (MPBX) is installed near the lowest reading station. This MPBX must
have anchors deep in the bedrock. If the height differences from the wire scale to the MPBX
reference plate are combined with the MPBX readings, the change in height difference can then
be derived for any of the wire scales with respect to the bedrock and thus for any of the gallery
benchmarks with respect to the bedrock.
C-16
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
C-12. Upgrades to Geodetic Surveying Systems. Conventional geodetic surveying and GPS
surveying systems are proposed for positioning points on the upper deck of the dam crest (Figure
C-16). Representative preanalysis trials and measurement schemes developed for these surveys
are illustrated in the Figures C-17 and C-18.
Figure C-16. Schematic plan of monitoring survey.
Figure C-17. GPS reference network preanalysis.
C-17
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Reference Point
Control Point
GPS Baseline
Figure C-18. Structure control network.
C-13. Schematic Design of Monitoring.

a. Reference network. Area monitoring network consists of 4 GPS stations with:
-2 GPS stations in a stable area within one kilometer from the dam (downstream areas
may generally be more stable); and
-optionally, 1–2 GPS stations at the unstable slope to provide control for the results
coming from the borehole extensometers.
b. Structure control network. Structural monitoring network consists of:
-2 GPS stations at the upper deck on monoliths 6 and 35, supplemented (if needed) by two
survey stations (pillar type with the self-centering plates) at monoliths 23 and 46 to
connect the network with the plumb lines in those monoliths.
c. Localized
networks. Local Structural monitoring consists of:
-GPS or conventional geodetic surveys across the crest of the structure, or geodetic
traversing in the upper service gallery, between plumb lines at monoliths 6, 23, 35, and 46;
-leveling between monoliths 6 to 46 with one benchmark in each of the intermediate
monoliths;
-existing (four) inverted and (two) suspended plumb lines;
-existing jointmeters;
C-18
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
-one vertical invar wire extensometer with leveling scales at the upper gallery, lower
gallery, and in the drainage gallery;
-one vertical borehole rod extensometer (MPBX type) in the drainage gallery, with three
rods of 5m, 10m, and 15 m in the bedrock (if possible); and
-existing borehole extensometers at the face of the unstable slope.
Largest Position Error: 2.0 mm
Number of Stations: Total 5 (1-fixed and 4-unknown)
Number of Setups: 5 Occupations (Stations R1, R2, R3, C06, C46)
Number of Observations: 33 measurements
Repeated Observations: 2 (baselines)
Instrument: Geodetic Quality GPS receiver
2D and 1D Station Confidence Regions (99.000 percent):
STATION MAJOR SEMI-AXIS (m) VERTICAL (m)
C06 0.0020 0.0017

C23 0.0020 0.0017
C35 0.0020 0.0017
C46 0.0020 0.0017
R2 0.0014 0.0012
R3 0.0020 0.0017
Comments: Reference network surveys using only GPS systems. Survey scheme meets
accuracy requirements using additional ties to points located on the structure.
Description: Structure Network

Largest 2D Position Error: 3.1 mm
Number of Stations: Total 4 (2-fixed and 2-unknown)
Number of Setups: 4 Occupations (C06, C23, C35, C46)
Number of Observations: 20 measurements
Repeated Observations: 2 (repeated sets)
Instrument: Total Station
2D and 1D Station Confidence Regions (99.000%):
STATION MAJOR SEMI-AXIS (m) VERTICAL (m)
C23 0.0031 0.0155
C35 0.0026 0.0113
C-19
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Comments: 2-point structure control network on dam using only conventional surveys. Survey
scheme ties the plumb line stations with observations from traversing only between endpoints.
The survey meets accuracy requirements. Forced centering is used to reduce centering error in
angle measurement.
C-20
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
APPENDIX D
Yatesville Lake Dam Network Adjustment Example
D-1. Sample Adjustment – Yatesville Lake Dam.
INPUT DATA
TITL Yatesville Lake Dam 16th Observation
ELIP GRS 80 6378137.0000 6356752.3141
COMP ADJ
PADJ YES NO NO NO NO NO
PRES YES NO
PSOL YES YES
RTST TAU MAX
PMIS YES YES
CONV 0.0001
MAXI 10
VARF YES YES NO
CONF YES YES NO YES NO
LUNT ft 0.3048006096
CLEV 95.0
LAMB KYN1601 n 37 30 w 84 15 0.0000 500000.0000 n 38 58 n 37 58 1.0 m
*Reference Station Coordinates
NEO 111 R-1 231672.634 2087616.903 682.105 KYN1601

NEO 111 R-2 231581.816 2086624.431 682.250 KYN1601
NEO 111 R-3 231897.263 2087483.998 682.247 KYN1601
NEO 111 R-4 231717.570 2086570.072 682.732 KYN1601
*Monitoring Station Coordinates
NEO 000 C-1 231697.820 2087338.110 680.370 KYN1601

NEO 000 C-2 231704.340 2087188.450 680.340 KYN1601
NEO 000 C-3 231710.460 2087038.150 680.320 KYN1601
NEO 000 C-4 231717.360 2086888.340 680.300 KYN1601
NEO 000 C-5 231724.560 2086738.540 680.280 KYN1601
NEO 000 D-1 231866.180 2087190.540 655.740 KYN1601
NEO 000 D-2 231872.090 2087040.500 655.710 KYN1601
NEO 000 D-3 231878.660 2086891.070 655.830 KYN1601
NEO 000 U-1 231570.700 2087176.720 660.230 KYN1601
NEO 000 U-2 231576.970 2087027.520 660.540 KYN1601
NEO 000 U-3 231581.980 2086877.240 660.350 KYN1601
*Horizontal Angle Observations
ANGL R-1 R-4 U-1 344 30 18.50 1.97

ANGL R-1 R-4 U-2 348 19 23.00 1.75
ANGL R-1 R-4 U-3 350 33 15.30 1.64
ANGL R-1 R-4 C-1 2 42 19.50 2.69
ANGL R-1 R-4 C-2 1 46 28.70 2.01
ANGL R-1 R-4 C-3 1 16 55.10 1.76
ANGL R-1 R-4 C-4 1 3 16.80 1.65
ANGL R-1 R-4 C-5 0 55 31.30 1.59
ANGL R-1 R-4 D-1 21 57 27.50 2.26
ANGL R-1 R-4 D-2 16 37 48.20 1.74
ANGL R-1 R-4 D-3 13 23 18.90 1.64
D-1
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
ANGL R-4 R-1 U-1 11 9 3.70 1.71

ANGL R-4 R-1 U-2 14 37 36.10 1.91
ANGL R-4 R-1 U-3 21 21 29.40 2.36
ANGL R-4 R-1 C-1 359 0 53.20 1.62
ANGL R-4 R-1 C-2 358 46 3.70 1.71
ANGL R-4 R-1 C-3 358 24 40.50 1.92
ANGL R-4 R-1 C-4 357 34 45.70 2.43
ANGL R-4 R-1 C-5 355 9 53.30 3.18
ANGL R-4 R-1 D-1 344 4 22.50 1.71
ANGL R-4 R-1 D-2 339 21 32.60 1.88
ANGL R-4 R-1 D-3 330 53 32.00 2.53
*Distance Observations
DIST R-1 U-1 452.374 0.0051

DIST R-1 U-2 597.508 0.0054
DIST R-1 U-3 745.544 0.0057
DIST R-1 C-1 279.948 0.0049
DIST R-1 C-2 429.643 0.0050
DIST R-1 C-3 580.016 0.0053
DIST R-1 C-4 729.973 0.0057
DIST R-1 C-5 879.943 0.0060
DIST R-1 D-1 468.998 0.0049
DIST R-1 D-2 610.542 0.0054
DIST R-1 D-3 755.003 0.0059
DIST R-2 U-1 552.872 0.0054
DIST R-2 U-2 403.735 0.0051
DIST R-2 U-3 253.770 0.0049
DIST R-2 C-1 723.094 0.0058
DIST R-2 C-2 577.216 0.0054
DIST R-2 C-3 433.294 0.0051
DIST R-2 C-4 296.703 0.0049
DIST R-2 C-5 182.774 0.0047
DIST R-3 C-1 247.126 0.0048
DIST R-3 C-2 352.963 0.0050
DIST R-3 C-3 483.427 0.0053
DIST R-3 C-4 622.264 0.0057
DIST R-3 C-5 765.236 0.0061
DIST R-3 D-1 296.296 0.0049
DIST R-3 D-2 445.017 0.0054
DIST R-3 D-3 593.831 0.0058
DIST R-4 U-1 624.623 0.0054
DIST R-4 U-2 479.110 0.0051
DIST R-4 U-3 336.535 0.0049
DIST R-4 C-1 768.341 0.0058
DIST R-4 C-2 618.551 0.0054
DIST R-4 C-3 468.170 0.0051
DIST R-4 C-4 318.295 0.0049
DIST R-4 C-5 168.650 0.0047
DIST R-4 D-1 638.628 0.0055
DIST R-4 D-2 495.922 0.0052
DIST R-4 D-3 360.176 0.0054
*Zenith Angle Observations
ZANG R-1 U-1 92 46 23.50 2.00

ZANG R-1 U-2 92 4 2.39 2.33
ZANG R-1 U-3 91 40 25.10 2.75
ZANG R-1 C-1 90 21 16.00 2.00
ZANG R-1 C-2 90 14 8.70 2.03
D-2
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
ZANG R-1 C-3 90 10 35.30 2.11
ZANG R-1 C-4 90 8 35.70 2.23
ZANG R-1 C-5 90 7 11.20 2.32
ZANG R-1 D-1 93 13 22.60 2.20
ZANG R-1 D-2 92 28 38.20 2.64
ZANG R-1 D-3 91 59 38.90 2.85
ZANG R-4 U-1 92 3 55.30 2.83
ZANG R-4 U-2 92 39 15.70 2.57
ZANG R-4 U-3 93 48 46.20 2.24
ZANG R-4 C-1 90 10 37.60 2.42
ZANG R-4 C-2 90 13 19.00 2.36
ZANG R-4 C-3 90 17 44.50 2.24
ZANG R-4 C-4 90 26 14.30 2.14
ZANG R-4 C-5 90 49 54.70 2.06
ZANG R-4 D-1 92 25 22.00 2.77
ZANG R-4 D-2 93 7 23.20 2.56
ZANG R-4 D-3 94 17 0.40 2.29
*Orthometric Height Difference Observations
OHDF R-1 C-1 -1.733 0.006

OHDF C-1 C-2 -0.027 0.003
OHDF C-2 C-3 -0.025 0.003
OHDF C-3 C-4 -0.014 0.003
OHDF C-4 C-5 -0.022 0.003
OHDF C-5 R-4 2.451 0.006
OHDF R-1 U-1 -21.882 0.012
OHDF U-1 U-2 0.3208 0.003
OHDF U-2 U-3 -0.193 0.003
OHDF U-3 R-2 21.883 0.012
OHDF R-3 D-1 -26.484 0.012
OHDF D-1 D-2 -0.027 0.003
OHDF D-2 D-3 0.116 0.003
OHDF D-3 R-4 26.886 0.012
END
D-3
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
ADJUSTMENT OUTPUT
=============================================================================
Yatesville Lake Dam 16th Observation
GeoLab V2.4d UNITS: ft,DMS GRS 80 08:15:19, Thu Jun 16, 1998
=============================================================================
INI file: C:\WINDOWS\GEOLAB.INI
Input file: C:\GEOLAB2\YATES\YLD16.IOB
Output file: C:\GEOLAB2\YATES\YLD16.LST
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PARAMETERS OBSERVATIONS
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description Number Description Number
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. of Stations 15 Directions 0
Coord Parameters 33 Distances 38
Free Latitudes 11 Azimuths 0
Free Longitudes 11 Vertical Angles 0
Free Heights 11 Zenithal Angles 22
Fixed Coordinates 12 Angles 22
Astro. Latitudes 0 Heights 0
Astro. Longitudes 0 Height Differences 14
Geoid Records 0 Auxiliary Params. 0
All Aux. Pars. 0 2-D Coords. 0
Direction Pars. 0 2-D Coord. Diffs. 0
Scale Parameters 0 3-D Coords. 0
Constant Pars. 0 3-D Coord. Diffs. 0
Rotation Pars. 0
Translation Pars. 0
-------- --------
Total Parameters 33 Total Observations 96
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Degrees of Freedom = 63
SUMMARY OF SELECTED OPTIONS

