GE 119: Land Surveying

2nd Semester, A.Y. 2016-2017

Comparison of Basic Lot Survey Data Using

Geodetic and Geocentric Datums in Varying Map
Projections

Submitted by:

Bueta, Gabriel Lorenzo A.

Madjus, Justin Frederick N.

Section 4A

Submitted to:

Engr. Louie P. Balicanta

Introduction

The geodetic datum is a reference ellipsoid used since old times as a basis for mapping out
the coordinates of different areas. However, as technology and other scientific advancements
improve, mathematicians and geodesists started on creating more reliable ellipsoidal models as
basis for reference in maps; these ellipsoidal models are transformed and realized into geocentric
datums. What differs these from the known geodetic datums is that it is Earth-Centered and Earth-
Fixed, meaning the center of the ellipsoid coincides with the center of gravity of the Earth.

Objectives

The objective of this research is to (1) prove if the differences in between the coordinates
of two (2) different datums commonly and widely used here in our country, specifically PRS92 (a
geodetic datum) and WGS84 (a geocentric datum), and (2) to show significant changes in the
positions of the survey data between different lots. In line with this, the research also aims to take
into considerationthe future plans of NAMRIA in improving the overall reference system used in
the country, which is that of the use of a geocentric datum.

Review of Related Literature

NAMRIA STRATEGIC PLAN 2020

The National Mapping Resource Information Agency is currently proposing a plan for the
modernization of the Philippine Geodetic Reference System which aims to address the problem of
using an outdated static reference system for the purposes of mapping and surveying in the country.
One of its goals is to develop the Philippine Geocentric Datum of 2016 which will become an
upgraded version of the current PRS 92 reference system. It will be aligned to the International
Terrestrial Reference System (ITRF) which is earth-centered and earth-fixed and wherein its
realizations/models will consider the Earths geodynamic behavior. According to this proposal, a
geocentric reference system is deemed better to suit the positioning needs of our country due to
different occurrences and changes involving plate tectonics and actual crustal deformations.

GEODETIC DATUM

The geodetic datum is a reference ellipsoid with a well-defined point of origin and
orientation. It is uniquely determined by specifying eight (8) parameters: two to define the
dimension, three to define the position of the origin, and three to define the orientation of the
three axes with respect to earth.
GEOCENTRIC DATUM

A geocentric datum is a datum with a natural Cartesian Coordinate System, in which its
three axes coincide with the principle axes of inertia of a rigid earth. Its center also coincides
with the Earths center of gravity, and thus, its minor axis also coincides with the Earths polar
axis of inertia.

2D CONFORMAL TRANSFORMATION

2D Conformal Transformation is a type of transformation that relies on 4 parameters to

maintain the shape of a figure; one scale, one rotation, and two translation parameters, one for
each axis.
X = Sxcos Sysin
Y = Sycos + Sxsin
where S is the Scaling Factor
is the angle of rotation

Equation 1. Scale and Rotation Parameters

X = ax by + c
Y = bx + ay + d
Where a, b, c and d are the translation parameters

Equation 2. Translation Parameters

CLOSED FORMULA METHOD

An additional method for coordinate conversion is the closed formula; which can be a
long and tedious method for converting grid coordinates to geographic coordinates.

= ()

The formula above is an efficient tool to convert any type of coordinates (either geographic
or Cartesian) into different specified datums whether geocentric, geodetic, or at any rate of
variation. In this research, however, this set of formulas was not used since the data obtained was
only limited to PRS 92 PTM grid coordinates, and since other specific parameters or values are
required (such as the height, etc.), results cannot be computed from here.

Methodology

The researchers obtained a simple subdivision plan (Lot 1-A, Psd-13-013832) and the
coordinates of its tie point from the technical department head of RASA Surveying, during their
on-the-job training at the said company.

Figure 1. Plot of Lot 1-A

 Figure 2. