Sunday, May 12, 2013

Priory GPS Data Collection


Introduction

This week we were tasked with mapping features at the Eau Claire priory for the purpose of future planning. A long term goal for the Priory includes student housing, outdoor adventure center, as well as other multipurpose buildings. We were tasked with mapping features that may be of interest for future planners.

There are many methods to going about mapping an area, for this exercise we decided to use the Trimble Junos. These devices have ArcPad loaded so we can deploy a Geodatabse from ArcMap into the device. Then we can use the device to collect points in the field and eventually bring the data back into ArcMap after point collection had finished.

Figure 1: Trimble Juno 3D. We used the 3B edition, but they are essentially the same for our purposes.
 

Study Area

As mentioned earlier, we were once again at the UWEC Priory. The Priory is an area filled with many small hills and deep (for Wisconsin) gorges. It currently houses the children’s center and has a few buildings on the property.

 
Figure 2: Aerial photo of our study area at the UWEC Priory.

Methods

To begin this exercise we had to load a geodatabse onto our Trimble units. After checking out the Juno from our geospatial faciliatator, we started building a geodatabse in ArcCatalog. We decided we wanted to map a number of features along the trails at the Priory. We chose to map the benches, invasive species, and erosional areas. To make the mapping process easier we decided to set domains for each of these features. This would allow us to classify the features as we went along without typing out the long details. For example, with erosion we set domains of Low, Moderate, and Severe occurrences. Now while in the field, we could just select one of the domains from a dropdown menu.

After creating the same criteria for the other two features, we deployed the data to our Juno units and went into the field. As we walked the trails we kept our eyes open for our desired features. When we stumbled upon a feature we would discuss exactly how to classify the feature. We would normally come to a consensus then record the data in the Juno. Unfortunately, something went wrong with our deployment and we were not able to access the dropdown menu as we thought we would. This meant we had to write out our desired attributes for each feature occurrence. Also, my GPS unit was having a hard time taking points and doing the point averaging so my data was basically useless.

When we returned to the lab, we began uploading our data that we collected. My data was obviously pretty unusable so I had to copy the data from my group member, Zach. From here we can begin to make maps of the feature data we collected.

Results/Discussion

Figure 3: Map of all the feautre data collected with Trimble units. The repetative key is a product of our flawed data collection methods
It was frustrating to be working in the field and have your equipment fail on you. I think that I missed a step with deployment which caused my unit to be useless. I think it was still a good exercise, however we will just need more careful oversight and attention to detail when creating and deploying our geodatabses.

Overall this was a good exercise in how we can use geospatial tools to map an area for potential future land use planning.

 

 

HABL


Introduction

This week we launched our final balloon with the goal of putting it high into the atmosphere. Our HABL (High Altitude Balloon Launch) should reach an altitude of at least 60,000 feet in the atmosphere. This would put the balloon somewhere in the stratosphere. Once it reaches its maximum height, the gas inside the balloon will pop and unleash the parachute, bringing it back safely to earth. We are going to attach a camera to the balloon and hopefully get some good images of the launch and flight.

Methodology

Earlier in the year we worked on making a balloon rig while the weather kept us indoors. Reference that blog post for more instruction on the construction portions. I worked on the measurement of weights (which were unnecessary in the end) but my fellow classmates worked on the rig itself. Their blogs are available at:

http://people.uwec.edu/hupyjp/webdocs/geog336_Reports_spr13.htm

We finally got a good day on Friday April 26th  with temps in the mid-upper 60s and winds at a minimum. Since this wasn’t the original class time only some of the students were able to attend. We carted the helium down from the chem department to the outdoor shed and began to fill the balloon. We determined when the balloon was full and then began to attach the rig to the balloon

The rig was primarily comprised of a Styrofoam box filled with insulation and hot handz hand warmers. The insulation and hand warmers were included in order to keep the camera warm enough to function. It gets quite cold as you get higher up in the atmosphere and the camera would have broken otherwise. Also included was a camera (obviously), a gps tracking device and a flash beacon.

We launched the balloon and it immediately took off upwards. After it cleared a crane on campus we knew the balloon wouldn’t encounter any more structures until it would land again.

A few hours later the gps tracking device notified us that the balloon had landed in nearby Marshfield (only 72) miles away. Our professor went to the location and climbed a tree to find the parachute and retrieved it successfully.

Results/Discussion

Here is a video of the launch


How neat is that?

There is another video floating around, however is too large to put here.  Instead, here are some still frames that the video produced.
Figure 1: Campus from the aerial balloon. Approx height of 1500ft

Figure 2: Aerial photo of the river from a much higher altitude

Figure 3: Here is a good photo where you can see the curvature of the earth. Pretty neat huh? Shows just how high our balloon was.

Overall, this was an important exercise in aerial mapping. We learned a lot by trial and error so far in this class and this exercise was on par with that. A lot of the footage captured by the camera was pretty shaky and unusable for mapping purposes. If we were to do the exercise again I think we could use multiple cameras and have a camera focused on the balloon itself, the ground, and then incorporate IR or other types of cameras. This would give a wide spectrum of images which would provide more useful in a mapping setting.

Sunday, April 21, 2013

Balloon Mapping II


Balloon Mapping II

Introduction
This week we set out to improve upon our aerial photography skills via balloon mapping again. This week we got lucky and had significantly less wind to work with and this would prove key to attaining high quality, usable photographs. We took a lot of lessons we learned last week and tried to act accordingly this week. We lost our balloon from last week when the rope snapped so we had to work with a completely new balloon this time around. We also took care to secure our balloon so we wouldn’t lose it again through another freak accident.

Figure 1:An ovierview of our study area. We were looking to map as much of campus as possible

Methodology
Following in last weeks steps, we split into different groups and completed our individual tasks before descending on the garage out by Phillips to fill our balloon. Once we filled the balloon we again walked out to Phillips mall and launched our balloon. (Figures 2, 3)


Figure 2: One of the first images taken from our balloon camera as it takes off


Figure 3: A good image for photo mapping. Notice the angle at which the camera is facing the ground is almost directly straight down.
 

This week however, I had a different task. A select few members of the class were in charge of taking ground control points with 3 Trimble Juno units. We went around campus and took ground control points at various light posts and trashcans and other landmarks.

The purpose of the ground control points was to have something to reference to later when we added the photos to ArcMap we could georeference these photos and the landmark on the image, to the gps coordinates we collected. This gives the pictures a ‘place’ in the real world so they have the utmost accuracy.

I was not a part of the launching or walking of the balloon since I was taking ground control points but you can refer to any of my classmates blogs for the narrative of that event. (http://people.uwec.edu/hupyjp/webdocs/geog336_Reports_spr13.htm)

Once we returned inside the images were uploaded to the computer and we could begin to search for usable ones. (Figure 3 shows a good example of a very usable photo.
 

Results/Discussion
Overall the pictures were far better quality than last week’s images and we were able to cover a lot more of campus, AND most importantly we returned with our balloon in hand.

Once we sorted through the images we realized that as a class we had far more areas to cover than one single person could stitch together. My innovative classmates decided to split up the study area into our 6 groups so that we could each stitch a little piece of it. Then ideally we could stitch our mosaics together to make a large image of all of campus.

This week we mosaicked with a different tool. In order to provide a more accurate orthophoto we decided to use ArcMap to do the mosaicking. This allowed us to add ground control points to our images.

Within arc map, you need to add a basemap to the project. This will allow you to assign points on our collected pictures, to the points on the base map. Then ArcMap can attach a geographical location to each picture. If you add enough of these points to each picutre you can avoid distortion as well as provide a highly accurate mosaicked image. It's all pretty simple within arcmap. You simply open your georeferencing tool and then add the individual pictures to the map. then you can select each picture, add reference points, and then the program stitches it together for you.
 (Figures 4, 5 show the final georeferenced area)

Figure 4: Overiew of the geo referenced photo area. It appears 'rough' in some areas because of all the recent changes in campus area buildings.
 
Figure 5: Same area as previous figure, but a bit bigger.

Conclusion
Overall this was a great addition to last week’s activity. All the things that went wrong last week, seemed to go right this week. We were able to use a new different software to stitch together a section of our study area and with more spatial accuracy than the first time. This was a great exercise to practice our mosaicking skills and teach us how we could do low cost aerial mapping of nearly any type of study area. 

Sunday, April 14, 2013

Balloon Mapping I


Introduction
This week we had the goal of launching our first balloon to begin learning a bit more about aerial photography and the processes behind aerial mapping. This was actually a project that we had been working on for some time now. Earlier in the semester we worked to design a housing to attach the camera to the balloon. With that exercise we took care to keep our payload low so our balloon would have no problem carrying it to the proper height. The class was excited to get started with balloon mapping and take a break from priory activities. The day we chose to launch our balloon wound up being pretty windy and it would be interesting to see how this affected our mapping exercises.

