Arc Collector - Part 2

Introduction 

For this assignment, students used Arc Collector to gather data on a topic of their choosing. The research question that was posed was "What is the level of difficulty of each hole at Mt. Simon Disc Golf Course based on how the holes are set up relative to the landscape?" Mt. Simon is a park located in Eau Claire, WI and features a 9-hole disc golf course. To answer this question, or any research question for that matter, it's important to develop a proper project design that is going to allow the researcher to gather the necessary and correct data for adequately answering the question at hand.

The objectives for this activity include:

• Develop a database in ArcMap to be used with Arc Collector
• Use Arc Collector to gather data
• Use data collected by Arc Collector and make a map that provides an answer to the research question

The instructor provided students with the following link of a tutorial for showing students how to set up and deploy a database in ArcMap for Arc Collector: http://doc.arcgis.com/en/collector/

Methods

The study area for this activity took place at the disc golf course at Mt. Simon (figure 1). To answer the research question, each hole was assessed based on the following criteria:

• Distance (in feet, disc golf courses in the U.S. are measured in feet)
• Elevation change
• Number of obstructions between the tee and the basket

Figure 1: Google map image of Eau Claire with pin over Mt. Simon park

The criteria for this activity included that a point feature class be created with at least three fields for attribute data where:

• One field is a text field for notes
• One field is a floating point or an integer field
• One field has a category of some type for the user to choose from

The first step was to set up a geodatabase where domains, feature classes, and subsequent project work could be saved in. A geodatabase was created titled 'MtSimon.gdb' from which the 'Distance' and 'ElevationChange' domains were then created (figures 2 and 3). The domain type for both domains were 'Coded Values' where the 'Code' and subsequent 'Description' for the 'Distance' domain included:

• 0-200 (0-200 feet)
• 201-300 (210-300 feet)
• >300 (over 300 feet)

and for the 'ElevationChange' it was:

• Flat (no elevation change)
• Slight elevation change
• Moderate elevation change

Figure 2: Distance domain with coded values

Figure 3: ElevationChange domain with coded values

After the geodatabase domains were set up, a point feature class was created titled 'Holes' and would serve to mark the tees and baskets on each hole (2 points per hole for a total of 18 points). In the 'Feature Class Properties' under the 'Fields' tab, the fields were then set up where the 'Field Name' and subsequent 'Data Type' were as follows (see figure 4):

• Hole_number; Short Integer
• Distance; Text (this field utilized the 'Distance' domain)
• Number_obstruct; Long Integer (number of obstructions)
• Elevation_change; Text (this field utilized the 'ElevationChange' domain)
• Notes; Text

Figure 4: Fields for the 'Holes' feature class

After the domains were set up and the feature class was created with the necessary fields, the next step was to upload the map to Arc Collector which would then allow the user to enter data into this map via mobile device. The data was collected in the early afternoon on a weekday where disc golf course activity would be minimized. Each tee and basket and subsequent fields were plotted and recorded where the notes, if any were taken, were only entered after the first point on each hole since entering that section twice was unnecessary. Data collection went smoothly without any issues and the attribute table that went along with the feature class turned out as good as expected (figure 5).

Figure 5: Attribute table of the 'Holes' feature class

Results/Discussion

In order to determine the difficulty of each hole, each hole was "scored" based on the criteria discussed at the beginning of the methods section. Keep in mind, the difficulty ratings given to the holes in this exercise are only relative to each other on this course as opposed to being compared to holes of different courses. The scoring system was broken down as follows:

1. Distance

• (0-200 feet) = 1
• (201-300 feet) = 2
• (>300 feet) = 3

      2. Obstructions

• (0-15) = 1
• (16-20) = 2
• (21-30) = 3

      3. Elevation Changes

• Flat = 1
• Slight elevation change = 2
• Moderate elevation change = 3

Holes with the most points would be deemed the most difficult holes while holes with the least points would be deemed the easiest holes. The holes received the following scores:

1. 6
2. 6
3. 3
4. 4
5. 7
6. 5
7. 5
8. 3
9. 5

Since there were five different integer values for the final scores (3, 4, 5, 6, 7), the holes were given a value ranging from 1 through 5 where 1 was the easiest and 5 was the most difficult. These difficulty values were then added to the map and placed directly between the tee and the basket for the hole that is represents (figure 6).

