The Accuracy of GIS Tools for Transforming Assumed Total Station Surveys to Real World Coordinates

DOI: 10.4236/jgis.2013.55045   PDF   HTML     6,467 Downloads   9,133 Views   Citations


Most surveying works for mapping or GIS applications are performed with total station. Due to the remote nature of many of the sites surveyed, the surveys are often done in unprojected, local, assumed coordinate systems. However, without the survey data projected in real world coordinates, the range of possible analyses is limited and the value of existing imagery, elevation models, and hydrologic layers cannot be exploited. This requires a transformation from the local assumed to the real world coordinate systems. There are various built-in and add-in tools to perform transformations through GIS programs. This paper studies the effect of using Georeferencing tool, Spatial Adjustment tool (Affine and similarity) and CHaMP tool on the precision and relative accuracy of total station survey. This transformation requires real-world coordinates of at least two control points, which can be collected from different sources. This paper also studies the effect of using geodetic GPS, hand-held GPS, Google Earth (GE) and Bing Basemaps as sources for control points on the precision and relative accuracy of total station survey. These effects have been tested by using 111 points covered area of 60,000 m2and the results have shown that the CHaMP tool is the best for preserving the relative accuracy of the transformed points. The Georeferencing and spatial adjustment (similarity) tools give the same results and their accuracy are between 1/1000 and 1/300 depending on the source of control points. The results have also shown that the cornerstone to preserve the precision and relative accuracy of the transformed coordinates is the relative position of the control points despite their source.

Share and Cite:

R. Khalil, "The Accuracy of GIS Tools for Transforming Assumed Total Station Surveys to Real World Coordinates," Journal of Geographic Information System, Vol. 5 No. 5, 2013, pp. 486-491. doi: 10.4236/jgis.2013.55045.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] USACE, “Control and Topographic Surveying,” Engineering Manual, EM1110-1-1005, US Army Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg, 2007, 498 p.
[2] U. Kizil and L. Tisor, “Evaluation of RTK-GPS and Total Station for Applications in Land Surveying,” Journal of Earth System Science, Vol. 120, No. 2, 2011, pp. 215-221.
[3] S. N. Lane and J. H. Chandler, “Editorial: The Generation of High Quality Topographic Data for Hydrology and Geomorphology: New Data Sources, New Applications and New Problems,” Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, Vol. 28, No. 3, 2003, pp. 229-230.
[4] L.-S. Lin, “Application of GPS RTK and Total Station System on Dynamic Monitoring Land Use,” The XXth ISPRS Congress, Istanbul, July 2004, pp. 12-23.
[5] S. N .Lane, J. H. Chandler and K. S. Richards, “Developments in Monitoring and Modeling Small-Scale River Bed Topography”, Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, Vol. 19, No. 4, 1994, pp. 349-368.
[6] I. C. Fuller, A. R. G. Large and D. J. Milan, “Quantifying Channel Development and Sediment Transfer Following Chute Cutoff in a Wandering Gravel-Bed River,” Geomorphology, Vol. 54, No. 3-4, 2003, pp. 307-323.
[7] J. E. Merz, G. B. Pasternack and J. M. Wheaton, “Sediment Budget for Salmonid Spawning Habitat Rehabilitation in a Regulated River,” Geomorphology, Vol. 76, No. 1-2, 2006, pp. 207-228.
[8] D. M. Walters, D. S. Leigh, M. C. Freeman, B. J. Freeman and C. M. Pringle, “Geomorphology and Fish Assemblages in a Piedmont River Basin, USA,” Fresh-Water Biology, Vol. 48, No. 11, 2003, pp. 1950-1970.
[9] I. Delgado and G. Lloyd, “A Simple Low Cost Method for One Person Beach Profiling,” Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 20, No. 4, 2004, pp. 1246-1253.
[10] P. Baptista, T. R. Cunha, A. Matias, C. Gama, C. Bernardes and O. Ferreira, “New Land-Based Method for Surveying Sandy Shores and Extracting DEMs: The IN-SHORE System,” Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, Vol. 182, No. 1-4, 2011, pp. 243-257.
[11] J. J. De Sanjose-Blasco, A. D. J. Atkinson-Gordo, F. Sal-vador-Franch and A. Gomez-Ortiz, “Application of Geomatic Techniques to Monitoring of the Dynamics and to Mapping of the Veleta Rock Glacier (Sierra Nevada, Spain) ,” Zeitschrift Fur Geomorphologie, Vol. 51, 2007, pp. 79-89.
[12] B. H. Mackey, J. J. Roering and J. A. McKean, “Long-Term Kinematics and Sediment Flux of an Active Earthflow, Eel River, California,” Geology, Vol. 9, No. 37, 2009, pp. 803-806.
[13] J. M. Wheaton, C. Garrard, K. Whitehead and C. Volk, “A simple, Interactive GIS Tool for Transforming Assumed Total Station Surveys to Real World Coordinates—The CHaMP Transformation Tool,” Computers & Geosciences, Vol. 42, 2012, pp. 28-36.
[14] E. W. Weisstein, “Affine Transformation,” From Math-World—A Wolfram Web Resource, 1 May 2013.
[15] R. E. Deakin, “Coordinate Transformations in Surveying and Mapping,” Geospatial Science, 2004.
[16] W. Sprinsky, “Transformation of Survey Coordinates: Another Look at an Old Problem,” Journal of Surveying Engineering, Vol. 128, No. 4, 2002, pp. 200-209.
[17] USACE, “Topographic Surveying,” USA Rmy Corps of Engineers, Washington DC, 111 p.
[18] D. Kaimaris, O. Georgoulab, P. Patiasb and E. Stylianidis, “Comparative analYsis on the Archaeological Content of Imagery from Google Earth,” Journal of Cultural Heritage, Vol. 12, No. 3, 2011, pp. 263-269.
[19] N. Q. Chien and S. K. Tan, “Google Earth as a Tool in 2-Dhydrodynamic Modeling,” Computers & Geosciences, Vol. 37, No. 1, 2011, pp. 38-46.

comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2020 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.