Talk:Total station

Details to add
Can we work with Refelctorless total station in night when there is small intensity of light? Sanjay Lipare sanjay_lipare@rediffmail.com


 * Both regular and reflectorless total stations work by bouncing laser "light" off the target. The laser may be infrared, so not visible to the eye. But since the light is created by the total station, it does not matter whether it is night or not. --Gerry Ashton (talk) 17:52, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Yup. The only issues with night time use is seeing the crosshairs. Yevad (talk) 09:21, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

question
Can a total station show E991 what signific it? my e-mail is seliashez@yahoo.es please sos elias espinoza M/s A-One Consultants,


 * What is E991? --Gerry Ashton (talk) 17:53, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

You have EDM listed as Electronic Distance Meter, I'm pretty sure it actually stands for Electronic Distance Measurement — Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.34.87.139 (talk) 23:30, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Yup, Electronic Distance Measurement in the manuals. Yevad (talk) 09:22, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

sokkia
this page was redirected from searching "sokkia". but the total station in the picture is manufactured by leica. someone with enough rights should it out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.35.164.46 (talk) 17:48, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

EDM Redirect
EDM redirects here. It should not. The EDM is a device developed independent of the total station. It was common (for a time) that EDMs were mounted on theodolites with no ability to compute anything but slope distance to the target. I came here looking for interesting information about the development of the EDM from the time of microwave distance measurement and through the use of EDM to measure the distance to the retroreflective prism arrays placed on the moon during the Apollo missions.

I am disappointed. An EDM is not necessarily associated with a total station. You might as well redirect Tire to Car.--Bodybagger (talk) 06:01, 20 July 2009 (UTC)


 * EDM should redirect here, until such time as there is an EDM article all of its own. You could write this yourself 8-)  In the meantime this isn't ideal, but it's the best we've got.  I'd certainly suggest adding a short EDM section to Total station, just to indicate the history.   Andy Dingley (talk) 08:05, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I have decided to survey my agricultural land by using leica total station how much accuracy I can get should I go for that?Want ur advise — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.204.130.173 (talk) 14:51, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

I have decided to survey my agricultural land by using leica total station how much accuracy I can get should I go for that?Want ur advise achaldesai.desai@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.204.130.173 (talk) 14:52, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Proposed merge with "Laser tracker"
I oppose a merge with "Laser tracker" because while they may be based on similar technology, laser trackers are much shorter range, more accurate, and worked with by a different community of users (for the most part). Jc3s5h (talk) 21:43, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Suggest that the term meter should be used for a measuring device, and metre used for the SI base unit of distance.

While a statement has been added to the 'Total station' article that the American 'meter' variety of the spelling of the International System of Units base unit 'metre' should be used, this variety has not been established by 'consistent usage'. if anything, the consistent usage rule establishes use of 'metre, as 'metres' and 'millimetres' are already incorporated in the article. The term 'meter' is also correctly used to refer to a measuring device, in the second sentence. There is no reason that this article should use American (or any other) spelling variations.

WP:RETAIN See also: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers § Retaining the existing format When an English variety's consistent usage has been established in an article, it is maintained in the absence of consensus to the contrary.

Usage of metre and meter
Suggest that the term meter should be used for a measuring device, and metre used for the SI base unit of distance.

While a statement has been added to the 'Total station' article that the American 'meter' variety of the spelling of the International System of Units base unit 'metre' should be used, this variety has not been established by 'consistent usage'. if anything, the consistent usage rule establishes use of 'metre', as 'metres' and 'millimetres' are already incorporated in the article. The term 'meter' is also correctly used to refer to a measuring device, in the second sentence. There is no reason that this article should use American (or any other) spelling variations.