Methodology
As stated earlier, we spent some time earlier in the year creating our camera housing so that was ready to go right away. We met during our normal class period and then split out into different smaller groups in order to get the launch going. One group got the helium, one group measured the string in 100 foot increments, another got the camera ready. Once we all met in the garage with our tasks complete we spent about 15 minutes filling the balloon with helium (Figure 1). Then we attached the camera housing and the balloon was ready for launch (Figure 2). Included in the housing was a GPS tracking unit so that we could georeference the photos after they were compiled on the computers.

Figure 1: The filling of the helium balloon
 

Figure 2: Balloon with the camera housing and gps attached

 
We walked out to campus mall and got the full effect of the wind on the ground and could only wonder what was going on 400 feet above us. When we were ready to launch we had to pay close attention to the string as we let the balloon out. The string attached to the spool was marked at 50ft intervals with a black mark, and then at 400 feet there was a red mark to signify the end. This was helpful, as it could tell us just how high the balloon was (assuming it went straight up).

We released the balloon into the air and found that the winds were a large hindrance to the balloon gaining altitude. I think the balloon was only about 100 feet in the air and was nowhere near directly above us (Figure 3).

Figure 3: Balloon moving more laterally than vertically.

 
Despite the lack of altitude we still walked the balloon around campus mall and along the river front. When we decided to walk the balloon across the bridge is when issues began to arise. The wind was battering on the balloon and eventually it was too much for the string to handle and our string snapped. Luckily for us though, the camera housing and gps also came detached from the balloon and fell into the river. The camera housing kept it afloat however, and we were able to retrieve it from the river with little issue.

Results/Discussion

When we got back indoors it was time to upload our photos to see if any were usable. The good news is that we got over 2,000 photos from the mapping exercise. However, a very limited few were usable. Photos that were taken at too much of an angle provide too much distortion for photo stitching. But with a sample size of 2,000 we were able to attain a good sample of usable images (Figures 4, 5).

Figure 4: One of the pictures I used to stitch the map

Figure 5: One of the pictures I used to stitch the map

 
When it came to mosaicking our images, a large portion of the class decided to use the freeware website called MapKnitter. This is supposed to be a very user friendly, easy to use website. After viewing a few tutorials I was able to get the hang of it and was able to stitch a few photos together. However, with MapKnitter you have no way of georeferencing your photos, so adding a true location becomes very inaccurate/un-reliable. Your resulting photo stitching image will be a pretty image but will not be up to reference standards (like an orthophoto would be) (Figure 6).

Figure 6: The resulting map from stitching three photos together.
 

Conclusion
Overall this was a great introductory exercise for many reasons. We learned the basics of photo mapping, map stitching, and most importantly the importance of wind and weather forecasting when conducting an exercise like this. Next week we are planning on launching the balloon again, hopefully in better conditions to get some more height, and more usable photos.

Sunday, April 7, 2013

Land Navigation Wrap-up

Introduction

Over the past few weeks we’ve been using our geographic skills to aid in a land navigation course at the UW-Eau Claire priory (see Study Area section for more info). Each week we had a different toolset to use in the completion of our navigation task.
Week 1 we used a student created map with two and five foot contours, and a traditional compass.
Week 2 we used ONLY a GPS with UTM coordinates.
Week 3 we used a GPS with UTM coordinates, and our original created map.

This report should outline each week and hopefully help us to understand our efficiency with the different tools.


Week 1
As mentioned earlier, The tools we were expected to use in Week 1 were as follows: 5foot contour map (Figure 1), 2foot contour map (Figure 2), compass (Figure 3), our pace count, and the UTM points given to us by our professor (Figure 4). This was done in a traditional orienteering fashion.

Orienteering is, for some a hobby, and others a necessary tool in the work place. For instance, there are many clubs and groups you can join who have the common hobby of orienteering (see www.us.orienteering.org). In other cases though, orienteering/land navigation can be used as a training exercise for military or based organizations. I’ve had discussions with former military personnel who tell stories of doing the exact same thing we’re doing, but on a much larger scale. What is important to realize from the obvious popularity and wide array of uses for such a tool, is that land navigation is a vital tool to many people, and many professions. Land navigation is not simply the product of a geographer’s nerd session, but a valuable and widely used geospatial tool.

For this exercise we were tasked with using only a few tools to complete the land navigation course the two most important being our compass and our topographic map we created last week. (See methods section for complete walkthrough). It was interesting because with a compass alone we can’t navigate to and from our points. Nor with a topographic map alone could we navigate to the points. We needed a frame of reference as well as points themselves, and an origin point (luckily we were provided these points, the origin, and a physical compass by our professor). By combining these UTM points, our compass and our topographic map (in UTM coordinate reference) we are able to navigate to the given points. One tool is good, two tools is better, but having all three leads to successful completion of the task.

What makes this exercise so valuable is that it is a culmination of a few of our previously learned/developed skills. A few weeks ago we perfected our compass skills and learned how to plot and map points based on azimuth and distance, last week we learned how to create topographic maps with a UTM reference, and this week we got to combine them.


Figure 1: 5Foot Contour Map created by myself. Notice the UTM grid that will aid in navigating when in the field next week. It will also help in aligning our compases with north in the pre field work.



Figure 2: 2Foot Contour map created by my groupmate Brandon. This should help us to get a forecast of our terrain before we have to traverse over to it. Also well help us to know what the terrain should be like near points we have to navigate to.



Figure 3: Actual Compass used in field with the parts of the compas labeled as well. use for reference when going throug the later parts of this lab writeup. Photo Credit: Hannah Bristol





Figure 4: UTM coordinates provided by Joe Hupy. Noted on the provided document is the UTM grid coordinates ona cartesian plane system, elevation of each point, Date the point was plotted, and the latitude and longitude.


Week 2
In week 2 we completed the course using only our GPS units and a list of UTM coordinates. This brought a new challenge to the task because we could no longer use our topographical maps. The main purpose of our activity was to determine how efficient we could be using GPS as our sole navigation, that is, how does having only one tool change the landscape of the event. (one tool is good, two tools is better, three tools is great….) It was time to see how we fared with only one of our tools.

For this exercise we worked in the same groups as the compass navigation, but this time we worked on a new orienteering course (last week we worked on course 3, and course 1 this week).

We each had our own eTrex GPS unit, with a list of UTM coordinates for each point we had to get to. We were then able to navigate to the list of points based on matching our UTM coordinate readings to the ones provided to us.

For this portion of the exercise it was important to understand exactly what UTM coordinates means. Universal Transverse Mercator, or UTM, refers to the series of map projections used to determine exact geographical locations. It is similar to the latitude and longitude but is split into zones across the hemispheres to make it far more localized and useful than traditional latitude and longitudinal navigation methods. Earth is split into 60 zones and here in western Wisconsin we fit into the zone 15 North. UTM lays out a Cartesian coordinate based on meters within each zone. This allows us to follow as out X and Y coordinates go up or down, we can travel north/south, east/west.

What makes this exercise valuable is the fact that we are going to experiment a similar process but with different tools. Part of the scientific method is retrying your project, to get similar results. Here we are re-doing our original Land Nav, but with a different tool. Then we can compare the efficiently and overall navigation skills to see which tool worked better or worse.

Week 3
Week three was one where we could combine different sets of tools to give us the best three we could ask for. This week we combined our GPS, UTM coordinates, and our topographic maps in order to complete the entire 15-point course. We also added full paintball gear to mix to add an extra level of difficulty.

This week was also important because it was somewhat of an all-encompassing culmination of our skill sets we’ve been working on. We had to create new maps with the points, and paintball course information, we had to use GPS navigation, and had to use our map reading skills in order to complete the entire course.

Study Area

Before we get into the methodology of each week, it is important to understand the area in which we are doing our exercises.

The University of Wisconsin Eau Claire purchased the priory in the past few years and has been using the buildings as a childcare facility. The property surrounding the structures however, provide a great outdoor learning center for classes like our. Check out the following maps for further imagery info.


Methodology/Results:

Week 1

For this exercise it’s important to remember last weeks exercise in creating our maps. These maps were not simply handed to us, we had to take the raw data and create our own topographic maps. Should any questions or issues arise, take note of last week’s write-up.



When we arrived at the Priory we went inside to have group planning before heading off into the woods to follow our land navigation course.



Al Wiberg giving a crash course on compass navigation highlighted this time inside. He reminded us that the first step in compass navigation is to take note of the Magnetic declination. This is the degree to which magnetic north and true north vary, and needs to be accounted for before navigating using your compass. As we discovered earlier in the year, Eau Claire’s magnetic declination is less than one degree, so it’s not something we have to worry about when measuring with this degree of accuracy (we aren’t measuring to fractions of degrees so any notation of declination would be beyond our level of accuracy anyways.) However, if using different, more accurate, tools, this magnetic declination would be a necessary adjustment.