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPTION SELECTION
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Computation Mode Adjustment
Maximum Iterations 10
Convergence Criterion 0.00010
Confidence Level for Statistics 95.000
Covariance Matrix Computation Full
Residual Rejection Criterion Tau Max
Confidence Region Types 1D 2D Station
Variance Factor (VF) Known Yes
CMULT (Multiply Parm Cov With VF) Yes
RMULT (Multiply Res Cov With VF) No
Full Inverse Computed Yes
Normals Reordered Yes
Coordinates Generated No
Geoid Interpolation Method Bi-Linear
D-4
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
MISCLOSURES
TYPE AT FROM TO OBSERVATION STD.DEV. MISC
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANGL R-1 R-4 U-1 344 30 18.5 2.0 -4.9
ANGL R-1 R-4 U-2 348 19 23.0 1.8 -1.5
ANGL R-1 R-4 U-3 350 33 15.3 1.6 1.5
ANGL R-1 R-4 C-1 2 42 19.5 2.7 -4.7
ANGL R-1 R-4 C-2 1 46 28.7 2.0 -1.3
ANGL R-1 R-4 C-3 1 16 55.1 1.8 -1.9
ANGL R-1 R-4 C-4 1 3 16.8 1.6 1.2
ANGL R-1 R-4 C-5 0 55 31.3 1.6 -0.4
ANGL R-1 R-4 D-1 21 57 27.5 2.3 -0.3
ANGL R-1 R-4 D-2 16 37 48.2 1.7 -2.0
ANGL R-1 R-4 D-3 13 23 18.9 1.6 -0.2
ANGL R-4 R-1 U-1 11 9 3.7 1.7 1.8
ANGL R-4 R-1 U-2 14 37 36.1 1.9 2.0
ANGL R-4 R-1 U-3 21 21 29.4 2.4 5.3
ANGL R-4 R-1 C-1 359 0 53.2 1.6 1.1
ANGL R-4 R-1 C-2 358 46 3.7 1.7 -0.1
ANGL R-4 R-1 C-3 358 24 40.5 1.9 3.7
ANGL R-4 R-1 C-4 357 34 45.7 2.4 1.7
ANGL R-4 R-1 C-5 355 9 53.3 3.2 4.7
ANGL R-4 R-1 D-1 344 4 22.5 1.7 -0.8
ANGL R-4 R-1 D-2 339 21 32.6 1.9 -2.4
ANGL R-4 R-1 D-3 330 53 32.0 2.5 1.6
DIST R-1 U-1 452.3740 0.0051 0.0102
DIST R-1 U-2 597.5080 0.0054 0.0087
DIST R-1 U-3 745.5440 0.0057 0.0101
DIST R-1 C-1 279.9480 0.0049 0.0005
DIST R-1 C-2 429.6430 0.0050 0.0078
DIST R-1 C-3 580.0160 0.0053 0.0052
DIST R-1 C-4 729.9730 0.0057 0.0023
DIST R-1 C-5 879.9430 0.0060 0.0019
DIST R-1 D-1 468.9980 0.0049 0.0046
DIST R-1 D-2 610.5420 0.0054 -0.0023
DIST R-1 D-3 755.0030 0.0059 0.0004
DIST R-2 U-1 552.8720 0.0054 -0.0036
DIST R-2 U-2 403.7350 0.0051 -0.0116
DIST R-2 U-3 253.7700 0.0049 -0.0010
DIST R-2 C-1 723.0940 0.0058 -0.0080
DIST R-2 C-2 577.2160 0.0054 -0.0086
DIST R-2 C-3 433.2940 0.0051 -0.0086
DIST R-2 C-4 296.7030 0.0049 0.0010
DIST R-2 C-5 182.7740 0.0047 -0.0060
DIST R-3 C-1 247.1260 0.0048 -0.0009
DIST R-3 C-2 352.9630 0.0050 0.0026
DIST R-3 C-3 483.4270 0.0053 0.0026
DIST R-3 C-4 622.2640 0.0057 0.0046
DIST R-3 C-5 765.2360 0.0061 0.0089
DIST R-3 D-1 296.2960 0.0049 0.0070
DIST R-3 D-2 445.0170 0.0054 0.0100
DIST R-3 D-3 593.8310 0.0058 0.0076
D-5
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
MISCLOSURES
TYPE AT FROM TO OBSERVATION STD.DEV. MISC
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
DIST R-4 U-1 624.6230 0.0054 -0.0114
DIST R-4 U-2 479.1100 0.0051 -0.0030
DIST R-4 U-3 336.5350 0.0049 -0.0092
DIST R-4 C-1 768.3410 0.0058 -0.0049
DIST R-4 C-2 618.5510 0.0054 0.0058
DIST R-4 C-3 468.1700 0.0051 -0.0071
DIST R-4 C-4 318.2950 0.0049 -0.0008
DIST R-4 C-5 168.6500 0.0047 -0.0103
DIST R-4 D-1 638.6280 0.0055 -0.0072
DIST R-4 D-2 495.9220 0.0052 -0.0039
DIST R-4 D-3 360.1760 0.0054 0.0002
ZANG R-1 U-1 92 46 23.5 2.0 3.5
ZANG R-1 U-2 92 4 2.4 2.3 -6.5
ZANG R-1 U-3 91 40 25.1 2.8 1.8
ZANG R-1 C-1 90 21 16.0 2.0 -3.7
ZANG R-1 C-2 90 14 8.7 2.0 -0.8
ZANG R-1 C-3 90 10 35.3 2.1 -2.3
ZANG R-1 C-4 90 8 35.7 2.2 2.1
ZANG R-1 C-5 90 7 11.2 2.3 -0.9
ZANG R-1 D-1 93 13 22.6 2.2 -1.0
ZANG R-1 D-2 92 28 38.2 2.6 -4.9
ZANG R-1 D-3 91 59 38.9 2.9 -4.5
ZANG R-4 U-1 92 3 55.3 2.8 -0.2
ZANG R-4 U-2 92 39 15.7 2.6 -4.2
ZANG R-4 U-3 93 48 46.2 2.2 -4.1
ZANG R-4 C-1 90 10 37.6 2.4 -0.3
ZANG R-4 C-2 90 13 19.0 2.4 -1.7
ZANG R-4 C-3 90 17 44.5 2.2 -0.5
ZANG R-4 C-4 90 26 14.3 2.1 -3.3
ZANG R-4 C-5 90 49 54.7 2.1 -5.3
ZANG R-4 D-1 92 25 22.0 2.8 -1.7
ZANG R-4 D-2 93 7 23.2 2.6 -3.9
ZANG R-4 D-3 94 17 0.4 2.3 -1.9
EHDF R-1 C-1 -1.7330 0.0060 -0.0020
EHDF C-1 C-2 -0.0270 0.0030 -0.0030
EHDF C-2 C-3 -0.0250 0.0030 0.0050
EHDF C-3 C-4 -0.0140 0.0030 -0.0060
EHDF C-4 C-5 -0.0220 0.0030 0.0020
EHDF C-5 R-4 2.4510 0.0060 0.0010
EHDF R-1 U-1 -21.8820 0.0120 0.0070
EHDF U-1 U-2 0.3208 0.0030 -0.0108
EHDF U-2 U-3 -0.1930 0.0030 0.0030
EHDF U-3 R-2 21.8830 0.0120 0.0170
EHDF R-3 D-1 -26.4840 0.0120 -0.0230
EHDF D-1 D-2 -0.0270 0.0030 -0.0030
EHDF D-2 D-3 0.1160 0.0030 0.0040
EHDF D-3 R-4 26.8860 0.0120 0.0160
D-6
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
ADJUSTED NEO COORDINATES (Reference Stations)

NORTHING EASTING O-HEIGHT
CODE FFF STATION STD DEV STD DEV STD DEV MAPPROJ
---- --- ------------ ---------------- ---------------- ---------- -------
NEO 111 R-1 231672.6340 2087616.9030 682.1050 KYN1601
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
NEO 111 R-2 231581.8160 2086624.4310 682.2500 KYN1601
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
NEO 111 R-3 231897.2630 2087483.9980 682.2470 KYN1601
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
NEO 111 R-4 231717.5700 2086570.0720 682.7320 KYN1601
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
ADJUSTED NEO COORDINATES (Monitoring Stations)

NORTHING EASTING O-HEIGHT
CODE FFF STATION STD DEV STD DEV STD DEV MAPPROJ
---- --- ------------ ---------------- ---------------- ---------- -------
NEO 000 C-1 231697.8239 2087338.1127 680.3734 KYN1601
0.0024 0.0025 0.0017
NEO 000 C-2 231704.3414 2087188.4534 680.3451 KYN1601
0.0026 0.0023 0.0018
NEO 000 C-3 231710.4664 2087038.1552 680.3205 KYN1601
0.0026 0.0023 0.0018
NEO 000 C-4 231717.3605 2086888.3414 680.3052 KYN1601
0.0025 0.0023 0.0016
NEO 000 C-5 231724.5637 2086738.5470 680.2838 KYN1601
0.0019 0.0024 0.0012
NEO 000 D-1 231866.1792 2087190.5461 655.7464 KYN1601
0.0030 0.0024 0.0025
NEO 000 D-2 231872.0906 2087040.5051 655.7199 KYN1601
0.0028 0.0025 0.0023
NEO 000 D-3 231878.6622 2086891.0720 655.8359 KYN1601
0.0030 0.0027 0.0023
NEO 000 U-1 231570.7087 2087176.7277 660.2268 KYN1601
0.0028 0.0025 0.0023
NEO 000 U-2 231576.9741 2087027.5281 660.5493 KYN1601
0.0028 0.0025 0.0022
NEO 000 U-3 231581.9820 2086877.2482 660.3560 KYN1601
0.0027 0.0024 0.0022
D-7
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
RESIDUALS
(critical value = 3.504):
TYPE AT FROM TO OBSERVATION RESIDUAL STD RES
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANGL R-1 R-4 U-1 344 30 18.5 -1.8 -1.4
ANGL R-1 R-4 U-2 348 19 23.0 -0.5 -0.4
ANGL R-1 R-4 U-3 350 33 15.3 1.7 1.3
ANGL R-1 R-4 C-1 2 42 19.5 -1.7 -1.0
ANGL R-1 R-4 C-2 1 46 28.7 -0.5 -0.3
ANGL R-1 R-4 C-3 1 16 55.1 0.5 0.4
ANGL R-1 R-4 C-4 1 3 16.8 1.3 0.9
ANGL R-1 R-4 C-5 0 55 31.3 0.6 0.4
ANGL R-1 R-4 D-1 21 57 27.5 0.5 0.3
ANGL R-1 R-4 D-2 16 37 48.2 -1.3 -1.0
ANGL R-1 R-4 D-3 13 23 18.9 0.5 0.4
ANGL R-4 R-1 U-1 11 9 3.7 -1.6 -1.2
ANGL R-4 R-1 U-2 14 37 36.1 -0.8 -0.6
ANGL R-4 R-1 U-3 21 21 29.4 2.2 1.6
ANGL R-4 R-1 C-1 359 0 53.2 -0.0 -0.0
ANGL R-4 R-1 C-2 358 46 3.7 -0.5 -0.4
ANGL R-4 R-1 C-3 358 24 40.5 0.9 0.7
ANGL R-4 R-1 C-4 357 34 45.7 1.4 1.0
ANGL R-4 R-1 C-5 355 9 53.3 0.6 0.4
ANGL R-4 R-1 D-1 344 4 22.5 -0.0 -0.0
ANGL R-4 R-1 D-2 339 21 32.6 -1.9 -1.6
ANGL R-4 R-1 D-3 330 53 32.0 0.9 0.6
DIST R-1 U-1 452.37400 0.0009 0.2281
DIST R-1 U-2 597.50800 -0.0003 -0.0556
DIST R-1 U-3 745.54400 0.0015 0.3063
DIST R-1 C-1 279.94800 -0.0019 -0.4906
DIST R-1 C-2 429.64300 0.0045 1.0975
DIST R-1 C-3 580.01600 0.0004 0.0859
DIST R-1 C-4 729.97300 0.0009 0.1864
DIST R-1 C-5 879.94300 -0.0050 -0.9516
DIST R-1 D-1 468.99800 -0.0016 -0.4173
DIST R-1 D-2 610.54200 -0.0074 -1.6738
DIST R-1 D-3 755.00300 -0.0011 -0.2223
DIST R-2 U-1 552.87200 0.0041 0.9087
DIST R-2 U-2 403.73500 -0.0041 -0.9908
DIST R-2 U-3 253.77000 0.0067 1.6943
DIST R-2 C-1 723.09400 -0.0047 -0.9416
DIST R-2 C-2 577.21600 -0.0050 -1.0598
DIST R-2 C-3 433.29400 -0.0018 -0.3996
DIST R-2 C-4 296.70300 0.0024 0.5768
DIST R-2 C-5 182.77400 0.0012 0.2831
DIST R-3 C-1 247.12600 -0.0057 -1.3969
DIST R-3 C-2 352.96300 -0.0011 -0.2477
DIST R-3 C-3 483.42700 -0.0046 -0.9979
DIST R-3 C-4 622.26400 0.0031 0.6163
DIST R-3 C-5 765.23600 0.0012 0.2193
DIST R-3 D-1 296.29600 0.0005 0.1289
DIST R-3 D-2 445.01700 0.0042 0.9480
D-8
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
RESIDUALS
(critical value = 3.504):
TYPE AT FROM TO OBSERVATION RESIDUAL STD RES
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
DIST R-3 D-3 593.83100 0.0053 1.1113
DIST R-4 U-1 624.62300 -0.0058 -1.3055
DIST R-4 U-2 479.11000 0.0031 0.7507
DIST R-4 U-3 336.53500 -0.0030 -0.7783
DIST R-4 C-1 768.34100 -0.0023 -0.4694
DIST R-4 C-2 618.55100 0.0092 1.9861
DIST R-4 C-3 468.17000 -0.0020 -0.4592
DIST R-4 C-4 318.29500 0.0005 0.1364
DIST R-4 C-5 168.65000 -0.0032 -0.8759
DIST R-4 D-1 638.62800 -0.0017 -0.3722
DIST R-4 D-2 495.92200 0.0006 0.1438
DIST R-4 D-3 360.17600 0.0025 0.6040
ZANG R-1 U-1 92 46 23.5 1.8 1.2
ZANG R-1 U-2 92 4 2.4 -3.4 -1.6
ZANG R-1 U-3 91 40 25.1 3.4 1.3
ZANG R-1 C-1 90 21 16.0 -1.2 -0.9
ZANG R-1 C-2 90 14 8.7 1.7 1.0
ZANG R-1 C-3 90 10 35.3 -2.1 -1.1
ZANG R-1 C-4 90 8 35.7 3.5 1.6
ZANG R-1 C-5 90 7 11.2 -0.0 -0.0
ZANG R-1 D-1 93 13 22.6 1.7 1.0
ZANG R-1 D-2 92 28 38.2 -1.6 -0.6
ZANG R-1 D-3 91 59 38.9 -2.9 -1.1
ZANG R-4 U-1 92 3 55.3 -1.2 -0.4
ZANG R-4 U-2 92 39 15.7 -0.0 -0.0
ZANG R-4 U-3 93 48 46.2 -0.1 -0.1
ZANG R-4 C-1 90 10 37.6 0.7 0.3
ZANG R-4 C-2 90 13 19.0 0.0 0.0
ZANG R-4 C-3 90 17 44.5 -0.3 -0.1
ZANG R-4 C-4 90 26 14.3 0.1 0.1
ZANG R-4 C-5 90 49 54.7 -0.5 -0.5
ZANG R-4 D-1 92 25 22.0 0.4 0.2
ZANG R-4 D-2 93 7 23.2 0.3 0.1
ZANG R-4 D-3 94 17 0.4 1.6 1.0
OHDF R-1 C-1 -1.73300 0.0014 0.2570
OHDF C-1 C-2 -0.02700 -0.0014 -0.7042
OHDF C-2 C-3 -0.02500 0.0004 0.2296
OHDF C-3 C-4 -0.01400 -0.0013 -0.6835
OHDF C-4 C-5 -0.02200 0.0006 0.2837
OHDF C-5 R-4 2.45100 -0.0028 -0.4848
OHDF R-1 U-1 -21.88200 0.0038 0.3277
OHDF U-1 U-2 0.32080 0.0017 1.0556
OHDF U-2 U-3 -0.19300 -0.0003 -0.1841
OHDF U-3 R-2 21.88300 0.0110 0.9415
OHDF R-3 D-1 -26.48400 -0.0166 -1.4262
OHDF D-1 D-2 -0.02700 0.0005 0.3296
OHDF D-2 D-3 0.11600 -0.0000 -0.0223
OHDF D-3 R-4 26.88600 0.0101 0.8668
D-9
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
ADJUSTMENT STATISTICS
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
S T A T I S T I C S S U M M A R Y
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Residual Critical Value Type Tau Max
Residual Critical Value 3.5042
Number of Flagged Residuals 0
Convergence Criterion 0.0001
Final Iteration Counter Value 3
Confidence Level Used 95.0000
Estimated Variance Factor 0.6826
Number of Degrees of Freedom 63
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chi-Square Test on the Variance Factor:
4.9528e-01 < 1.0000 < 1.0013e+00
THE TEST PASSES
NOTE: All confidence regions were computed using the following factors:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Variance factor used = 0.6826
1-D expansion factor = 1.9600
2-D expansion factor = 2.4477
For relative confidence regions, precisions are computed from the ratio of the
major semi-axis and the spatial distance between the two stations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
2-D and 1-D Station Confidence Regions (95.000 percent):
STATION MAJOR SEMI-AXIS AZMTH MINOR SEMI-AXIS VERTICAL
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
C-1 0.0066 128 0.0052 0.0033
C-2 0.0067 149 0.0052 0.0036
C-3 0.0067 155 0.0052 0.0036
C-4 0.0066 148 0.0052 0.0032
C-5 0.0061 106 0.0045 0.0024
D-1 0.0074 178 0.0060 0.0049
D-2 0.0069 3 0.0062 0.0045
D-3 0.0074 17 0.0065 0.0046
U-1 0.0068 11 0.0061 0.0046
U-2 0.0068 175 0.0060 0.0043
U-3 0.0068 162 0.0058 0.0043
D-10
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
HISTOGRAMS
1 2
3 4
Figure D-1. Adjustment histograms of the measurement residuals plotted for different
observation types. (1) Histogram of horizontal angle observations. (2) Histogram of distance
observations. (3) Histogram of zenith angle observations. (4) Histogram of height
difference observations. Each example is normally distributed with no observation outliers
present. The horizontal axis indicates the magnitude of the residual. Residuals are grouped
into different classes, each covering a portion of the total range of observed values. The
vertical axis indicates the relative frequency or number of residuals found in each class.
D-11
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
NETWORK MAPS
Figure D-2. Adjustment network map (plan view) showing station names, relative locations,
and the point confidence ellipse (95%) for horizontal positioning plotted around each point.
Network map and confidence ellipses are plotted at different scales. Circles indicate
monitoring points and diamonds represent reference stations.
Figure D-3. Adjustment network map showing station names and connections between
points based on observations made during data collection. R-1 through R-4 are reference
stations, C-1 through C-5 are centerline monitoring points, U-1 through U-3 are upstream
monitoring points at the base of the structure, D-1 through D-3 are downstream monitoring
points at the base of the structure.
D-12
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
APPENDIX E
Laser Alignment Surveys and Instrumentation
E-1. Laser Alignment Techniques.
a. General. Different techniques for conducting laser alignment surveys are presented in this
section. These are related to methods for conducting surveys using single target alignments, two
target alignments, and laser scanning systems.
b. Single target laser alignment. The main disadvantage of early laser alignment systems is
that they only employed a single target. The target placed at a reference station establishes one
end of the LOS and the center of the laser beam is the other end of the LOS. For single target
surveys, the laser source is first carefully aimed at the center of the target, then the operator
moves the target from its reference position to use it at intermediate locations. There are two
problems with single target laser alignment:
(1) the operator is unaware of any movement of the laser beam; and
(2) alignment errors are introduced unless the reference laser position is frequently checked.
The only way to check for beam movement is to stop alignment operations, remove the target
from its working location, and move it to the reference station position. The position of the laser
beam on the target at the reference station is then checked, and the laser beam re-aimed if
necessary. This method is only useful for detecting slow variations in laser beam position at the
reference station, for example, caused by thermal disturbances in the structure being aligned, or
in long-term (e.g., geologic) instabilities at the laser source location. High frequency
disturbances such as vibration cannot be corrected at all.
c. Two target laser alignment. If two targets are used, then the measurement becomes more
accurate because of the addition of a reference target situated at the far end of the LOS that
constantly monitors beam position. The intermediate target used by the operator must allow for
passage of light through to reach the reference target. The intermediate target is called the
alignment or transparent target. In this approach, two different pointing compensation methods
are used with transparent targets, namely, passive and active systems.
(1) Passive pointing compensation. If the 2D coordinates of the laser beam on the reference
and alignment target are measured simultaneously, then the position of the alignment target with
respect to a line between the laser and the reference target can be measured independent of any
pointing error of the laser. The laser beam need not even be precisely aimed onto the center of
the reference target. Instead, the coordinates of the laser beam at both targets are used to
compensate for any laser beam movement. When the position of the laser beam is sampled
rapidly, the system compensates for thermal pointing errors, initial alignment errors, and
vibration errors. In Figure E-1 the line between the center of the reference target and the center
E-1
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
of the laser beam source defines the LOS, not the laser beam. The laser beam is shown directed
upward representing a laser pointing error. The transparent alignment target is shown centered
with respect to the LOS. The pointing or wedge error as measured at the reference target is (h),
because of similar triangles the pointing error is h' or (d/D) ∙ (h) at the alignment target.
Subtracting this error from the measured beam position at the alignment target results in a
compensated (CXY) alignment measurement, or true position of the target in both the x and y
axes:
CXY = h' XY - (d/D)(hXY) (Eq E-1)
The LOS is defined by two points: one point being the center of the laser case and the other
being the center of the reference target. The constants d and D are measured in the field or have
been previously entered into the computer. Absolute target distances are not required, only the
ratiometric distance, d/D. In some applications, absolute distances are known and entered into
the computer interface. In other applications, ratiometric distances are more convenient to use.
This technique is particularly useful at long laser-to-target distances, as angular errors at the laser
create large position errors at the targets. Another advantage of passive pointing compensation is
that the operator does not have to precisely aim the laser to dead center on the target. This
allows operators to quickly set up the system. Because of how this technique uses geometric
principles, it is called similar triangle compensation or passive pointing compensation.
Figure E-1. Geometry of a two target laser alignment.
(2) Active pointing compensation. Perhaps the most recent method to compensate for errors
in steering the laser beam, due to thermal, mechanical or atmospheric effects, is to actively steer
the laser. This technique uses all of the same components as passive pointing compensation,
except the laser is now fitted with internal or external pitch and yaw pointing actuators. The
reference target sends its error signals back to the laser where beam steering occurs to null out
the error. The system acts as an optical servo mechanism. One advantage of this method over
that of the similar triangle method is that absolute or ratiometric distances are not needed. Since
the laser is always on the reference target center, no mathematical compensation needs to be
applied. Any transparent target placed in the beam at any distance from the laser simply
determines beam position. In this method the laser beam is the LOS.
E-2
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(3) Scanning systems. Scanning systems can be a simple single-axis laser system that is
manually rotated, or have 3 axes with each axis motor driven. The simplest laser sources for
these types of system are small boxes with leveling feet and bubble vials. The user must set up
the source to a level condition before it can be used. For three axis systems, once a level has
been established, the other two axes will sweep out vertical planes of light that are perpendicular
to each other. The most sophisticated scanning sources sweep out the beam automatically via a
motor and they also contain internal level sensors. Some even control the degree of "levelness"
by servo correcting the source if it moves off of level. A simpler method uses a pendulum on
which a lightweight laser diode source is attached. The targets for these type of sources are
always one dimensional. For a manually rotated source, the electronics are similar to 2D targets;
the user must aim the beam by hand into the target's window. For dynamic scanning, the targets
use very fast detectors as the beam sweeps by in only a few microseconds for a target located at
some distance and a scan rate of 60 RPMs or higher. Sometimes LEPs are used as the sensor.
For very high speed systems a bi-cell sensor is used. The sensor is rectangular and oriented in its
long direction. A typical size would be 30 mm tall by 5 mm wide. But this sensor is split along
its diagonal into two triangular shaped photodetectors. The two triangular shaped parts of the bi-
cell are each connected to a timing circuit. When the time the laser beam spends on each
segment is equal, the beam is exactly in the middle of the bi-cell. Deviations up or down
produce a difference in timing that is exactly proportional to distance. The main advantage of
scanning systems is that many targets can be placed in the scan zone. It has a 360 degree
scanning window and is designed mainly for leveling applications with accuracy the same as
simple laser alignment.
E-2. Laser Alignment Error Sources.
a. General. Any laser alignment system has associated measurement errors. Even if active
and passive pointing compensation is not employed, any transparent target must not produce
steering or deviation of the laser beam as it passes through it. The system's accuracy depends on
the laser beam traveling in a straight line from the laser, through (possibly several) transparent
target(s) and finally to the reference target. The transparent target will usually have: some sort of
a beam splitter; and have windows on each end of it. Each window and the beam splitter possess
a small amount of wedge error that acts to mis-steer the beam. Although the wedge error of
these components is usually small (tens of arc seconds), at long distances the displacement error
can become large. There are two types of errors which can be injected into the error
compensation equation; those due to steering of the laser beam by the transparent target (wedge
angle error), and those due to the target being slightly tipped (deviation error).
b. Wedge angle error. Rotation adjustment of the wedge prisms on the transparent target
allows for the refractive error to be adjusted to less than one arc second. Figure E-2 shows a two
target system with the laser beam initially centered on the alignment target. The alignment target
is shown with a wedge error of  and it steers the incident laser beam away from the LOS. The
laser beam strikes the surface of the reference target at a distance of (D-d)  from its center. The
compensation equation then produces an error, , of magnitude:
E-3
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
 = (d/D)  (D-d) (Eq E-2)
due to the wedge error  of the transparent alignment target. Inspection shows this error is zero
when the alignment target is situated at a distance of 0 or D from the laser source. If the
alignment target was situated next to the reference target (d = D), then it would impart no
significant steering error at the reference target. If it were located next to the laser (d = 0), then
the wedge error as seen at the alignment target is also zero. The error is greatest when the
alignment target is located halfway between the laser source and the reference target. Table E-1
below shows how transparent target wedge error affects system alignment accuracy as a function
of laser-to-reference target distance (D). The table assumes the alignment target is situated at
D/2, or at one-half of the laser-to-reference target distance.
Figure E-2. Two target alignment showing wedge error.
Table E-1. Compensation error due to residual target wedge angle.
Wedge() 50-ft 100-ft 300
10 arcsec 0.0075 in. 0.015 in. 0.045 in.

1 arcsec 0.00075 in. 0.0015 in. 0.0045 in.
.5 arcsec 0.00037 in. 0.00075 in. 0.0022 in.
c. Target deviation. Another error source is due to tipping of the target, causing a deviation
of the laser beam as it passes through the windows and/or beam splitter. Deviation errors do not
grow with distance as do pointing errors. Table E-2 below indicates the magnitude of deviation
error due to target tipping in yaw or pitch for a total glass thickness of 8 mm. This thickness
represents the thickness of the windows and beamsplitter in a transparent target.
d. Target accuracy. Most modern position sensitive targets used in alignment contain
dedicated microprocessors. They can communicate their data over a bus or through the air with
optical data links. The electronics of each target usually consist of a microprocessor; non
volatile, electrically erasable programmable memory (EEPROM); analog-to-digital converters;
E-4
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
filters; and serial communication drivers. Targets come in a variety of different sensing areas
and virtually all use lateral photodiode detectors to sense laser beam position. Quad-cells are
almost never used due to their small sensing range. Since each lateral photodiode detector has
slightly different linearity, manufacturers now calibrate each target on a precision motion
platform. Stored within each target are corrections for its detector. The result is that all targets
are metrologically identical. A good rule of thumb for target accuracy is 1 part in 500 of a
target's sensor diameter. For example, a target with a LEP sensor diameter of 1 inch would have
a position accuracy of +0.002 inches.
Table E-2. Deviation error due to target tipping.
Tipping Angle Error
1 degree 0.0018 in.

3 degrees 0.0054 in.
E-3. Laser Beam Propagation.
a. General. A propagating laser beam does not remain parallel as is frequently assumed.
Even with "perfect" projection optics, the laser beam obeys the laws of physics; the dominant
law here is diffraction. All laser beams follow a prescribed propagation characteristic that
depends on two conditions:
(1) how the beam was launched, and
(2) what type of disturbances it encounters along it path.
The first is greatly controllable; the second is usually not.
b. Laser beam launch conditions. The only two parameters which govern how a laser beam
behaves after it is launched are: initial diameter and wavelength (Yoder, 1986). For a given
wavelength, the larger the initial diameter the less the beam will spread with distance. For a
given distance, a laser beam with a long wavelength will grow in diameter faster than a laser
beam of a shorter wavelength. These propagation characteristics are embedded in the exact
equation below which is a result of electromagnetic theory.
z = 0 ∙ sqrt [1+(z/20)2] (Eq E-3)
where 0 is the initial laser beam radius; z is the laser beam radius at a distance z from the
source, and  is the wavelength of light. At long distances the equation simplifies to:
z = (z/0) (Eq E-4)
E-5
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
It can be seen how two quantities govern beam spread; wavelength, and initial diameter. A laser
whose beam is approximately parallel over a reasonable distance is called a collimated beam.
Approximately is an appropriate term, because any propagating laser beam has associated with
it, a waist, or the place along the beam path where it has the smallest diameter. Sometimes this
waist is located some distance from the laser source. At other times, the beam waist is at the
laser source. The beam waist is chosen to be located at a certain point, and to possess a
particular diameter, depending on desired beam propagation characteristics. There is a distance
over which the laser beam remains essentially parallel which is called its depth of field. The
depth of field of a propagating laser beam is defined as the distance over which the laser beam
does not grow by more than sqrt (2) of its initial diameter or its waist diameter. Table E-3 below
illustrates the relationship between initial beam diameter and depth of field. The beam waist is
located exactly in the middle of the depth of field. The diameter of the beam waist is 1/sqrt (2)
or 0.707 of the initial beam diameter. The chart assumes a wavelength () of 635 nanometers,
which is the wavelength of the visible diode lasers used in laser tooling. The z-range over which
this conditions holds for an initial beam diameter of di is:
ZR = ( d 2 i ) / (4) (Eq E-5)
Table E-3. Depth of field for different laser beam diameters.
Initial Diameter Depth of Field (m) Depth of Field (feet)
1 mm 1.2 4
4 mm 20 64
10 mm 123 403
20 mm 492 1614
25 mm 769 2522
c. Atmospheric conditions. A beam of light propagating in a vacuum obeys the laws of

