FW04 — Profile Leveling and Longitudinal Profile Development - Report

FW04 — Profile Leveling and Longitudinal Profile Development

I — Project Details

Item	Record
Fieldwork / Project	FW04 — Profile Leveling and Longitudinal Profile Development
Location	University Campus — Proposed Access Alignment
Date / Time	September 24, 2026; 1:00–4:00 PM
Group / Section	Group 1 / CE Surveying
Stations	0+000 to 0+100 at 20 m intervals
Start Benchmark	BM-A = 100.000 m
Closing Benchmark	BM-B = 98.420 m
Assigned Design Grade	-1.20%
Weather / Ground	Partly cloudy; dry alignment

II — Survey Team and Equipment Used

A — Survey Team

Member	Assignment / Description	Remarks
Student A	Party Chief	None
Student B	Level Operator	None
Student C	Rod Person	None
Student D	Recorder	None
Student E	Stationing / Centerline Assistant	None
Student F	Safety Observer	None

B — Equipment Used

Equipment / Instrument	ID / Description	Quantity	Remarks
Automatic Level	LV-02	1	Compensator checked
Leveling Rod	LR-05; metric	1	Serviceable
Steel Tape	ST-04; 30 m	1	Used for stationing
Turning Plate	TP-Plate-01	1	Stable
Station Stakes	P-000 to P-100	6	Labels visible
PPE Set	High-visibility vest and closed shoes	6	Complete

III — Project Sketch and Photo Documentation

A — Project Sketch

FW04 — Longitudinal Profile

B — Google Maps Location Points

Point / Area	Map Record	Purpose / Limitation
BM-A and BM-B	Verified pins and WGS84 coordinates required in actual report	Geographic recovery context
Proposed alignment	Marked Google Maps route required in actual report	Shows site orientation and access
Profile stations	Field stationing and level-book record	Engineering stationing remains authoritative

No fictional geodetic coordinates are assigned to this illustrative dataset.

C — Photo Documentation — Dedicated Page

Reserve one complete report page for the embedded original images represented by this register.

Photo	Image File	Description
1	FW04-photo-01.jpg	Centerline stationing and labeled profile stakes
2	FW04-photo-02.jpg	Backsight on BM-A and instrument setup
3	FW04-photo-03.jpg	Intermediate sight at a principal station
4	FW04-photo-04.jpg	Turning-point procedure and closing observation on BM-B

IV — Observations and Data

A — Raw Level Notes

Setup	Point	Station	BS (m)	IS (m)	FS (m)	HI (m)	Raw Elev. (m)
I-01	BM-A	Control	1.400	—	—	101.400	100.000
I-01	P-000	0+000	—	1.250	—	—	100.150
I-01	P-020	0+020	—	1.540	—	—	99.860
I-01	P-040	0+040	—	1.890	—	—	99.510
I-01	TP-A	0+050	—	—	2.050	—	99.350
I-02	TP-A	0+050	1.200	—	—	100.550	99.350
I-02	P-060	0+060	—	1.280	—	—	99.270
I-02	P-080	0+080	—	1.620	—	—	98.930
I-02	P-100	0+100	—	1.950	—	—	98.600
I-02	BM-B Close	0+110	—	—	2.127	—	98.423

B — Adjusted Profile Data

Station	Raw Ground (m)	Correction (m)	Adjusted Ground (m)	Design Grade (m)	Ground − Grade (m)	Interpretation
0+000	100.1500	0.000000	100.1500	100.000	+0.150	Cut
0+020	99.8600	-0.000545	99.8595	99.760	+0.099	Cut
0+040	99.5100	-0.001091	99.5089	99.520	-0.011	Fill
0+060	99.2700	-0.001636	99.2684	99.280	-0.012	Fill
0+080	98.9300	-0.002182	98.9278	99.040	-0.112	Fill
0+100	98.6000	-0.002727	98.5973	98.800	-0.203	Fill
BM-B 0+110	98.4230	-0.003000	98.4200	—	—	Control closure

V — Computations and Assumptions

Closure check:

e=98.423-98.420=+0.003\text{ m}=+3\text{ mm}

|e|_{\mathrm{allow}}=12\sqrt{0.110}=3.980\text{ mm}

The run is accepted because $3\text{ mm}<3.980\text{ mm}$ . Corrections are distributed by cumulative distance:

C_d=-0.003\left(\frac{d}{110}\right)

The assigned grade elevation at distance $x$ metres from Sta. 0+000 is:

E_g(x)=100.000-0.012x

At Sta. 0+080:

E_g(80)=100.000-0.012(80)=99.040\text{ m}

E_{\mathrm{ground}}-E_g=98.9278-99.040=-0.1122\text{ m}\approx-0.112\text{ m}

Assumptions and conventions:

BM-A and BM-B elevations are fixed controls.
The assigned tolerance is $12\sqrt{K}$ mm with $K$ in kilometres.
Misclosure is distributed by cumulative alignment distance.
Positive ground-minus-grade indicates cut; negative indicates fill.
The longitudinal profile may use a disclosed vertical exaggeration for legibility, while tabulated elevations remain true values.

VI — Remarks and Conclusions

A — Remarks

Profile stations were treated as intermediate sights; TP-A received the foresight and subsequent backsight.
Raw and adjusted elevations remain separate.
Rod plumbing, stationing, turning-point stability, and unequal sight length are probable error sources.
Cut/fill interpretation is longitudinal only; volume requires cross-sections.

B — Conclusion

The profile run closed with +3 mm, within the ±3.980 mm assigned tolerance. Relative to the -1.20% design grade, cut occurs at 0+000 and 0+020, while fill dominates from 0+040 through 0+100. The adjusted elevations are accepted for the longitudinal profile.

Example filename: `G#1-P#4-Profile Leveling.pdf`