WP:RETAIN See also: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers § Retaining the existing format When an English variety's consistent usage has been established in an article, it is maintained in the absence of consensus to the contrary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JuanFox (talk • contribs) 02:59, 24 May 2014 (UTC)


 * The argument about meter only referring to a measuring instrument was decided long ago at Manual of style/Dates and numbers; it is disruptive editing to re-argue it at each page. This article consistently used "meter" for the unit of measure in 2009 but I accidentally forgot to add a parameter to the convert template in this edit. I will now correct my error. Jc3s5h (talk) 15:47, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Coordinate measurement
The first sentence in this doesn't read very well. I would adjust it, but I'm not entirely sure what it's supposed to mean. In general, it might be worth clarifying that the instruments measure planar coordinates and convert them to rectangular for the display in X, Y & Z.

The statement about needing line of sight isn't correct, as in actual use it is easy enough to mark 2 points that you can see and use a string & tape measure to find the hidden point. Also, you don't necessarily need to be set up on a station, or to do a resection between two known points. Total stations have many uses depending on the imagination of the user. For example, I have used them to measure a very large door opening by simply setting it up level in front of the doorway and surveying various points (the rectangular coordinates displayed would have been relative to the location where it was used previously). The important thing in that exercise was determining accurate widths, heights and deviations from plumb, using programs such as "reference line". The actual position relative to anything else wasn't relevant. I have even done similar exercises when the instrument is fresh out of the box and just told the instrument that it was at 100.000, 100.000, 10.000 just for the purpose of being able to proceed.

Also, when using a total station to check "best fit" of a structure prior to works beginning, site control might not be established yet and again, actual position isn't so relevant, because the relationship between existing structures/elements is what is being looked at. Yevad (talk) 09:41, 3 July 2014 (UTC)


 * I agree that the first sentence isn't well written. I suspect the whole section needs to be rewritten. One problem is the word "measure". There isn't a clear demarcation between what is calculated and what is measured. Really, the total station makes a bunch of internal measurements, such as the reading of the horizontal and vertical angle encoders, the reading of an internal level, the phase of various modulations applied to the laser, temperature, atmospheric pressure, then corrections for various known imperfections in the instrument, and calculates a distance, horizontal angle, and vertical angle. Optionally, some instruments will display x, y, z coordinates if the position of the occupied point and a known direction are available.


 * I think the issue of whether site control has been established can be described by saying the total station can use a national or international geodetic coordinate system if points with known coordinates are available, or an assumed coordinate system can be used.


 * As for Yevad's comment "The statement about needing line of sight isn't correct, as in actual use it is easy enough to mark 2 points that you can see and use a string & tape measure to find the hidden point", I would say the total station is not measuring the hidden point, but depending on how extensive the onboard software is, it might be able to calculate the coordinates of the hidden point. Jc3s5h (talk) 10:40, 3 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Jc, my comment about line of sight would probably be based on an example where you mark out 2 nearby points with the same easting (or northing) as the position you seek, and then use the difference between the northing (or easting) as a guide to how far away the point is. You would then run a string line through the 2 points and measure beyond, or back from, the nearest point.  There are variations of this technique that can be used in all manner of situations, such as choosing 2 points to get a "reference line", if they are inline with the hidden point.Yevad (talk) 22:18, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

What a "Total" Station should be
Total stations seem to be an instrument that can measure distance and angles. The first is most frequently done by some sort of EDM and the latter by an optical angle encoder that is manually operated.

I propose that a new goal should be set for the development of a true "Total" Station.

First of all it should be robotic. Incorporate A GNSS/DGPS system. Have an on board high resolution 20 mega pixel camera. Optics that can resolve .5 arc seconds at 50 feet. Record Temperature, humidity, air pressure, wind direction and speed in all readings and calculations.

Other things that could be included. Spectrometer (detect airborne or surface chemical spills or hazards) Geiger Counter (measure environmental radiation) seismic sensor (measure seismic activity) lidar wind speed meter (could measure winds aloft or wind across a horizontal distance) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.44.163.17 (talk) 16:26, 17 September 2015 (UTC)


 * The preceding post is entirely unrelated to the purpose of Wikipedia, or any other encyclopaedia. Jc3s5h (talk) 17:59, 17 September 2015 (UTC)