diffraction and is not affected by any other source. The index of refraction for a vacuum is
defined as exactly equal to one (1). However, in an atmosphere the beam will behave
differently. The index of refraction of air being slightly larger (than one) causes changes in the
propagation characteristics of a light beam. Two dominant effects on the beam are to make it
move or quiver, and another that is commonly called "scintillation;" which means the intensity of
the light beam varies as a function of time.
(1) Refraction. Much work has been conducted on the effects of atmospheric turbulence on
propagating light. The index of refraction of air being different along the path length causes
these two effects. The index of refraction of air is strongly affected by temperature, and to a
lesser extent pressure and water vapor pressure (humidity). An expression for the index of
refraction (n) due to temperature (T), pressure (P), and humidity (H) is given by:
n = 1+10-6 (79/T) [P+(4800H/T)] (Eq E-6)
E-6
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
where T is in degrees Kelvin (Ko = Co+273), and where P and H are in millibars. It can be
appreciated that it is a weak effect by the 10-6 factor in front of the second term. For most
applications, the expression is simplified by keeping pressure at a normal 1013 millibars and
ignoring humidity.
(2) Scintillation. Perhaps the best known treatise on how the atmosphere affects light and
sound propagation was by Tatarskii (1959). He identified how wind velocity affects scintillation
and what the power spectral density was of the scintillations. He also determined how random
side-to-side motions are scaled with distance and how propagation was affected by different
atmospheric conditions. Measurements were made for all regions of the atmosphere, from the
ground, through the troposphere, and into the stratosphere. Most of the measurements involved
the frequency of the scintillations and not the positional shift of the light beam. Precision optical
displacement devices and even lasers were not available when most measurements were made in
the mid-1940's and early 1950's. Perhaps the most important contribution made was the
introduction of atmospheric structure constants. These parameters provided information on how
turbulent the atmosphere was including correlation distance as one of these important constants.
(3) Correlation distance. This is lateral distance from a propagating beam of light under
which the scintillation and turbulence would be completely different for a neighboring beam.
For a quiet atmosphere where there is gentle and thorough mixing of the air layers, the
correlation distance  is equal to (Smith, 1993):
 = sqrt (L) (Eq E-7)
where  is the wavelength of the light and L is the distance from the source. The correlation
distance is important because it affects the choice of beam diameter. For example, if a range of
L = 123 meters is used (from Table E-3, depth of field for a 10 mm diameter beam), then for a 
of 0.635 microns (0.635 x 10-6 m) the correlation distance is 8 mm. What this means is that since
the laser beam diameter required for good collimation is approximately the same size as the
correlation distance, the beam will undergo a slight amount of fading. The fading is due to one
side of the beam interfering with the other side, after traveling a long distance, and so
experiencing a different atmosphere. If the beam were less than the correlation distance this
effect would not happen. Indeed, experience has shown in the field that on "long shots" if one
holds a piece of paper up to beam at a long distance from the source, the spot on the paper will
change shape quickly. It will be circular one moment and highly elliptical the next. A non-
circular beam will cause errors in laser beam position measurement, because LEP targets
measure the centroid of the laser beam.
d. Remedies to atmosphere effects. There are a few ways to remedy these atmospheric error
effects. One is to make certain that there is no cross-beam wind component. This can be
achieved with tubes physically enclosing the beam path. Another method is to blow air down the
laser beam path with fans. The idea is to eliminate cross beam wind components with a down
beam velocity component. If air conditioning is used in the building, it should be turned off as
E-7
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
the extremely cold air mixing with hot air gives rise to the worst beam deflections possible.
Some other remedies are to change either the range or the wavelength used. For example,
decreasing the alignment range to 50 meters would decrease the correlation distance to 5.6 mm.
Conversely, if a blue wavelength laser were used with a  of 0.42 microns, the correlation
distance would be about 6.4 mm at 123 meters. The basic consideration in long distance shots is
to have the beam diameter as small as or smaller than the correlation distance. The highest
expected frequency of scintillations is:
f(v) = v/(sqrt (L)) (Eq E-8)
where v the cross-beam velocity component of the wind. It should be noted that L in this
equation and the above one cannot take on any value—in this instance., the range L must be
located in the far field of the source. Usually, this distance is on the order of 10 meters. For the
same situation as above with L = 123 meters,  of 0.635 microns, and a 1 meter/sec velocity, the
maximum frequency of beam scintillation is 113 Hz. As in any data acquisition system, if one
samples laser beam position at the target at least twice this frequency, then aliasing errors will
not occur.
E-4. Laser Alignment Survey Example.
a. General. Laser alignment is a major tool in deformation monitoring surveys at both Libby
and Chief Joseph Dams (Seattle District). The technology currently used dates back to the late
1960's when laser was still a novelty in engineering applications. At that time, intensive research
was conducted on the propagation of laser in turbulent atmosphere (Chrzanowski and Ahmed,
1971), and on development of time integrated and self-aligning laser centering targets
(Chrzanowski, 1974). The equipment employed at the Libby and Chief Joseph Dams is the
simplest available at that time, consisting of a low power HeNe laser (with expected large
thermal directional drift of its output), collimated with a 50 mm diameter collimator lens and a
simple divided (Wheatstone bridge balancing) photodetector for sensing the center of energy of
the laser beam. Since the detector does not perform a time integration of the scintillating laser
spot, the alignment distance is limited by air turbulence to only about 250 m. The translation
stage of the photodetector is also of a very old design equipped with a vernier readout whereas
newer translation stages have micrometer or digital readout systems. Although the system can
still give a resolution of better than 1 mm, it is cumbersome and labor intensive to use. The
accuracy of the deflection measurements is designed to meet a 3 mm tolerance at the 95%
confidence level. An upgraded laser system should have a beam-center detection precision in the
range of +1-2 mm at the 95% confidence level at its maximum operating range. At most, a total
uncertainty in deflection measurement should be no greater than 5 mm at the 95% confidence
level.
E-8
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
b. Alignment equipment. The existing laser system has the following potential weaknesses:
-uses out-of-date technology;
-has a limited working range;
-requires excessive warm-up time;
-exhibits low reliability in beam centering at long range;
-lacks internal checks for station centering;
-lacks direct referencing to the alignment end-points;
-relies on manual reading and manual target alignment;
-experiences systematic drift in orientation during the survey;
-sensitive to atmospheric disturbances; and
-affected by refraction errors in the measurements.
The current laser system uses a Spectra-Physics LT-3, Stabilite model 120T HeNe gas laser,
(model 257 exciter), with a Model 336 Multiwavelength Collimating Lens, 450-650 nm, 50 mm
CA, 200 mm EFL@ 587.6 nm. The target system is a custom fabricated light sensor (detector).
The target housing consists of a 6-inch diameter cylinder with a single vertical splitter plate
dividing the casing into two chambers (bi-cell). A cadmium sulfide photo resistive cell is
mounted to each chamber and wired into a Wheatstone bridge circuit. In use, the target sensor is
known to be centered on the laser beam when the light intensity on the two photo resistive cells
is equal as indicated by a null reading on a microamp meter. A translucent diffusion screen
allows coarse beam centering to be performed by eye before fine measurement is attempted. The
target sensor has both horizontal and vertical motion provided by a manually operated translation
stage. Vertical travel range is 1.7 inches, horizontal travel is 4.0 inches. Target adjustments are
made by threaded-rods (actuators) with the amount of travel referenced to horizontal and vertical
vernier scales that are rigidly mounted to the target assembly.
c. Alignment surveys. Laser targets are forced centered into permanent floor or wall inserts
next to each monolith joint. Offsets are recorded in the U/D stream direction between the target's
zero position over the survey monuments, and the center of the laser beam. The operator
translates the target onto the alignment by mechanical adjustment (actuators). Beam-position
centering is made visually from meter readings and by moving the target until a null readout is
obtained. The meter tends to display more erratic output as the target is moved to its maximum
operating distance. Offset measurements are repeated three times on a vernier scale with 0.001
inch resolution. Reading errors are related mainly to system and operator bias, and to the
operating resolution of the vernier scale. Data is recorded by hand on standard data cards that
are printed on sheets of paper and then the data is transferred to a PC text file.
d. Gallery environment. Each gallery has overhead lamps that are turned off during the
survey. Flashlights are needed to navigate between target stations. Movement in the gallery is
restricted to avoid creating air currents across the laser beam or near the targets. Disturbed
atmospheric conditions may delay work for up to 10 minutes after walking near a target station.
This slows down the measurements and moving equipment during the surveys. Localized air
turbulence also influences beam collimation and laser accuracy/detection performance. It takes
E-9
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
roughly 3–15 minutes to finish the readings at a single laser target station. Setup and warm-up
times are approximately 30–40 minutes for each time the laser is moved to a new base segment
station. Average survey completion times are on the order of 7–8 hours per gallery.
e. Laser survey procedures. Due to the length of the laser survey at the two dams (760 m at
Libby Dam and 590 m at Chief Joseph Dam), the survey is broken into a number of segments.
The adjacent segments are oriented relative to one another using common points observed in the
overlap region. This observation scenario is depicted in Figure E-4. The offset measurements
from the different laser segments are referred to the baseline between the two reference
endpoints. Deterioration of the laser beam image with distance from the transmitter has
restricted the segment length to approximately 800 feet (240 m), with about 250–340 feet (75–
100 m) of overlap between segments. This results in a five-segment survey at Libby Dam and a
four-segment survey at Chief Joseph Dam.
SEGMENT 2
SEGMENT 1
OVERLAP REGION
Laser station Control point at back end of overlap

Reference point Control point at forward end of overlap
Figure E-3. Connection of laser survey segments by observation of common points.
f. Laser surveys and refraction. It has been observed that there is no way to quantitatively
evaluate the problem of long-period distortions of the reference line due to refraction (which
could be caused by horizontal temperature gradients), while the high-frequency, small-amplitude
oscillations caused by atmospheric turbulence could be reduced by limiting the length of the
traverse segments. High-frequency oscillations caused some difficulties for the observer in
photo-electrically centering the target on the laser beam. Therefore, a survey procedure was
developed which minimized the effects of atmospheric turbulence. At each survey segment, the
survey would proceed from the end target (the one farthest away from the laser) to the closest
target, so as to minimize the disturbance of air between the target and the laser. This procedure
minimizes the effect of atmospheric turbulence on the readings, and allows the observer to
collect a set of readings which have good internal precision (i.e., they are close to the same
value). However, the effect of atmospheric turbulence is random, and thus will be averaged out
if enough measurements are taken. The survey procedure does nothing to minimize the much
more serious and difficult-to-detect problem of systematic refraction caused by horizontal
temperature gradients. In fact, the effect of refraction is most pronounced when the
measurements are collected in this way, because the air between laser and target is allowed to
settle into thermal layers. The refraction problem can be reduced by disturbing or mixing the air
E-10
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
between laser and target, which causes the refraction to be randomized. This would also affect
the internal precision of the survey, but the overall accuracy would be improved. At both Chief
Joseph and Libby Dams, a horizontal temperature gradient could exist due to the fact that one
wall of the gallery is closer to the pool while the other wall is closer to the outside air. Even if
there is no gradient due to the two walls being different temperatures, it is quite possible that the
walls themselves have a different temperature than the air in the gallery. For this reason, it is
crucial to keep any optical lines of sight as far from the wall as possible. At Chief Joseph Dam,
the laser survey is run down the center of the gallery; this is the best possible place for the
survey. At Libby Dam, however, the survey is performed very close to the wall (less than 30
cm).
g. Alignment calculation procedures. To determine the relative orientation of the laser

segments, a procedure is used as illustrated in Figure E-5. For each overlap region, a number of
points are called 'forward' overlap points and others are called 'back' overlap points. Numerous
trials are conducted to fit each possible pair of back and forward overlap points as 'control'
points. In each trial, two control points are fixed to be coincident, and the average error of
superposition is calculated for the rest of the overlap points. The combination of control points
that yields the lowest average error of superposition is chosen to define the relative orientation of
the adjacent segments. For the remaining overlap points, readings from the forward segment
(i.e., the segment where the overlap points are closer to the laser) are used in the offset
calculation, and data from the back segment is discarded. When all of the segments have been
processed for relative orientation, the whole line is constrained by setting the offsets of the two
endpoints to zero.
SEGMENT 2
Error of
SEGMENT 1 superposition
OVERLAP REGION
back overlap forward overlap
Figure E-4. Segment orientation using two overlap points.
Reducing the laser survey data by this method has several drawbacks.
-The overlap error at two points is artificially constrained to be zero, when it is known that
these two points are observed with the same level of accuracy as the other overlap points.
-The method does not make optimal use of all available data. For example, data from the
back segment of the overlap is discarded. Although the readings from the forward
segment should be higher quality (due to the fact that the targets are closer to the laser in
E-11
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
this segment), this is not enough to justify ignoring the only redundant observations made
in the survey. A better procedure for orienting traverse segments is to use data from all of
the overlap points, while incorporating the knowledge that measurements from the back
segment have a higher standard deviation than those in the forward segment.
-There is no way to include any external information to yield a better estimate of the
offsets. The laser alignment procedure has the same error propagation characteristics as a
straight survey traverse; where the uncertainty perpendicular to the survey line increases
with distance from the control points. If additional information is used to constrain the
measured offsets along the traverse (e.g., from plumb line data), it would dramatically
improve the precision of the results.
-Statistical assessment of the offset solution is restricted to an analysis of the superposition
error between individual segments. There is no calculation made of the estimated
precision of the derived offset values based on the survey data.
In conclusion, it is recommended to use a more flexible and rigorous data reduction scheme,
based on least squares methods, for processing the relative orientation of laser alignment
segments.
h. Laser survey accuracy evaluation. From previous studies evaluating the precision of the
laser system, it was concluded that the probable error (i.e., at the 50% confidence level), of the
derived offset is +0.031 inches (0.79 mm). This corresponds to a standard deviation of:
 = + 0.042 inches (1.07 mm),
meaning that the derived deflections would have a 95% confidence value of:
(1.07) (sqrt (2)) (1.96) = 2.97 mm.
This accuracy evaluation is useful for understanding the internal precision of the alignment
system. However, this evaluation does not account for the effect of systematic environmental
influences and therefore does not indicate a real accuracy for the system. The data was reduced
using four independent sets of survey control, but, all of the observations in each epoch were
collected as part of the same observation campaign, and thus could have been affected by the
same amount of systematic refraction. In order to get a valid accuracy assessment, there are two
choices:
(1) Run the alignment survey several times under different atmospheric conditions and
observe the spread in offset values. In this case, all of the surveys would have to be completed
over a short period of time, so that movement of the structure does not affect the results.
(2) Compare the deflections obtained from the alignment surveys with collocated deflection
data obtained from a different independent source.
E-12
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
The first option would require entirely new field observations. The second option, however, has
been investigated using deflection data from plumb line readings at Libby Dam. A summary of
this comparison indicates a standard deviation of 5.3 mm for the two sets of deflection values
(i.e., differencing of pairs of data at the same epoch). A 95% confidence value of:
(5.3 mm) (1.96) = 10.4 mm
was obtained, and is a more realistic assessment of the accuracy of deflections from the laser
alignment system. This result assumes that the Libby Dam plumb lines have been properly
installed and carefully observed. This accuracy level can also be used to approximate accuracies
for the Chief Joseph surveys, bearing in mind that it is slightly shorter than Libby Dam, and that
it is run down the center of the gallery rather than close to one wall.
E-5. Suspended and Inverted Plumb lines. Suspended and inverted (floating) plumb lines are
among the most accurate, easy to maintain, and reliable instruments used in structural
monitoring. The two inverted plumb lines at Libby Dam Monoliths 6 and 46 monitor the
stability of the end points of the laser alignment system. Plumb line readings since 1991 indicate
that both monoliths are stable within +0.25 mm (0.01 inch) in the U/D direction and within +1
mm (0.04 inch) along the axis of the dam. Monoliths 23 and 35 contain both suspended and
inverted plumb lines. At each monolith, the suspended plumb lines extend from the upper
inspection gallery to the drainage and grouting gallery. The inverted plumb lines extend from
the drainage and grouting gallery to an anchor 10 m deep in the bedrock. Therefore, suspended
and inverted readings at the drainage and grouting gallery can be combined to give the total
displacement of the upper inspection gallery with respect to the bedrock. The combined readings
at these two monoliths indicate very smooth cyclic deflections of the dam (particularly at
Monolith 23 as shown in Figure E-6. Movement is well correlated with the cyclic water load
changes, with a maximum total range of deflections of about 18 mm (0.7 inch).
E-6. Comparison of Alignment and Plumb line Systems.
a. General. The results of the laser alignment have been treated as an independent survey
without any attempt to correlate or integrate the results with indications of other instruments,
particularly with the reliable plumb line measurements. As such, there was no control on the
stability of the end points of the alignment line and no check on possible refraction effects. For
example, at Libby Dam, alignment surveys have been carried out twice yearly, in May and in
November. One should note that these two epochs of observations do not coincide with the
maxima and minima of the dam deflections that occur in March and in September as indicated by
the plumb line results. This is working against the principal rule stated earlier for monitoring the
maximum expected deformation. Figures E-7 and E-8 how plots of the May and November laser
survey displacements for the years 1991–1999, respectively. There are large changes in the
displacements of individual monoliths from one year to another, reaching a maximum of 20 mm
between 1997 and 1999. One cannot explain or correlate the results with water level or
temperature changes. In order to interpret those deflections, the results at station 23R have been
compared with plumb line readings interpolated to the time of the alignment surveys (see Table
E-4. Discrepancies between the two types of surveys far exceed the errors of plumb line
E-13
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
readings that are estimated at 0.3 mm. The maximum discrepancy (31 October 1994) reaches 8.1
mm, exceeding by 10 times the actual (plumb line survey) deflection of the dam in comparison
with 1991 data. Using the discrepancies () from Table E-4 as indicating true errors of the
alignment survey, the error in the laser deflection survey is equal to 10.4 mm at 95% confidence
level. This means, that when employing currently used procedures and calculation methods, the
alignment surveys cannot detect displacements smaller than 10.4 mm.
15.00
13.00
11.00
9.00
7.00
5.00
3.00
Reading (mm)
1.00
-1.00
-3.00
-5.00
-7.00
-9.00
-11.00
U/S - D/S
-13.00 RIGHT - LEFT
-15.00
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Year
Figure E-5. Combined readouts from suspended and inverted plumb lines at Monolith 23,
Libby Dam.
E-14
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
20
101 121 14151617181
18 1 3 9 Grid
21-May-91
16
26-May-92
14 10-May-93
12 16-May-94
30-May-95
10
4-Jun-96
8 19-May-97
6 7-Jun-99
4
Deflection (mm)
-2
-4
-6
-8
-10
-12
-14
-16
-18
-20
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46
Monolith
Figure E-6. May results of Libby laser alignment (1991 base).
20
18
16
14
12
10
6
Deflection (mm)
-2
-4
101 121 14151617181
1 3 9
-6
Grid
-8 19-Nov-91
-10 7-Dec-92
1-Nov-93
-12
31-Oct-94
-14 14-Nov-95
-16 5-Nov-96
17-Nov-97
-18
-20
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46
Monolith
Figure E-7. November results of laser alignment (1991 base).
E-15
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Table E-4. Comparison of laser alignment with plumb line data
Date Plumb Reduced Laser Diff  Temp T/y

(mm) (1991) (mm) (mm) (°C) (°C/m)
1991-05-21 6.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 13

1992-05-26 5.8 -1.1 -4.6 -3.5 14 -0.05
1993-05-10 11.8 4.9 2.5 -2.4 11 -0.03
1994-05-16 5.2 -1.7 -9.4 -7.7 14 -0.11
1995-05-30 3.7 -3.2 -1.0 2.2 18 0.03
1996-06-04 3.5 -3.4 -6.1 -2.7 14 -0.04
1991-11-19 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 8

1992-12-07 7.1 6.7 14.2 7.5 3 0.10
1993-11-01 -1.3 -1.7 4.6 6.3 12 0.09
1994-10-31 -0.3 -0.7 7.4 8.1 12 0.12
1995-11-14 -5.0 -5.4 -4.3 1.1 8 0.02
b. Refraction effects. The only reasonable explanation for the large error of the laser
alignment surveys is the influence of atmospheric refraction. Using the values of () from Table
E-4 one can calculate the expected changes of gradients of temperature between the 1991 survey
and subsequent epochs of observations. Those values are listed in the last column of Table E-4
assuming a survey length of 760 m and atmospheric pressure of 1000 mb. The results vary
between -0.11 degees C/m and +0.12 degees C/m. Considering the fact that the alignment
surveys are performed within a few inches from the wall of the gallery, those values of gradient
changes would be quite realistic.
E-7. Tiltmeter Observations. Tiltmeters require extremely careful and frequent calibration for
temporal drift of the output, effect of temperature changes, and linearity of the conversion factor
(Volts vs. angular units). Therefore, tiltmeters are among the least reliable instruments for
permanent installations.
a. Drift calibrations. Accelerometer type tiltmeters should be calibrated for drift on a stable
tilt-plate station, situated off of the structure, having a known or monitored reference tilt value.
Drift error is modeled by solving for changes in tilt as a function of time at a reference tilt station
immediately prior to and after each survey. Corrections are interpolated for each tilt
measurement using observed time and drift rate from the model.
b. Temperature corrections. Before drift calibrations are computed, a thermal correction

needs to be applied to account for changes in the shape of the accelerometer unit at ambient
temperature. This is especially important when comparing tilt measurements made over
E-16
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
different seasons of the year. A correction is based on a temperature coefficient () supplied by
the manufacturer:
/T = +(0.03 % reading + 3 arc sec)/ °F
Actual temperature readings are made in the gallery during the tiltmeter surveys. Readings in
areas exposed to sunlight should be taken in the early morning before thermal instabilities affect
the shape of the structure. Final tilt angle values are converted to a length-to-distance ratio using
a pre-selected base length distance. Linear horizontal displacements are found using the
elevation difference between each tilt plate and the bottom of the monolith (as a radius of
rotation) assuming the monolith behaves as a rigid body. Higher resolution electrolytic tiltmeters
are available that operate by a liquid bubble level sensor (50 mm vial length). These instruments
are permanently fixed to the structure and have a repeatability of +3 arc seconds with automated
reading systems
E-17
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
E-18
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
APPENDIX F
Relative Distance Ratio Assessment Methods
F-1. Introduction. Certain EDM biases such as refraction and scale error in EDM distance
measurements can be minimized between two survey epochs, without calculating corrections, by
application of "reference line ratio" methods. This method uses the fact that distance
measurements made over similar line lengths under similar atmospheric conditions are affected
equally by refraction (i.e., scale error). If measurements are made initially between two
reference stations separated by a known distance, the ratio between the measured and known
distance will provide a scale bias value for the network. The true distance to any other station
will be proportional to the scale bias determined for the known baseline. This is also true for
surveys conducted at any later epoch, where the atmospheric conditions will be different, but the
ratio between a reference line and the measured line can be used to detect changes in the ratio of
their distances. Thus, it is not necessary to explicitly determine EDM scale error or refractive
index when using this technique. Although significant accuracy improvements are reported
(when compared to results based on applying calculated refraction corrections), the disadvantage
of using this method is that its accuracy is based on assumptions about uniform local
atmospheric conditions. Techniques to reduce refractive index errors in measurements by using
ratios, or reference lines, include two important rules:
Rule 1: Refractive index errors, resulting from end point measurements of temperature and
pressure, tend to be the same for all lines measured from one point within a short period of time.
Rule 2: The ratios of observed distances, measured from one point within a short period of
time, are constant.
Note: For both rules, a short period of time is 30 minutes or less.
C
Ratio AB/AC = 1.26684250
Figure F-1. Ratio of two lines.
F-1
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
a. General principle. In Figure F-1, lines AB and AC are measured from a common point.
Rule 1 states that if refractive index measurements are made at points A, B, and C within a short
period, the errors in the measurements tend to be the same at all three points. If the true
temperature along line AB is 20°C, but the mean of measurements made at A and B is 24°C (a
condition typical of daytime), then the mean of temperature measurements at the end points of
line AC would also be expected to be 4°C higher than the true temperature along that line.
Because 1°C is approximately equivalent to 1 ppm of distance, both lengths will be in error by 4
ppm. However, if the measured length of AB is divided by the measured length of AC, the
resulting ratio will equal the ratio of the true lengths. Thus, the ratio of two measured lengths
will be more accurate than either of the lengths that were used to form the ratio. For example:
AB was measured to be 2839.611 meters, and
AC was measured to be 2241.487 meters.
Their ratio is:
AB/AC = 1.26684250.
Both lines were in error by 4 ppm because of temperature-measuring errors; therefore, the true
lengths were:
AB = 2839.611 + 0.0114 (4 ppm), and
AC = 2241.487 + 0.0090 (4 ppm).
The ratio of the true lengths is:
2839.6224/2241.4960 = 1.26684250,
the same as the ratio of measured lengths.
b. Corrected and observed ratios. When ratios are formed from measurements that have had
refractive index corrections applied, they will be called corrected ratios. The property of the
corrected ratio is that it is very accurate. From corrected ratios, angles may be computed that are
frequently within a few tenths of an arc second of their true values. A second set of ratios can be
obtained from the same measurements by using the data before the application of the refractive
index corrections. These are called observed ratios, and they have been formed from lines that
have had no temperature of pressure corrections applied. Rule 2 states that the observed ratio is
constant. This means that the observed ratio of two lines measured today will agree with the
observed ratio of the same two lines measured months or years later. This will be true even
though the observed lengths of the individual lines have changed greatly because of changes in
atmospheric conditions between the two sets of measurements. The observed ratios will not,
however, be the same as the corrected ratios unless certain conditions are met. To understand
this, let us assume for a moment that an instrument has been set upon a hilltop. In the valley
F-2
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
below, two points have been selected that are equidistant from the hilltop stations and are and the
same elevation. The observed distances to the two points would appear the same because the
distances are equal and both lines pass through roughly the same atmosphere. A point is then
selected that is the same distance from the hilltop station as the other points, but with a higher
elevation. When the observed distances are recorded, the two lengths to the valley points are the
same, but the observed length to the higher elevation point is shorter. Because air density
decreases with elevation, the light traversing the higher line travels faster and returns sooner.
The instrument then shows the distance to be shorter. Two lessons can be learned from this. The
first lesson is that if the mean elevations of two lines measured from a point are the same, the
ratio of the observed distances is equal to the ratio of the corrected distances. In the example
above, the observed distances to the valley points are the same, and the ratio of the two observed
lengths is 1. The true lengths to the two points are the same so that the ratio of the corrected
lengths is also 1. This is often the case with dams where the alignment markers along the crest
of the dam are all within a few meters of the same elevation. This property of observed ratios
will be used later on. The second lesson is that when the elevations of the end points to which
measurements are being made are different, the ratio of observed lengths is not the same as the
ratio of corrected (true) lengths because the refractive indices along the two lines are different.
Even though it is not accurate, the observed ratio does not change with time and it may be used
to detect changes in position. Furthermore, the observed ratio may be corrected by means of an
atmospheric model. In many respects, ratios have properties similar to those of angles. In
triangulation, the sum of the three angles of a triangle must equal 180 degrees, and a knowledge
of two angles permits calculation of the third. Similarly, the product of three ratios obtained
from a triangle must equal 1, and a knowledge of two ratios permits calculation of the third. For
a triangle with sides A, B, and C as measured from vertices 1, 2, and 3 (Figure F-2), the ratio
measured from vertex 1 is A1 / B1, using a counterclockwise convention (A1/B1 rather than
B1/A1) with the subscript designating the vertex from which the ratio was measured. Two other
ratios, B2/C2 and C3/A3, may also be measured. If the measurements are perfect, then:
A1 = A3
B1 = B2
C2 = C3
and the ratios are simplified to:
( A1 / B1 ) ( B2 / C2 ) ( C3 / A3 ) = 1
If the measurements are not perfect (the usual case), the degree to which the product failed to
equal 1 is a measure of the precision of the measurements. If only two ratios were measured, the
third may be calculated. For example:
A1 / B1 = ( C2 / B2 ) ( A3 / C3)
F-3
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
B
3
A
1
Figure F-2. Ratios in a triangle.
Angles may be calculated directly from the ratios by using a modified cosine formula. The use
of ratios yields angles as a result, and the angles determined from the ratios are more accurate
than those determined from the lengths alone because a ratio is more accurate than either of the
lengths from which it is derived. When the angles of a triangle do not sum to 180, the triangle
may be adjusted by taking one-third of the difference between 180 and the sum of the angles and
by applying it as a correction to each angle. With ratios, a correction may be made to each ratio.
In measuring dams or other large structures, with the ratio method, refractive index errors are
less important because relative displacement values are needed, and therefore relative, rather
than absolute, distances may be used.
F-2. Deformation Monitoring Using Ratio Methods. This section provides guidance on
performing deformation surveys using EDM ratio difference techniques. These surveys are done
using an EDM or total station. Standard trilateration techniques are used to compute movements.
This process requires measurement of the reference control network and the structure itself.
a. The reference control network. In monitoring possible movements of the structure with
this technique, points on the structure, object points, must be related to points that that have been
selected for stability, usually at some distance from the structure itself. All movements of the
structure are related to one or more of these reference points. It is important that these reference
points not move (i.e., they are stable), and for this reason, they should be placed in geologically
stable positions. They should also afford a good geometry for trilateration measurements. Good
geometry, in turn, consists of measuring along the line where movement is expected. For
example, if measurements of upstream or downstream movements are required, the reference
point should be located correspondingly either upstream or downstream. Also, the point should
be at a sufficient distance from the structure so that the end points, as well as the center, can be
monitored with good geometry. In Figure F-3, a dam is shown with both an upstream and
F-4
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
downstream control monument. Geometrically, measurements from both the upstream side of
the dam will be poor, while those from the downstream side will be much stronger. If movement
in two dimensions is desired, a point off the end of the dam should also be chosen. For best
results, the angle of intersection should be as close to 90 degrees as possible. Figure F-4 depicts
two acceptable selections of reference network control figures.
Reference point
Dam or embankment
Reference point
Target
Reference point
Figure F-3. Control monuments for a dam.
(1) A final criteria for the selection of reference control monuments is intervisibility.
Because the control figure also provides a means of correcting for refractive index when optical
electronic instrumentation is used, the points selected for control at the ends of the dam must be
visible from the upstream and/or downstream points.
(2) In trilateration, lengths to an unknown station from each of two control points will give
the position of the unknown station in two dimensions. Measurements from three control
stations will give three positions of the unknown station and may be used as a check of survey
accuracy. Figure F-4a and F-4b show good control figures for the measurement of a dam. In the
figures, A, B, C, and D are control monuments, and all are intervisible. In Figure F-4b, point P is
an unknown station on the dam and is measured from control points A, B, and C. Positions of P
are calculated from measurements of lines AP and BP, from lines BP and CP, and from lines AP
F-5
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
and CP. The agreement between the three positions obtained for point P is a measure of the
accuracy of the survey.
(3) When measurements are made of lines exceeding 600 meters, a major source of error is
the inability to determine accurately the refractive index along the line. An error in temperature
of 1 degree or in pressure of 2.5 mm (0.1 inches) of mercury will cause an error in length of one
part per million. These errors may be minimized by considering the ratio of two lines that have
been measured within 30 minutes of each other. The errors of each line tend to be the same so
that taking a ratio greatly reduces the magnitude of the error. This may be shown by again
referring to Figure F-4a. Point D has been selected as a reference point. Its position was chosen
so that it would be in stable ground, it would be visible from the other control points, and the
lines to it from the other control points would pass through similar atmospheric conditions to
those from the control points to unknown positions on the dam.
(4) The first time a structure is visited to make trilateration measurements, both ratios and
conventional measurements are made to determine the shape and size of the control figure. The
simplest example would be the triangular figure shown in Figure F-4b. All control monuments
should be occupied by the EDM or total station. At each point, measurements should be made to
all of the other control monuments within a short period of time. In the case of the triangle ABC
in Figure F-4b, monument A would be occupied and lengths AC and AB measured. Similar
measurements should then be made as the EDM occupies stations B and C. Each line should
then be reduced to the level or spheroid and then have the refractive index corrections applied. A
typical set of measurements for triangle ABC is:
Length (in m) Ratio

A to C 2547.447 AC/AB 0.9181349
B 2774.589
P
D C
C P A
B A B
a. Strong control figure b. Simple control figure
Figure F-4. Strong and simple control figures around a structure.
F-6
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
B to A 2774.583 BA/BC 3.7776155
C 734.480
C to B 734.478 CB/CA 0.2883212
A 2547.430
(AC/AB)*(BA/BC)*(CB/CA) = 1.0000018
Adjusted Angles
A 15 05' 47.84"
B 64 35' 55.08"
C 100 18' 17.08"
By way of comparison, angles calculated from the mean lengths would be:
A 15 05' 47.59"
B 64 35' 53.76"
C 100 18' 18.65"
The adjusted angles determined from corrected ratios are more accurate than the angles
determined from the means of the lengths of the sides because ratios are more accurate than the
lengths of which they are composed.
(5) It may be seen from this example that the result of working with ratios is angles, and that
in effect very accurate triangulation is being carried out using an EDM or total station. As in the
case of triangulation, a baseline is necessary to determine the scale when ratios are used. Choose
one of the sides of the triangle to serve as a baseline, and use the mean length as the scale for the
triangle. In this example, AB has been chosen and its length is 2774.586 meters. Next, by using
the sine formula and the angles determined from ratios, the other two sides may be determined:
2774.586 = BC = AC
sin C sin A sin B
BC = 734.481
AC = 2547.443
(6) The angles obtained by these methods are of the highest accuracy. The scale, however, is
only as accurate as the mean of the two measurements of the baseline. Fortunately, this is not a
serious problem with measurements of dams because changes in lengths are desired rather than
the absolute lengths themselves.
F-7
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(7) The final task in establishing the control network is to assign coordinates to A, B, and C.
These may be fitted into an existing network, or a local control net may be set up for the project.
(8) At a later date, the control figure may once again be occupied. The same procedure may
be used, and the angles determined and compared with those obtained during the first survey.
This, however, requires the use of temperature and pressure measuring devices each time the
figure is surveyed.
(9) An easier method is to use the observed ratios, for these do not require knowledge of the
refractive index. Remember that the observed ratios remain constant, and thus comparison of
observed ratios from the first survey with observed ratios from the second survey are sufficient
to determine whether any of the control monuments have moved. In fact, measurements of
temperature and pressure need only be made of the control lines in order to give the proper scale
to the figure. And these measurements need only be made the first time a project is surveyed.
From that time on, only observed distances are required. In addition, all of the measurements
from the control monuments to stations on the dam will be observed distances. Measurements of
temperature and pressure are not necessary.
b. Points on the dam. When positions have been established for the monuments in the
control figure, observed ratios will be used to determine the refractive index corrections for
measurements of points on the dam. Referring again to Figure F-4b, the lines AC, AB, and BC
have been corrected for refractive index and may be used as reference lines. For measurements
from control monument A, either AC or AB may be used as a reference line. A good reference
line is one which traverses approximately the same atmosphere as is found along the lines to
points on the dam and is almost the same length or longer. If we call the corrected length of the
reference line RCorr and the observed length of the same line RObs, the following equation may be
written:
RObs · k = RCorr (Eq F-1)
where k is a constant owing to the atmospheric conditions along the line at the time it was
measured. Because the reference line has been selected to travel through approximately the
same atmosphere as that to points on the dam, k is also the atmospheric constant for lines
measured to the dam. If PObs is the observed length to a point on the dam, then PCorr may be
found from:
PObs · k = PCorr (Eq F-2)
This technique enables the surveyor to correct for refractive index without using temperature and
pressure measuring equipment. However, k is not really a constant because it changes slowly
with time. For this reason, it must be remeasured at approximately 30-minute intervals, and it
must be assumed it changes in a linear fashion.
F-8
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(1) The following example will detail the previous phenomena. In Figure F-5, the EDM has
been set up at A. Measurements are made of AC, AP1, AP2, AP3, and again AC.
Reference point
C
P3
Reference point
P2 A
P1
Target points (P) on structure
Reference point
B
Figure F-5. Use of a Reference Line.
After the observed lengths have been reduced to the level or the spheroid, the measurements
from control monument A were recorded as listed in Table F-1.
Table F-1. Measurement Taken (Example Deformation Survey)
Refractive
Observed Index Corrected
To Length Constant Distance
Station Time (DObs) (k) (DCorr)
C 1330 2547.326 1.0000459 2547.443

P1 1335 2477.075 1.0000454 2477.187
P2 1340 2407.354 1.0000449 2407.462
P3 1345 2445.152 1.0000445 2445.261
C 1350 2547.331 1.0000440 2547.443*
Note: AC is the reference line
F-9
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
The first and last measurements are of AC. The length of AC is known and is used as a
reference line to calculate the value of the refractive index constant. At first, the constant was
1.0000459 (2547.443/2547.326), but because of changes in the atmosphere, it changed to
1.0000440 (2547.443/2547.331). The value of k at intermediate times may be found by
assuming that the change was linear. Thus, a value of k may be found for the times when P1, P2,
and P3 were measured. Applying the appropriate value of k to the observed length, DObs, of AP1
gives 2477.075 * 1.0000454 = 2477.187 as its corrected length, DCorr.
(2) Any length in a control figure may serve as a reference line, although some lines will be
better than others. From A, AB would also serve. From B, however, BC would be a better
choice than BA because it passes through a similar atmosphere to that found in measuring from
B to P1, P2, and P3.
c. Reduction to the spheroid. Mention has been made of reducing lines either to the level or
the spheroid. In very accurate work where lines exceed 1 km, the surface upon which a survey is
being made can no longer be considered a plane. If distances are reduced to the level and used to
calculate angles, the angles thus obtained may not agree with angles obtained from a theodolite.
Further, the position of a point calculated from the lengths to two control monuments may not
agree with the position of the same point when measured from two other control monuments. To
prevent problems of this type, figures with line lengths in excess of 1 km should be reduced to
the spheroid instead of the level.
d. Example deformation survey. The example survey developed in the following paragraphs
combines the principles developed for ratio lines. A diagram of the control setup and dam are
shown in Figure F-6. Control pedestals have been set at points C1, C2, C3, and C4. Markers A1
through A6 have been set along the crest of the dam, and T1 and T2 have been set near the toe of
the dam. Elevations have been measured to obtain the list in Table F-2.
(1) Each of the control monuments was occupied with an EDM, and measurements were
made to the other three control monuments. Temperatures and pressures were also taken at both
ends of the lines. After measuring the control lines, the lengths to stations on the dam were
measured from three of the control monuments. Temperatures and pressures were not taken for
these lines.
F-10
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Target points (P) on dam

A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6
C1 C2
T1 T2
C3
Flow
C4
Reference network
Figure F-6. Example survey scheme on a concrete dam.
Table F-2. Elevations for example deformation survey.
Point Elevation (m above sea level)
A1 410.724
A2 410.718
A3 410.706
A4 410.721
A5 410.712
A6 411.245
C1 419.911
C2 413.275
C3 463.701
C4 521.537
T1 329.623
T2 329.394
(2) On a separate occasion, the following lengths were measured from C3:
F-11
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Table F-3. Measurements from C3 for example deformation survey.
Observed Mean Mean

Distance Temp. Press.

# To Time DS (meters) ( C) (inches Hg)
1 C1 0930 1081.105 16.4 28.26

2 C4 0935 945.032 16.4 28.09
3 C2 0940 703.788 17.0 28.27
4 C1 0945 1081.104 16.7 28.26
5 C1 1025 1081.101
6 A1 1035 968.241
7 A2 1045 924.456
8 C1 1050 1081.103
9 A3 1100 882.721
10 A4 1115 843.323
11 C1 1120 1081.104
12 A5 1130 806.626
13 A6 1145 772.950
14 C1 1150 1081.104
15 C1 1300 1081.100
16 T1 1305 872.886
17 T2 1315 836.021
18 C1 1300 1081.097
Measurements began with the control figure. Either C1 or C2 could have been used for a
reference line, but in this case C1 has been chosen. Because it was the reference line, it was
measured before and after the remaining control lines. This practice helped to check for both
drift in the instrument and in the atmospheric conditions. When the control lines were
completed, the operator next measured to points on the dam. Forty minutes had elapsed after
completion of the contour line measurements before the field party with reflectors was set up on
the dam. Because the reference line should be measured approximately every 30 minutes, the
observed distance to C1 was again measured (measurement 5). A reflector was left unattended at
C1 because it was no longer necessary to read the temperature and pressure. Remember
temperature and pressure measurements are made only on the control lines and only when a
study is made for the first time at a particular dam. The next time the dam is visited, perhaps 6
or 12 months later, it will not be necessary to measure refractive index. Possible movement in
the control figure may be checked at that time by a comparison of ratios of observed distances.
(2) Measurements were made that same afternoon from C1. Only the control lines were
measured. Three sets of positions will be obtained for the stations on the dam from C2, C3, and
C4. Measurements from C1 would do little to improve the accuracy of these positions in the
upstream-direction. Table F-4 gives the lengths from C1 recorded for that session.
F-12
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Observed Mean Mean

# To Time DS (meters) ( C) (inches Hg)
19 C2 1400 566.212 19.0 28.28

20 C3 1405 1081.095 18.8 28.20
21 C4 1410 989.418 18.5 28.09
22 C2 1415 566.215 18.8 28.28
(4) A week later, monument C4 was occupied and measurements were taken.
These measurements are shown in Table F-5.
Observed Mean Mean


23 C1 0835 989.446 6.1 28.85

24 C2 0840 1138.277 6.1 28.87
25 C3 0845 945.050 5.8 28.78
26 C1 0850 989.445 6.2 28.85
27 C1 0900 989.444
28 A1 0905 1031.587
29 A2 0915 1042.973
30 A3 0925 1057.756
31 C1 0930 989.438
32 A4 0940 1075.788
33 A5 0945 1096.925
34 A6 0955 1120.924
35 C1 1000 989.432
36 T1 1010 981.303
37 T2 1020 987.682
38 C1 1025 989.431
(5) Later that day, monument C2 was occupied and measurements were taken. These
measurements are shown in Table F-6 and completed the field measurement phase.
F-13
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Observed Mean Mean


39 C1 1230 566.225 8.1 29.04

40 C4 1235 1138.273 7.6 28.87
41 C3 1240 703.799 7.8 28.97
42 C1 1245 566.225 8.3 29.04
43 A1 1250 398.146
44 A2 1300 337.350
45 A3 1310 276.652
46 C1 1315 566.225
47 A4 1320 216.070
48 A5 1330 155.828
49 A6 1335 96.436
50 C1 1345 566.224
(6) The first step in the data reduction is to reduce all the lines (DS) to the spheroid. This has
been done and is shown in Table F-7.
Table F-7. Corrected line lengths.
Observed Corrected
C3 Distance Distance
# To Time DObs (meters) (meters)
1 C1 0930 1080.143 1080.156*

2 C4 0935 943.188 943.201*
3 C2 0940 701.931 701.940*
4 C1 0945 1080.142 1080.155*
5 C1 1025 1080.141 (1080.155)
6 A1 1035 966.724 966.736
7 A2 1045 922.873 922.884
8 C1 1050 1080.141 (1080.154)
9 A3 1100 881.068 881.078
10 A4 1115 841.599 841.609
11 C1 1120 1080.142 (1080.154)
12 A5 1130 804.828 804.837
13 A6 1145 771.115 771.124
14 C1 1150 1080.142 (1080.154)
15 C1 1300 1080.138 (1080.154)
16 T1 1305 862.473 862.486
F-14
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
17 T2 1315 825.111 825.125

18 C1 1320 1080.135 (1080.154)
Observed Corrected
19 C2 1400 566.136 566.144*

20 C3 1405 1080.133 1080.149*
21 C4 1410 984.112 984.128*
22 C2 1415 566.139 566.147*
Observed Corrected
23 C1 0835 984.140 84.137*

24 C2 0840 1133.034 1133.030*
25 C3 0845 943.206 943.203*
26 C1 0850 984.139 984.136*
27 C1 0900 984.138 (984.134)
28 A1 0905 1025.543 1025.540
29 A2 0915 1036.993 1036.992
30 A3 0925 1051.857 1051.858
31 C1 0930 984.132 (984.134)
32 A4 0940 1069.987 1069.991
33 A5 0945 1091.232 1091.238
34 A6 0955 1115.403 1114.411
35 C1 1000 984.126 (984.134)
36 T1 1010 962.289 962.297
37 T2 1020 968.747 968.756
38 C1 1025 984.125 (984.134)
Observed Corrected
39 C1 1230 566.149 566.147*

40 C4 1235 1133.149 1133.027*
41 C3 1240 701.942 701.940*
42 C1 1245 566.149 (566.146)
F-15
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
43 A1 1250 398.112 398.110

44 A2 1300 337.318 337.316
45 A3 1310 276.622 276.621
46 C1 1315 566.149 (566.146)
47 A4 1320 216.041 216.040
48 A5 1330 155.797 155.796
49 A6 1335 96.408 96.408
50 C1 1345 566.148 (566.146)
Note: * - Denotes length corrected from temperature and pressure measurements.

( ) - Denotes true length.
(7) When the lines have been reduced to the spheroid, the next step is to define the size and
shape of the control figure, in this case a doubly braced quadrilateral. There are several ways to
do this. One way is that the figure contains four triangles, and these may be individually treated
in the same manner as the triangle in Figure F-4a. Another way would be to use the means of the
six lines in the figure and adjust these by means of a quadrilateral adjustment. This is the
technique that was used in the present case to obtain the following adjusted lengths:
C1 to C2 566.146 meters
C1 to C3 1080.154
C1 to C4 984.134
C2 to C3 701.940
C2 to C4 1133.029
C3 to C4 943.202
(8) The control figure may be fit into an existing coordinate system or a local system may be
devised just for the dam. For the example dam, a local system was used. C4 was selected as a
starting point was assigned coordinates of x = 1000.000 and y = 1000.000. The coordinates of
C3 were then chosen to place C3 at a distance of 943.202 meters from C4; they are x = 1943.202
and y = 1000.000; The placement of C4 and C3 has determined the scale and orientation of the
figure. Using the positions of C3 and C4 and the appropriate lengths, the positions of C1 and C2
can be determined to be:
C1: x = 1366.527 y = 1913.333
C2: x = 1890.936 y = 1699.991
(9) The establishment of the control figure needs be done only once. From that time on, it is
only necessary to check for movements of the control monuments. This may be done by
comparing observed ratios taken at some later time with the original set.
F-16
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
(10) Returning to Table F-7, one may now calculate the corrected lengths DC to the stations
on the top and toe of the dam from the control monuments. This is done by using reference lines
to make refractive index corrections.
(11) Measurements 15 through 18 from Table F-7 are given in Table F-8.
Table F-8. Changes of correction factor with time.
# C3 DO Correction DC*
To Time (meters) Factor (meters)
15 C1 1300 1080.138 1.0000148 (1080.154)

16 T1 1305 862.473 1.0000155 862.486
17 T2 1315 825.111 1.0000169 825.125
18 C2 1320 1080.135 1.0000135 (1080.154)
* () denotes true length.
(12) At 1300, when the distance to C1 was measured, the observed distance, DObs, was found
to be 1080.138 meters. This line, C3 to C1, is a part of the control figure, and its correct length
has been determined to be 1080.154 meters. The atmospheric correction at 1300 may then be
found by dividing. The correction is 1080.154/1080.138 = 1.0000148. Later, at 1320, the
atmospheric correction has become 1.0000176. Assuming the change in correction has been
linear as a function of time over the 20-minute interval, we may calculate the correction factor at
1305 and 1315 when observed distances were measured to T1 and T2. Multiplying the observed
distance by the corresponding atmospheric correction gives the corrected distance, DCorr, to T1
and T2. Thus, in Table F-7, the values in parenthesis in column 5 are the correct or true lengths
of reference lines, and the values without an asterisk or parenthesis are the corrected lengths that
have been calculated from reference lines.
(13) Finally, with the corrected lengths and the coordinates of the control monuments from
which they were measured, it is possible to calculate the positions of the points on the dam.
Because three lengths were measured to stations on the crest of the dam, three solutions will be
obtained. Geometrically, some solutions will be superior to others. For stations at the toe of the
dam, only one solution is possible.
(14) In Table F-9, positions of the crest and toe markers are given for various line
combinations. In the case of the crest markers, and adjusted position is also given.
Table F-9. Crest and toe station positions.
Station X Y From
F-17
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
A1 1533.713 1875.726 C2 to C3
1533.710 1875.720 C2 to C4
1533.705 1875.723 C3 to C4
1533.709 1875.722 Adjusted
A2 1590.161 1852.688 C2 to C3
1590.158 1852.682 C2 to C4
1590.153 1852.685 C3 to C4
1590.157 1852.684 Adjusted
A3 1646.583 1829.648 C2 to C3
1646.588 1829.656 C2 to C4
1646.594 1829.652 C3 to C4
1646.589 1829.653 Adjusted
A4 1703.041 1806.615 C2 to C3
1703.038 1806.609 C2 to C4
1703.033 1806.613 C3 to C4
1703.037 1806.612 Adjusted
A5 1759.465 1783.585 C2 to C3
1759.467 1783.588 C2 to C4
1759.470 1783.584 C3 to C4
1759.468 1783.586 Adjusted
A6 1815.919 1760.547 C2 to C3
1815.915 1760.542 C2 to C4
1815.912 1760.545 C3 to C4
1815.915 1760.544 Adjusted
T1 1568.152 1776.672 C3 to C4
T2 1608.187 1754.053 C3 to C4
(15) If desired, alignment may be determined from positions. Using the crest stations A1 and
A6 as end points, the alignment of A2 through A5 is given in Table F-10. T1 and T2 are also
included in the alignment to help monitor any tilt in the dam. Alignment done from positions is
not affected by curved dams, by bends, or by differences in elevations.
F-18
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Table F-10. Alignment.
Distance Distance
Station from A1 (meters) off Line (meters)*
A2 60.968 0.00
A3 121.919 - 0.001
A4 182.888 + 0.001
A5 243.836 - 0.004
T1 +78.691
T2 +84.505
* + = Downstream
- = Upstream
F-19
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
F-20
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Jan 18
GLOSSARY
Terms and Abbreviations
1. Abbreviations and Acronyms.
1D...............................One-Dimensional
2D...............................Two-Dimensional
2DRMS ......................Twice the distance root mean square
3D...............................Three-Dimensional
A-E.............................Architect-Engineer
ATR............................Automatic Target Recognition
AGC ...........................Army Geospatial Center
ASCII .........................American Standard Code for Information Interchange
BM .............................Benchmark
CCD ...........................Charged Couple Device
CDMS ........................Continuous Deformation Monitoring System
CERN.........................European Organization for Nuclear Research
CONUS ......................CONtinental United States
CORPSCON ..............CORPS CONvert
COTS .........................Commercial Off the Shelf
CW .............................Civil Works
DD..............................Double Differencing
DoD............................Department of Defense
DOP............................Dilution of Precision
Dof .............................Degrees of Freedom
DGPS .........................Differential GPS
DSP ............................Digital Signal Processing
DSAC.........................Dam Safety Action Classification
EDM...........................Electronic Distance Measurement
EM..............................Engineer Manual
EP...............................Engineer Pamphlet
ER ..............................Engineer Regulation
ERDC.........................Engineer Research and Development Center
FEM ...........................Finite Element Method
FGCS..........................Federal Geodetic Control Subcommittee
FIG .............................International Federation of Surveyors
FOA............................Field Operating Activity
ft .................................Feet
GDOP.........................Geometric Dilution of Precision
GIS .............................Geographic Information System
GPS ............................Global Positioning System
GRS80........................Geodetic Reference System of 1980
Glossary-1
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
HARN ........................High Accuracy Regional Networks
HDOP.........................Horizontal Dilution of Precision
Hg...............................Mercury
HI ...............................Height of Instrument
HQUSACE.................Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
IR................................Infrared
IWST..........................Iterative Weighted Similarity Transformation
LEP ............................Lateral Effect Photodiode
LiDAR........................Light Detection and Ranging
LOS ............................Line of Sight
mm .............................Millimeter
MSC ...........................Major Subordinate Command
NAD27.......................North American Datum of 1927
NAD83.......................North American Datum of 1983
NANU ........................Notice Advisory to NAVSTAR Users
NAVD88 ....................North American Vertical Datum 1988
NGRS.........................National Geodetic Reference System
NGS............................National Geodetic Survey
NGVD29 ....................National Geodetic Vertical Datum 1929
NIR.............................Near Infrared
NOAA ........................National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NOS............................National Ocean Service
O/D.............................Outside Diameter
OMB ..........................Office of Management and Budget
PB...............................Phased Based
PICES.........................Periodic Inspection and Continuing Evaluation of (Completed CW)
Structures
PLL ............................Phase Lock Loop
PRN............................Pseudo Random Noise
QC ..............................Quality Control
RINEX .......................Receiver Independent Exchange
RMS ...........................Root Mean Square
SD ..............................Single Differencing
SI ................................International System of Units
SN ..............................Signal to Noise
SNR............................Signal to Noise Ratio
SPCS ..........................State Plane Coordinate System
SV ..............................Space vehicle
TBM...........................Temporary Benchmark
TD ..............................Triple Differencing
TEQC .........................Translation Editing Quality Check
TOF ............................Time of Flight
UHF............................Ultra High Frequency
Glossary-2
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Jan 18
UNB ...........................University of New Brunswick
USC&GS....................U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey
USACE ......................U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USATEC ....................U.S. Army Topographic Engineering Center
U-SMART..................USACE Survey Monument Archival and Retrieval Tool
URL............................Universal Resource Locator
UTC............................Universal Time Coordinated
UTM...........................Universal Transverse Mercator
USNO.........................U.S. Naval Observatory
VCO ...........................Voltage Controlled Oscillator
VDOP.........................Vertical Dilution of Precision
WGS84.......................World Geodetic System of 1984
2. Terms.
Absolute GPS
Operation with a single receiver for a desired position. This receiver may be positioned to be
stationary over a point. This mode of positioning is the most common military and civil
application.
Accuracy
The degree to which an estimated (mean) value is compatible with an expected value. Accuracy
implies the estimated value is unbiased.
Adjustment
Adjustment is the process of estimation and minimization of deviations between measurements
and a mathematical model.
Altimeter
An instrument that measures elevation differences usually based on atmospheric pressure
measurements.
Altitude
The vertical angle between the horizontal plane of the observer and a directional line to the
object.
Angle of Depression
A negative altitude.
Angle of Elevation
A positive altitude.
Glossary-3
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Angular Misclosure
Difference in the actual and theoretical sum of a series of angles.
Archiving
Storing of documents and information.
Azimuth
The horizontal direction of a line clockwise from a reference plane, usually the meridian. Often
called forward azimuth to differentiate from back azimuth.
Backsight
A sight on a previously established traverse or triangulation station and not the closing sight on
the traverse. A reading on a rod held on a point whose elevation has been previously
determined.
Baseline
Resultant 3D vector between any two stations with respect to a given coordinate system. The
primary reference line in a construction system.
Base net
The primary baseline used for densification of survey stations to form a network.
Base Points
The beginning points for a traverse that will be used in triangulation or trilateration.
Base Control
The horizontal and vertical control points and coordinates used to establish a base network. Base
control is determined by field surveys and permanently marked or monumented for further
surveys.
Benchmark
A permanent material object, natural or artificial, on a marked point of known elevation.
Best Fit
To represent a given set of points by a smooth function, curve, or surface which minimizes the
deviations of the fit.
Blunder
A mistake or gross error.
Glossary-4
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Jan 18
Calibration
Determining the systematic errors in an instrument by comparing measurements with correct
values. The correct value is established either by definition or by measurement with a device
which has itself been calibrated or of much higher precision.
Chi-square Testing
Non-parametric statistical test used to classify the shape of the distribution of the data.
Circle Position
A prescribed setting (reading) of the horizontal circle of a direction theodolite, to be used for the
observation on the initial station of a series of stations that are to be observed.
Circuit Closure
Difference between measured or adjusted value and the true or published value.
Collimation
A physical alignment of a survey target or antenna over a mark or to a reference line.
Collimation Error
The angle between the actual LOS through an optical instrument and an alignment.
Confidence Level
Statistical probability (in percent) based on the standard deviation or standard error associated
with the normal probability density function. The confidence level is assigned per an expansion
factor multiplied by the magnitude of one standard error. The expansion factor is based on
values found in probability tables at a chosen level of significance.
Control
Data used in geodesy and cartography to determine the positions and elevations of points on the
earth's surface or on a cartographic representation of that surface. A collective term for a system
of marks or objects on the earth or on a map or a photograph whose positions or elevation are
determined.
Control Densification
Addition of control throughout a region or network.
Control Monuments
Existing local control or benchmarks that may consist of any Federal, state, local, or private
agency points.
Control Point
A point with assigned coordinates is sometimes used as a synonym for control station. However,
a control point need not be realized by a marker on the ground.
Glossary-5
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Control Survey
A survey which provides coordinates (horizontal or vertical) of points to which supplementary
surveys are adjusted.
Control Traverse
A survey traverse made to establish control.
Coordinate Transformation
A mathematical process for obtaining a modified set of coordinates through some combination of
rotation of coordinate axes at their point of origin, change of scale along coordinate axes, or
translation through space.
Datum
Any numerical or geometrical quantity or set of such quantities which serve as a reference or
base for other quantities.
Differential GPS
Process of measuring the differences in coordinates between two receiver points, each of which
is simultaneously observing/measuring satellite code ranges and/or carrier phases from the
NAVSTAR GPS constellation. Relative positioning with GPS can be performed by a static or
kinematic modes.
Differential Leveling
The process of measuring the difference of elevation between any two points by spirit leveling.
Direction
The angle between a line or plane and an arbitrarily chosen reference line or plane. At a
triangulation station, observed horizontal angles are referred to a common reference line and
termed horizontal direction. A line, real or imaginary, pointing away from some specified point
or locality toward another point. Direction has two meanings: that of a numerical value and that
of a pointing line.
Direct Leveling
The determination of differences of elevation through a continuous series of short horizontal
lines. Vertical distances from these lines to adjacent ground marks are determined by direct
observations on graduated rods with a leveling instrument equipped with a spirit level.
Dumpy Level
The telescope permanently attached to the leveling base, either rigidly to by a hinge that can be
manipulated by a micrometer screw.
Glossary-6
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Jan 18
Earth-Centered Ellipsoid
Center at the Earth's center of mass and minor semi-axis coincident with the Earth's axis of
rotation.
Easting
The distance eastward (positive) or westward (negative) of a point from a particular meridian
taken as reference.
Eccentricity
The ratio of the distance from the center of an ellipse to its focus on the major semi-axis.
Electronic Distance Measurement (EDM)
Timing or phase comparison of electro-magnetic signal to determine an interferometric distance.
Elevation
The height of an object above some reference datum.
Ellipsoid
Formed by revolving an ellipse about its minor semi-axis. The most commonly used reference
ellipsoids in North America are: Clarke 1866, Geodetic Reference System of 1980 (GRS 80),
World Geodetic System of 1972 (WGS 72), and World Geodetic System of 1984 (WGS 84).
Ellipsoid height
The magnitude h of a point above or below the reference ellipsoid measured along the normal to
the ellipsoid surface.
Error
The difference between the measured value of a quantity and the theoretical or defined value of
that quantity.
Error Ellipse
An elliptically shaped region with dimensions corresponding to a certain probability at a given
confidence level.
Error of Closure
Difference in the measured and predicted value of the circuit along the perimeter of a geometric
figure.
Finite Element Method
Obtaining an approximate solution to a problem for which the governing differential equations
and boundary conditions are known. The method divides the region of interest into numerous,
interconnected sub regions (finite elements) over which simple, approximating functions are
used to represent the unknown quantities.
Glossary-7
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Fixed Elevation
Adopted as a result of tide observations or previous adjustment of spirit leveling, and which is
held at its accepted value in any subsequent adjustment.
Foresight
An observation to the next instrument station. The reading on a rod that is held at a point whose
elevation is to be determined.
Frequency
The number of complete cycles per second existing in any form of wave motion.
Geodesy
Determination of the time-varying size and figure of the earth by such direct measurements as
triangulation, leveling, and gravimetric observations.
Geodetic Control
Established and adjusted horizontal and/or vertical control in which the shape and size of the
earth have been considered in position computations.
Geodetic Coordinates
Angular latitudinal and longitudinal coordinates defined with respect to a reference ellipsoid.
Geodetic Height
See Ellipsoid height.
Geodetic Leveling
The observation of the differences in elevation by means of a continuous series of short
horizontal lines of sight.
Geodetic Reference System of 1980
Reference ellipsoid used to establish the NAD83 system of geodetic coordinates.
Global Positioning System (GPS)
DoD satellite constellation providing range, time, and position information through a GPS
receiver system.
Histogram
A graphical representation of relative frequency of an outcome partitioned by class interval. The
frequency of occurrence is indicated by the height of a rectangle whose base is proportional to
the class interval.
Glossary-8
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Jan 18
Horizontal Control
Determines horizontal positions with respect to parallels and meridians or to other lines of
reference.
Index Error
A systematic error caused by deviation of an index mark or zero mark on an instrument having a
scale or vernier, so that the instrument gives a non-zero reading when it should give a reading of
zero. The distance error from the foot of a leveling rod to the nominal origin (theoretical zero) of
the scale.
Indirect Leveling
The determination of differences of elevation from vertical angles and horizontal distances.
Interior Angle
An angle between adjacent sides of a closed figure and lying on the inside of the figure. The
three angles within a triangle are interior angles.
International Foot
Defined by the ratio 30.48/100 meters.
International System of Units (SI)
A self-consistent system of units adopted by the general Conference on Weights and Measures in
1960 as a modification of the then-existing metric system.
Intersection
Determining the horizontal position of a point by observations from two or more points of
known position. Thus, measuring directions or distances that intersect at the station being
located. A station whose horizontal position is located by intersection is known as an
intersection station.
Intervisibility
When two stations are visible to each other in a survey net.
Invar
An alloy of iron containing nickel, and small amounts of chromium to increase hardness,
manganese to facilitate drawing, and carbon to raise the elastic limit, and having a very low
coefficient of thermal expansion (about 1/25 that of steel).
Least Count
The finest reading that can be made directly (without estimation) from a vernier or micrometer.
Glossary-9
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Least Squares Adjustment
The adjustment of the values of either the measured angles or the measured distances in a
traverse using the condition that the sum of the squares of the residuals is a minimum.
Level
Any device sensitive to the direction of gravity and used to indicate directions perpendicular to
that of gravity at a point.
Level Datum
A level surface to which elevations are referred. The generally adopted level datum for leveling
in the U.S. is mean sea level. For local surveys, an arbitrary level datum is often adopted and
defined in terms of an assumed elevation for some physical mark.
Level Net
Lines of spirit leveling connected together to form a system of loops or circuits extending over
an area.
Line of Sight
The line extending from an instrument along which distant objects are seen, when viewed with a
telescope or other sighting device.
Local Coordinate System
Where the coordinate system origin is assigned arbitrary values and is within the region being
surveyed and used principally for points within that region.
Local Datum
Defines a coordinate system which is used only over a region of very limited extent.
Mean Angle
Average value of the angles.
Metric Unit
Belonging to or derived from the SI system of units.
Micrometer
In general, any instrument for measuring small distances very accurately. In astronomy and
geodesy, a device, for attachment to a telescope or microscope, consisting of a mark moved
across the field of view by a screw connected to a graduated drum and vernier. If the mark is a
hairlike filament, the micrometer is called a filar micrometer.
Misclosure
The difference between a computed and measured value.
Glossary-10
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Jan 18
Monument
A physical object used as an indication of the position on the ground of a survey station.
North American Datum Conversion (NADCON)
The National Geodetic Survey developed the conversion program NADCON to convert to and
from North American Datum of 1983. The technique used is based on a bi-harmonic equation
classically used to model plate deflections. NADCON works exclusively in geographical
coordinates (latitude/longitude).
National Geodetic Vertical Datum 1929
Formerly adopted as the standard geodetic datum for heights, based on an adjustment holding 26
primary tide stations in North America fixed.
Network
Interconnected system of surveyed points.
Non-SI units
Units of measurement not associated with International System of Units (SI).
North American Datum of 1927
Formerly adopted as the standard geodetic datum for horizontal positioning. Based on the
Clarke ellipsoid of 1866, the geodetic positions of this system are derived from a readjustment of
survey observations throughout North America.
North American Datum of 1983
Adopted as the standard geodetic datum for horizontal positioning. Based on the Geodetic
Reference System of 1980, the geodetic positions of this system are derived from a readjustment
of survey observations throughout North America.
North American Vertical Datum of 1988
Adopted as the standard geodetic datum for heights.
Northing
A linear distance, in the coordinate system of a map grid, northwards from the east-west line
through the origin (or false origin).
Open Traverse
Begins from a station of known or adopted position, but does not end upon such a station.
Glossary-11
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Optical Micrometer
Consists of a prism or lens placed in the path of light entering a telescope and rotatable, by
means of a graduated linkage, about a horizontal axis perpendicular to the optical axis of the
telescope axis. Also called an optical-mechanical compensator. The device is usually placed in
front of the objective of a telescope, but may be placed immediately after it. The parallel-plate
optical micrometer is the form usually found in leveling instruments.
Optical Plummet
A small telescope having a 90° bend in its optical axis and attached to an instrument in such a
way that the LOS proceeds horizontally from the eyepiece to a point on the vertical axis of the
instrument and from that point vertically downwards. In use, the observer, looking into the
plummet, brings a point on the instrument vertically above a specified point (usually a geodetic
or other mark) below it.
Order of Accuracy
Defines the general accuracy of the measurements made in a survey. The order of accuracy of
surveys are divided into four classes labeled: first order, second order, third order, and fourth or
lower order.
Origin
That point in a coordinate system which has defined initial coordinates and not coordinates
determined by measurement. This point is usually given the coordinates (0,0) in a coordinate
system in the plane and (0,0,0) in a coordinate system in space.
Orthometric Height
The elevation H of a point above or below the geoid.
Parallax
The apparent displacement of the position of a body, with respect to a reference point or system,
caused by a shift in the point of observation.
Philadelphia Leveling Rod
Having a target but with graduations so styled that the rod may also be used as a self-reading
leveling rod. Also called a Philadelphia rod. If a length greater than 7 feet is needed, the target
is clamped at 7 feet and raised by extending the rod. When the target is used, the rod is read by
vernier to 0.001 foot. When the rod is used as a self-reading leveling rod, the rod is read to 0.005
foot.
Photogrammetry
Deducing the physical dimensions of objects from measurements on photographs of the objects.
Glossary-12
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Jan 18
Plumb Line
The direction normal to the geopotential field. The continuous curve to which the gradient of
gravity is everywhere tangential.
Positional Error
The amount by which the actual location of a cartographic feature fails to agree with the feature's
true position.
Precision
The amount by which a measurement deviates from its mean.
Project Control
Control used for a specific project.
Project Datum
Datum used for a specific project.
Quadrangle
Consisting of four specified points and the lines or line segments on which they lie. The
quadrangle and the quadrilateral differ in that the quadrangle is defined by four specified angle
points, the quadrilateral by four specified lines or line-segments.
Random Error
Randomly distributed deviations from the mean value.
Readings
The observed value obtained by noting and/or recording scales.
Real-time
An event or measurement reported or recorded at the same time as the event is occurring through
the absence of delay in getting, sending, and receiving data.
Reciprocal Leveling
Measuring vertical angles or making rod readings from two instrument positions for the purpose
of compensating for the effects of refraction.
Rectangular Coordinate Systems
Coordinates on any system in which the axes of reference intersect at right angles.
Redundant Measurements
Taking more measurements than are minimally required for a unique solution.
Reference Point
Used as an origin from which measurements are taken or to which measurements are referred.
Glossary-13
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Rejection Criterion
Probabilistic confidence limit used to compare with measurements to determine if the
measurements are behaving per a hypothesized prediction.
Refraction
The bending of rays by the substance through which the rays pass. The amount and direction of
bending are determined by its refractive index.
Relative Accuracy
Indicated by the dimensions of the relative confidence ellipse between two points. A quantity
expressing the effect of random errors on the location of one point or feature with respect to
another.
Repeating Theodolite
Designed so that the sum of successive measurements of an angle can be read directly on the
graduated horizontal circle.
Resection
Determining the location of a point by extending lines of known direction to two other known
points.
Sexagesimal System
Notation by increments of 60. As the division of the circle into 360°, each degree into 60
minutes, and each minute into 60 seconds.
Setup
In general, the situation in which a surveying instrument is in position at a point from which
observations are made.
Spheroid
Used as a synonym for ellipsoid.
Spirit Level
A closed glass tube (vial) of circular cross-section. Its center line forms a circular arc with
precise form and filled with ether or liquid of low viscosity, with enough free space left for a
bubble of air or gas.
Stadia Constant
The sum of the focal length of a telescope and the distance from the vertical axis of the
instrument on which the telescope is mounted to the center of the objective lens-system.
Glossary-14
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Jan 18
Standard Error
The standard deviation of the errors associated with physical measurements of an unknown
quantity, or statistical estimates of an unknown quantity or of a random variable.
Systematic Error
Errors that affect the position (bias) of the mean. Systematic errors are due to unmodeled effects
on the measurements that have a constant or systematic value.
State Plane Coordinate System (SPCS)
A planar reference coordinate system used in the United States.
Strength of Figure
A number relating the precision in positioning with the geometry with which measurements are
made.
Subtense Bar
A bar with two marks at a fixed, known distance apart, used for determining the horizontal
distance from an observer by means of measuring the angle subtended at the observer between
the marks.
Taping
Measuring a distance using a surveyor's tape.
Three-wire Leveling
The scale on the leveling rod is read at each of the three lines and the average is used for the final
result.
Transformation
Converting a position from one coordinate system to another.
Traverse
A sequence of points along which surveying measurements are made.
Triangulation
Determination of positions in a network by the measurement of angles between stations.
Tribrach
The three-armed base, of a surveying instrument, in which the foot screws used in leveling the
instrument are placed at the ends of the arms. Also called a leveling base or leveling head.
Trigonometric heighting
The trigonometric determination of differences of elevation from observed vertical angles and
measured distances.
Glossary-15
EM 1110-2-1009
01 Feb 18
Trilateration
Determination of positions in a network by the measurement of distances between stations using
the intersection of two or more distances to a point.
U.S. Survey Foot