Figure 6: Final map of Mt. Simon Disc Golf Course hole difficulty rating

Conclusion

Proper project design is essential for adequately answering a proposed research question. For this activity, setting up the geodatabase with its domains and the feature class with the necessary fields allowed Arc Collector to be used properly to collect the data and provided an adequate answer to what the difficulty levels of each hole at Mt. Simon Disc Golf Course are. This sort of project could be used on other disc golf courses, but could be much more elaborate. The criteria for this activity was kept very simple and the layout of the DGC at Mt. Simon is a very simple one as well that allowed the results to match up well with the given criteria. The criteria would have to be more elaborately developed and perhaps more tools would need to be utilized for more technically designed courses. 

Arc Collector - Part 1

Introduction

Arc Collector allows for collection of data in the field using a mobile device (phone, tablet).

Methods

Results/Discussion

Conclusion

Sources

Navigation with a Map and a Compass - Week 2

Introduction

In this activity, the navigation maps that were created in the previous week's activity, will now be utilized along with a compass and GPS unit to navigate the selected study area. Primary components used in land navigation include the following:

• Compass
• Topographical map
• Pace count
• Following a bearing
• Adjusting for declination

The link below provides more detail on land navigation:

http://www.backcountryattitude.com/land_navigation.html

Methods

For this exercise, students utilized the following:

• Navigation map in UTM (figure 1)
• Navigation map in decimal degrees (figure 2)
• Trimble Juno GPS (figure 3)
• Compass (which can be seen in figure 4)
• Pink ribbon (for marking trees at designated GPS coordinates)
• Pen
• Ruler

Figure 1: Navigation map (UTM Zone 15N)

Figure 2: Navigation map (decimal degrees)

Figure 3: Trimble Juno Series GPS unit

Figure 4: Measuring and marking bearings on the UTM navigation map

Each group was given a set of GPS coordinate points that were to be navigated to using the maps and compass. The coordinates were in UTM format and were therefore located on the UTM map and marked for the purpose of then finding and marking the bearings from point to point. The points used in this exercise were as follows:

1. 617708, 4958257
2. 617930, 4957946
3. 617619, 4958049
4. 617852, 4958136
5. 617695, 4958123

Each group was to choose a starting point (ours was on the north side of the building) and proceed to each coordinate point in order from 1 to 5. In order to calculate the correct bearings from point to point, a compass was used by lining up the left or right side straight edge of the compass with the starting point and the destination point. Then the compass dial was turned until "red in the shed" was acheived - that is, until the compass north arrow fell within the compass dial outlined arrow (figure 4). The bearing then was the azimuth on the compass dial that lined up with the fixed directional arrow on the compass (the black arrow located on the top center of the compass). 

After the points and bearings were marked on the map, each group member figured out his or her own pace count. The pace count was determined by calculating how many steps one takes within a given distance (100 meters for this exercise). A measuring tape was pulled out to 50 m in the parking lot where students walked alongside the tape while counting their steps. I walked the stretch of tape once and multiplied my result to get a pace count of 116.

After pace counts were determined, Dr. Hupy set up the GPS units to display the coordinates of the current location and to track students' paths through their respective courses. Finally, once the GPS unit was ready, it was time to navigate the course. 

The terrain that students navigated mainly consisted of fairly thick woods with both older, larger trees, and very young, smaller trees (figure 5). The relief was inconsistent where some spots were smooth and flat and others were quite drastic (figure 6). One group member handled the compass and navigation direction while the other two each handled a map and the GPS unit. Using the compass, a landmark was picked in the azimuth, the group walked to it with the compass bearer leading the way, and after the landmark was reached, another landmark was picked. This continued until the point was reached where the GPS unit was used to verify the correct coordinate location.

Figure 5: Section of woods on navigation course

Figure 6: Reaching GPS point 1 in a deep valley

This process continued until the course was complete. Pink ribbon was given to each group to mark a tree at a coordinate location if no tree had already been marked (figure 7). This occurred at point 2, where the GPS confirmed that we were in the correct coordinate location, but we were unable to find any marked trees and so we marked one ourselves. Also, as a way of checking the we were on the correct navigation path, we would stop about halfway between each point and gather our bearings by using the GPS unit to mark our location on the navigation map, then calculating the bearing and continuing onward (figure 8).

Figure 7: Marking a tree at GPS point 2

Figure 8: Using the GPS and map to gather our bearings

Results/Discussion

The result of our GPS tracks can be seen below, where the tracks are the red dots that form a serrated line and the green triangles are the GPS point labelled 1 through 5 (figure 9).

Figure 9: GPS points and tracks of navigation exercise

Looking at the resulting map, it's clear to see that the tracks do not pass directly through each point. In fact, it only passed directly through point 2, came near point 3, and was further away from points 4, 5, and 1, and the tracks show that our path from point to point was not have extremely efficient routes. There was some deviation off of a straight-line path from most points, especially from the starting point to point 1 and point 2 to point 3 after we navigated around the school.

We found that, for most points, our compass bearings were not leading us directly to the points, therefore forcing us to gather our bearings and recalculate the azimuth to the point. This may have been due to the map we were using (UTM), not taking declination into account, or not following the azimuth correctly. By the time the exercise was finished, we found that we did not even utilize our pace counts and thought that it would not have been that useful anyways (even though it may have) due to the hilly and wooded terrain that forced us off a straight line from point to point and to take steps that were not consistently separated as they had been in the parking lot. Since the coordinate points had been given in UTM coordinates, we did not even utilize the map with decimal degrees. Perhaps having used this map to navigate would have led to better results for our tracks. Using the GPS unit was helpful in gathering our bearings and recalculating the azimuth. Without it, we may have not found the points we were looking for. The contour lines featured on the maps was also not something we utilized very well. Perhaps having contour lines in conjunction with a slope feature class of the terrain would have helped us visualize the terrain we were navigating a little better.


Conclusion

While this activity was not a complete success, it was also not a complete failure. While our group had a good plan in place going into the exercise, we found that by the end we could have employed better navigation methods, and it is because of this that we learned a great deal of what it takes to navigate in a remote terrain (or at least got an idea).

Sources

GPS image: http://mountliming.co.uk/precision-farming/gps-hardware-and-software/ 

Development of a Field Navigation Map - Week 1

Introduction

For this exercise, students will be navigating a local area utilizing two different maps: one utilizing the UTM coordinate system with a grid and the other using the traditional world Geographic Coordinate system using decimal degrees. Along with the two maps, students will use a compass and pace count for navigating. Pace count is knowing how many steps a person takes within a given distance where the common standard is 100 meters.

Methods

Students were provided with access to a geodatabase to work with in the creating of the maps which featured numerous data sets. This material was located in:

• Q:\StudentCoursework\JHupy\Coursedata\336_Geospatialfieldmethods\Geog336_Data

Two maps were to be constructed for this exercise: one containing a UTM grid of at least 50 meter spacing and another with Geographic Coordinates in decimal degrees. The maps need to be 11x17 in landscape format and saved in PDF format and should contain the following elements: 

• North arrow
• Scale bar (meters)
• What the projection is
• What the coordinate system is
• A properly labeled grid
• Background of student's choice
• List of data sources
• Watermark of map creator's name
• Pace count

Grid Map

Layers included in final map:

1. Eau_Claire_West_SE (raster)
2. Slope_grdn452 (slope feature class created from raster grdn45w092_13)
3. Navigationboundary

Steps taken to create map:

1. Project the data frame in NAD 1983 (2011) UTM Zone 15N (Meters) in 'Layers' properties (figure 1)
2. Connect to folder containing Priory geodatabase and my_priory geodatabase (this is where output of tools will be saved)
3. Add Eau_Claire_West_SE, Navigationboundary, and grdn45w092_13
4. Clip grdn45w092_13 to Navigationboundary (figure 2):
• Go to ArcToolbox > Data Management Tools > Raster > Raster Processing > Clip 
• Input Raster: grdn45w092_13
• Output Extent: Navigationboundary
• Output Raster Dataset: grdn45w092_13_Clip
5. Then analyze slope of the output (figure 3):
• Go to ArcToolbox > Spatial Analyst Tools > Surface > Slope
• Input Raster: grdn45w092_13_Clip
• Output Raster: slope_grdnClip
• Output Measurement: Degree
6. Set transparency of slope_grdnClip to 60% (figure 4)
7. Add a grid to the map under 'Layer' properties in the 'Grids' tab (figure 5)
• New Grid
• Measured Grid, hit next
• Enter 40 meters in the X Axis and Y Axis sections
• Finish grid and adjust accordingly

Figure 1: Projection tab example

Figure 2: Clip tool example

Figure 3: Slope tool example

Figure 4: Transparency setting example

Figure 5: Grid tab example

Geographic Coordinate Map

Layers included in final map:

1. Navigationboundary
2. Contour_grdnClip2
3. F1_merged

Steps taken to create map: 

1. Project the data frame in NAD 1983 (2011) State Plane Wisconsin Central (Meters) in 'Layers properties
2. Add Navigationboundary, grdn45w092_13_Clip, F1 and F1_1 to map
3. Create contours of from grdn45w092_13_Clip (figure 6):
• Go to ArcToolbox > Spatial Analyst Tools > Surface > Contour 
• Input Raster: grdn45w092_13_Clip
• Output Polyline Features: Contour_grdnClip2
• Contour Interval: 2 (for 2 meters)
4. Merge the F1 and F1_1 rasters to create one raster (figure 7):
• Go to ArcToolbox > Data Management Tools > Raster > Raster Dataset > Mosaic
• Input Rasters: F1, F1_1
• Target Raster: F1_merged
5. Display labels for Contour_grdnClip2 by going to layer's properties > Labels and selecting 'Label features in this layer' box and adjust labels accordingly

Figure 6: Contour tool example

Figure 7: Mosaic tool example

Results/Discussion

The UTM map with 40 meter spacing can be seen below (figure 8). The coordinate system is NAD 1983 (2011) UTM Zone 15N (Meters), (the zone where the field navigation will take place).

Figure 8: UTM map containing grid with 40 meter spacing

The Geographic Coordinate map with decimal degrees can be found below (figure 9). The coordinate system is NAD 1983 (2011) State Plane Wisconsin Central (Meters), (again, the navigation area falls within this zone). The projection is Lambert Conic Conformal.

Figure 9: Geographic Coordinate system map with 2 meter contour lines, labeled

Data used from Priory geodatabase:

• Eau_Claire_West_SE: this provided a good quality basemap for the grid map
• F1 and F1_1: when merged, a good quality, grey scale basemap for the contour map where contour lines could easily be seen
• grdn45w092_13: a good quality DEM that allowed for numerous surface analyses, but first had to be clipped to the study area to speed up computational processes
• Navigationboundary: shows map reader the study area and was the extent used to clip the grdn45w092_13 DEM

Data not included from Priory geodatabase:

• drg_s_wi035: topographic map that appeared too gritty
• labels: not visible at a large scale
• LidarNE and LidarNW: couldn't get these layers to show when zoomed in on study area
• priory_2ftcontours: created 2 meter contours from grdn45w092_13 DEM

Conclusion

Overall, the map creation was successful, but how well the maps will work in the field navigation part of this exercise remains to be seen. It is necessary to include enough elements within a map in order for it to be useful for navigation, but it is also possible to clutter to the map with too many elements and impede its usefulness. Finding the right balance of elements is key to a useful navigation map.