Next he walked us through an example of navigation planning using our map. By taking our origin point and finding our second point, he showed us that by laying our compass on the origin, with the HEADING arrow pointed directly at our second point we can determine the azimuth at which the second point is, in relation to the first point. (refer to Figure 3)



With our compass edge on the origin point, and HEADING arrow pointed directly at our next destination we can then turn the HOUSING/BEZEL until our red red box or 'shed' and the reference lines on the bezel are parrallel with the UTM grid on the map.Then the bearing arrow (and extension of our heading arrow) will tell us exactly what the azimuth is towards our destination point. Step by step directions are as follows:

1.Lay compass base plate edge on origin point, so that it also lines up with destination point. (use a piece of paper to 'extend' your baseplate if needed

2.Orient heading arrow pointed directly at destination point.

3.Rotate housing to ensure that the red box or 'shed' and the reference lines on the bezel are parrallel with the UTM grid on the map.

4.Note the azimuth reading as identified by the Heading arrow azimuth degree value.

(refer to Figure 3)

After you attain your azimuth reading for the origin to the first destination, you can then measure out the distance between these two points. Since we measured our pace count in meters, we now know exactly how many of our paces it takes to travel 100 meters. Using the scale and the knowledge of our pace count it’s easy to determine exactly how far it is from point to point. This should be noted somewhere on your map or on your list of given points.



After you master the azimuth reading, and measuring your distance for the first set of points, it is easy to reproduce this for any other set of points, each time you just have a new origin and a new destination point. 

Once we completed all the measurements and recorded these on our map it was time to take to the actual course. In the field we were able to start at our origin and held the compass against our bodies. We then rotated the housing on the compass to place our azimuth reading in line with our heading arrow. Then, lining the red needle up with the red ‘shed’ we were able to determine what direction our destination would be. We then used out pace count to approximate the distance, and once we were at about the right distance we panned our surroundings to search for the orienteering flag. Once finding each flag, we were able to repeat this process, simply setting up a new destination each time. (Figure 5)


Figure 5: All points plotted out for us to track on the map, and then in real life again.


In the field we were able to take our recorded azimuths and distances and go from point to point, successfully completing the course with very few hiccups. (Figures 6+7)


Figure 6. At each desitnation we had to punch our ticket to prove we made it to each spot.

Figure 7: Arriving at our destination point. Then we would shoot an Azimuth and head towards our next destination point.


Week 2

 
Week 2 was slightly different, this week we could only use our UTM coordinates and a GPS unit. No maps, no compasses.

The first thing we did was to start our track logs on the Garmin eTrex unit. The track logs will be used in the lab to determine just how efficiently we travel between the points. Track log took a reading every X amount of time (for my log I believe it was every 30 seconds or every minute) so then we have a series of points to follow our path.

Figure 8: our personal GPS Unit, the Garmin eTrex.

We then were given the list of points and the UTM coordinates by our professor. There is a function in the GPS where you can type in the UTM coordinates and the GPS will guide you there, however that would defeat the purpose of the exercise so we didn’t use it. We instead, had to watch the UTM coordinates change as we moved around, then we could get a good bearing of what direction increased and decreased out X and Y coordinates. Once we figured that out, we could navigate somewhat efficiently from point to point.


Figure 9: Display of where the UTM readouts are located.
Image provided by classmate Tonya Olson (http://tonyaolson1.blogspot.com/)


At the beginning it took a little while to figure out the exact directions. But once we were able to figure out how the cardinal directions played into the UTM directions we were able to navigate to our points rather efficiently. We completed the full 5 point course in just under 3 hours.
 
When we returned to the lab, it was time to import out data into the GIS. We first had to import the tracklog from the GPS unit to the GIS. To do this, we used the DNR-GPS software loaded on the computer. This gave us a list of points, and together these paths made up our path that we took through the course. After this was imported we added the shapfile to our Priory geodatabse. We also all sent out shapefiles (converted into feature classes) to our professor who added them to a public geodatabase so we could access our classmates’track logs as well.

We then created maps for our own path, our group paths, and a map for the entire classes paths. Each map is provided as figures 10-12
 


Figure 10: A Map of the course overall and the path that I took according to my GPS unit.


Figure 11: A map of the overall course and the path that my group took (Zach R. and Myself) according to our GPS units.
Figure 12: Map of the overall course and the paths that each member of the class took. You can slightly make out the difference courses by tracing individual paths through the points.

 
Week 3
Week three was again different because we added paintball to the mix. However, more importantly, this week we were able to use all the forms of navigation we had been using the past events. 

Figure 13: Map of the Priory set up for Paintballing exercise. Notice the new feature, Do Not Shoot Zone.
 
Figure 14: My Group (Group 6) Path during this exercise.


Figure 15: The entire classes navigation paths for the exercise. Notice the points that no group ever managed to navigate to.


Discussion/Conclusion:

Week1
Our method of measuring and recording while indoors really came to be of great help while working in the field. It ensured that we could use our map for reference if needed, but was not a necessary tool to whip out every single time we took a new bearing. We did however, keep the map out for most of the time, as it provided us with a good idea of what to expect in our next destination.

Using the 2foot and 5foot contour lines, we were able to determine what type of terrain we would be experiencing on our traverse to the destination point. This was helpful because it helped us stay on the right track, and we could tell if we were headed in the complete wrong direction.

Our map also allowed us to reorient ourselves if we ever lost our pace count, or the terrain was not lending itself to our mode of navigation, for instance if a hill prevented us from taking a good azimuth bearing. We were able to reorient ourselves along a road that traveled through the priory when this happened. From the edge of the road we could reshoot our azimuth and guesstimate our pace count again.

As far as our maps go, each of them seemed to function pretty well for their individual purposes. The 2-foot contour aided in the foresight process when determining the terrain surrounding our destination points, and the 5-foot contour aided in a good reference point from which to take our measurements from.

If I needed to change one thing about our maps, I would make our 2foot contour map a bit less ‘noisy’ and have it focus solely on the contour lines and a few reference points. It has a bit too much going on in it currently.

Overall this exercise was a good combination and utilization of many of the tools we have learned so far this semester. It was a good start on the way to land navigation and provides a good base from which we can experiment and learn more as we move further. The implementation of GPS next week should prove to add another, more complex layer.

Week 2
This exercise made for an interesting experience. It was somewhat difficult to navigate with ONLY using UTM coordinates. It involved a lot of walking and then checking the GPS, then walking more, checking it again, walking more, and checking again etc etc. It was also made difficult because of the fact that we still had knee deep snow at the priory. This made it difficult to watch the GPS while we walked so it turned into guess and check. It also slowed down our movement quite a bit. Had there been no snow we could have finished in probably half the time. The one area in which the snow aided was the fact that it made spotting the point flags pretty easy.

More importantly though, viewing the GPS tracks was interesting because it showed us just what type of path we took, in relation to the path we SHOULD have been taking. It also allowed us to track the differences in our groups track logs. Where we all took very similar routes, our GPS logs did not always look the same. The same is viewable with other groups as well.

Overall a good learning experience as I’ve had limited exposure to UTM coordinate navigation, and the use of the tracklogs made it pretty interesting to examine post-navigation.
 
Week 3
Week three proves what I have stated multiple times in this report; One tool is good, two tools are better but three tools are the best. This is on perfect display during week 3. We were able to use the three tools we had to best navigate our courses most efficiently.




Final Remarks
Final Remarks

Sunday, March 24, 2013

Land Navigation GPS


Introduction:
As a continuation of our land navigation series, this week we will be completing the course using only our GPS units. This brought a challenge to the task because we could no longer use our maps. The main purpose of our activity was to determine how efficient we could be using GPS as our sole navigation, that is, how does having only one tool change the landscape of the event. (one tool is good, two tools is better, three tools is great….)

For this exercise we worked in the same groups as the compass navigation, but this time we worked on a new orienteering course. (Last week we worked on course 3, and course 1 this week.)

We each had our own eTrex GPS unit, with a list of UTM coordinates for each point we had to get to. We were then able to navigate to the list of points based on matching our UTM coordinates to the ones given to us.

Methods:
The first thing we did was to start our track logs on the Garmin eTrex unit. The track logs will be used in the lab to determine just how efficiently we travel between the points. Track log took a reading every X amount of time (for my log I believe it was every 30 seconds or every minute) so then we have a series of points to follow our path.

We then were given the list of points and the UTM coordinates by our professor. There is a function in the GPS where you can type in the UTM coordinates and the GPS will guide you there, however that would defeat the purpose of the exercise so we didn’t use it. We instead, had to watch the UTM coordinates change as we moved around, then we could get a good bearing of what direction increased and decreased out X and Y coordinates. Once we figured that out, we could navigate somewhat efficiently from point to point.

At the beginning it took a little while to figure out the exact directions. But once we were able to figure out how the cardinal directions played into the UTM directions we were able to navigate to our points rather efficiently. We completed the full 5 point course in just under 3 hours.

When we returned to the lab, it was time to import out data into the GIS. We first had to import the tracklog from the GPS unit to the GIS. To do this, we used the DNR-GPS software loaded on the computer. This gave us a list of points, and together these paths made up our path that we took through the course. After this was imported we added the shapfile to our Priory geodatabse. We also all sent out shapefiles (converted into feature classes) to our professor who added them to a public geodatabase so we could access our classmates’ track logs as well.

We then created maps for our own path, our group paths, and a map for the entire classes paths. Each map is provided in the results section.

Results:

 

Figure 1: A Map of the course overall and the path that I took according to my GPS unit.
 
Figure 2: A map of the overall course and the path that my group took (Zach R. and Myself) according to our GPS units.
Figure 3: Map of the overall course and the paths that each member of the class took. You can slightly make out the difference courses by tracing individual paths through the points.

Conclusion:
This exercise made for an interesting experience. It was somewhat difficult to navigate with ONLY using UTM coordinates. It involved a lot of walking and then checking the GPS, then walking more, checking it again, walking more, and checking again etc etc. It was also made difficult because of the fact that we still had knee deep snow at the priory. This made it difficult to watch the GPS while we walked so it turned into guess and check. It also slowed down our movement quite a bit. Had there been no snow we could have finished in probably half the time. The one area in which the snow aided was the fact that it made spotting the point flags pretty easy.

More importantly though, viewing the GPS tracks was interesting because it showed us just what type of path we took, in relation to the path we SHOULD have been taking. It also allowed us to track the differences in our groups track logs. Where we all took very similar routes, our GPS logs did not always look the same. The same is viewable with other groups as well.

Overall a good learning experience as I’ve had limited exposure to UTM coordinate navigation, and the use of the tracklogs made it pretty interesting to examine post-navigation.

Monday, March 11, 2013

Land Navigation-Compass


Introduction

This week our exercise was to complete a series of orienteering/land navigation courses out at the UW-Eau Claire priory. The tools we were expected to use were as follows: 5foot contour map (Figure 1), 2foot contour map (Figure 2), compass (Figure 3), our pace count, and the UTM points given to us by our professor (Figure 4).

Figure 1: 5Foot Contour Map created by myself. Notice the UTM grid that will aid in navigating when in the field next week. It will also help in aligning our compases with north in the pre field work.
 

Figure 2: 2Foot Contour map created by my groupmate Brandon. This should help us to get a forecast of our terrain before we have to traverse over to it. Also well help us to know what the terrain should be like near points we have to navigate to.

Figure 3: Actual Compass used in field with the parts of the compas labeled as well. use for reference when going throug the later parts of this lab writeup. Photo Credit: Hannah Bristol

Figure 4: UTM coordinates provided by Joe Hupy. Noted on the provided document is the UTM grid coordinates ona  cartesian plane system, elevation of each point, Date the point was plotted, and the latitude and longitude.
 

Orienteering is, for some a hobby, and others a necessary tool in the work place. For instance, there are many clubs or groups you can join who have the common hobby of orienteering (see www.us.orienteering.org). In other cases though, orienteering/land navigation can be used as a training exercise for military or based organizations. I’ve had discussions with former military personnel who tell stories of doing the exact same thing we’re doing, but on a much larger scale. What is important to realize from the obvious popularity and wide array of uses for such a tool is that land navigation is a vital tool to many people, and many professions. Land navigation is not simply the product of a geographer’s nerd session, but a valuable and widely used spatial tool.

For this exercise we were tasked with using only a few tools to complete the land navigation course the two most important being our compass and our topographic map we created last week. (See methods section for complete walkthrough). It was interesting because with a compass alone we can’t navigate to and from our points. Nor with a topographic map alone could we navigate to the points. We needed a frame of reference as well as points themselves, and an origin point (luckily we were provided these points, the origin, and a physical compass by our professor). By combining these UTM points, our compass and our topographic map (in UTM coordinate reference) we are able to navigate to the given points. One tool is good, two tools is better, but having all three leads to successful completion of the task.

What makes this exercise so valuable is that it is a culmination of a few of our previously learned/developed skills. A few weeks ago we perfected our compass skills and learned how to plot and map points based on azimuth and distance, last week we learned how to create topographic maps with a UTM reference, and this week we got to combine them. (Further analysis in Discussion portion)

Methods
For this exercise it’s important to remember last weeks exercise in creating our maps. These maps were not simply handed to us, we had to take the raw data and create our own topographic maps. Should any questions or issues arise, take note of last week’s write-up.

When we arrived at the Priory, (1190 Priory Road, Eau Claire, WI) we went inside to have group planning before heading off into the woods to follow our land navigation course.

Al Wiberg giving a crash course on compass navigation highlighted this time inside. He reminded us that the first step in compass navigation is to take note of the Magnetic declination. This is the degree to which magnetic north and true north vary, and needs to be accounted for before navigating using your compass. As we discovered earlier in the year, Eau Claire’s magnetic declination is less than one degree, so it’s not something we have to worry about when measuring with this degree of accuracy (we aren’t measuring to fractions of degrees so any notation of declination would be beyond our level of accuracy anyways.) However, if using different, more accurate, tools, this magnetic declination would be a necessary adjustment.

Next he walked us through an example of navigation planning using our map. By taking our origin point and finding our second point, he showed us that by laying our compass on the origin, with the HEADING arrow pointed directly at our second point we can determine the azimuth at which the second point is, in relation to the first point. (refer to Figure 3)

With our compass edge on the origin point, and HEADING arrow pointed directly at our next destination we can then turn the HOUSING/BEZEL until our red red box or 'shed' and the reference lines on the bezel are parrallel with the UTM grid on the map.Then the bearing arrow (and extension of our heading arrow) will tell us exactly what the azimuth is towards our destination point. Step by step directions are as follows:
 
1.Lay compass base plate edge on origin point, so that it also lines up with destination point. (use a piece of paper to 'extend' your baseplate if needed
2.Orient heading arrow pointed directly at destination point.
3.Rotate housing to ensure that the red box or 'shed' and the reference lines on the bezel are parrallel with the UTM grid on the map.
4.Note the azimuth reading as identified by the Heading arrow azimuth degree value.

(refer to Figure 3)
 
After you attain your azimuth reading for the origin to the first destination, you can then measure out the distance between these two points. Since we measured our pace count in meters, we now know exactly how many of our paces it takes to travel 100 meters. Using the scale and the knowledge of our pace count it’s easy to determine exactly how far it is from point to point. This should be noted somewhere on your map or on your list of given points.

After you master the azimuth reading, and measuring your distance for the first set of points, it is easy to reproduce this for any other set of points, each time you just have a new origin and a new destination point. 
 
Once we completed all the measurements and recorded these on our map it was time to take to the actual course. In the field we were able to start at our origin and held the compass against our bodies. We then rotated the housing on the compass to place our azimuth reading in line with our heading arrow. Then, lining the red needle up with the red ‘shed’ we were able to determine what direction our destination would be. We then used out pace count to approximate the distance, and once we were at about the right distance we panned our surroundings to search for the orienteering flag. Once finding each flag, we were able to repeat this process, simply setting up a new destination each time. (Figure 5)

Figure 5: All points plotted out for us to track on the map, and then in real life again.

 
 In the field we were able to take our recorded azimuths and distances and go from point to point, successfully completing the course with very few hiccups. (Figures A+B)
Figure A. At each desitnation we had to punch our ticket to prove we made it to each spot.
Figure B: Arriving at our destination point. Then we would shoot an Azimuth and head towards our next destination point.

Discussion/Conclusion
Our method of measuring and recording while indoors really came to be of great help while working in the field. It ensured that we could use our map for reference if needed, but was not a necessary tool to whip out every single time we took a new bearing. We did however, keep the map out for most of the time, as it provided us with a good idea of what to expect in our next destination.

Using the 2foot and 5foot contour lines, we were able to determine what type of terrain we would be experiencing on our traverse to the destination point. This was helpful because it helped us stay on the right track, and we could tell if we were headed in the complete wrong direction.

Our map also allowed us to reorient ourselves if we ever lost our pace count, or the terrain was not lending itself to our mode of navigation, for instance if a hill prevented us from taking a good azimuth bearing. We were able to reorient ourselves along a road that traveled through the priory when this happened. From the edge of the road we could reshoot our azimuth and guesstimate our pace count again.

As far as our maps go, each of them seemed to function pretty well for their individual purposes. The 2-foot contour aided in the foresight process when determining the terrain surrounding our destination points, and the 5-foot contour aided in a good reference point from which to take our measurements from.

If I needed to change one thing about our maps, I would make our 2foot contour map a bit less ‘noisy’ and have it focus solely on the contour lines and a few reference points. It has a bit too much going on in it currently.

Overall this exercise was a good combination and utilization of many of the tools we have learned so far this semester. It was a good start on the way to land navigation and provides a good base from which we can experiment and learn more as we move further. The implementation of GPS next week should prove to add another, more complex layer.