The unit of length defined by 1200/3937 m
Variance-Covariance Matrix
A matrix whose elements along the main diagonal are called the variances of the corresponding
variables; the elements off the main diagonal are called the covariances.
Vernier
An auxiliary scale used in reading a primary scale. The total length of a given number of
divisions on a vernier is equal to the total length of one more or one less than the same number of
divisions on the primary scaled.
Vertical Angle
An angle in a vertical plane either in elevation or depression from the horizontal.
Vertical Circle
A graduated scale mounted on an instrument used to measure vertical angles.
Vertical Datum
Any level surface used as a reference for elevations. Although a level surface is not a plane, the
vertical datum is frequently referred to as the datum plane.
World Geodetic System of 1984
Adopted as the standard geodetic datum for GPS positioning. Based on the World Geodetic
System reference ellipsoid.
Zenith Angle
Measured in a positive direction downwards from the observer's zenith to the observed target.
Zenith Distance
The complement of the altitude, the angular distance from the zenith of the celestial body
measured along a vertical circle.
Glossary-16

Structural Deformation Surveying

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Structural Deformation Surveying

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Structural Deformation Surveying

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EM 1110-2-1009

ENGINEERING AND DESIGN

Structural Deformation Surveying

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Engineering and Design

3. Distribution Statement. This publication is approved for public release; distribution is

FOR THE COMMANDER:

6 Appendices E ERY A. ANDERSON

*This manual supersedes EM 1110-2-1009, Structural Deformation Surveying, 1 June 2002

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY EM 1110-2-1009

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

CECW-EE Washington, DC 20314-1000

Engineering and Design

STRUCTURAL DEFORMATION SURVEYING

Purpose .......................................................................................1-1 1-1

Applicability ...............................................................................1-2 1-1

Distribution .................................................................................1-3 1-1

Scope of Manual .........................................................................1-5 1-1

Structural Deformation Surveying..............................................1-7 1-3

Life Cycle Project Management .................................................1-8 1-4

Metrics ........................................................................................1-9 1-4

Trade Name Exclusions..............................................................1-10 1-4

Abbreviations and Terms............................................................1-11 1-4

Mandatory Requirements............................................................1-12 1-4

Proponency and Waivers ............................................................1-13 1-4

Chapter 2. Planning, Design, and Accuracy Requirements

Standards for Deformation Surveys............................................2-1 2-1

Accuracy Requirements for Performing Deformation Surveys..2-2 2-2

Overview of Deformation Surveying Design ............................2-3 2-4

Professional Associations ...........................................................2-4 2-9

Causes of Dam Failure................................................................2-5 2-10

Foundation Problems in Dams....................................................2-6 2-11

Navigation Locks........................................................................2-7 2-12

Deformation Parameters .............................................................2-8 2-14

Location of Monitoring Points....................................................2-9 2-15

Design of Reference Networks...................................................2-10 2-17

Reference Point Monumentation ................................................2-11 2-21

Monitoring Point Monumentation ..............................................2-12 2-23

Design of Measurement Schemes...............................................2-13 2-26

Measurement Reliability.............................................................2-14 2-29

Frequency of Measurements.......................................................2-15 2-31

Chapter 3. Deformation Measurement and Alignment Instrumentation

Angle and Distance Measurements ............................................3-2 3-2

Differential Leveling ..................................................................3-3 3-6

Total Station Trigonometric Elevations......................................3-4 3-7

Global Positioning System (GPS) ..............................................3-5 3-8

Photogrammetric Techniques .....................................................3-6 3-11

Alignment Measurements...........................................................3-7 3-12

Extension and Strain Measurements...........................................3-8 3-14

Tilt and Inclination Measurements .............................................3-9 3-17

Non-Geodetic Measurements .....................................................3-10 3-19

Optical Tooling Technology.......................................................3-11 3-21

Laser Tooling methods ...............................................................3-12 3-22

Chapter 4. Sources of Measurement Error and Instrument Calibrations

Theory of Measurements and Survey Measurement Error.........4-2 4-1

Optical Pointing Error.................................................................4-3 4-4

Instrument Leveling Error ..........................................................4-4 4-7

Instrument Centering Error.........................................................4-5 4-8

Horizontal Angle Measurement Error ........................................4-6 4-11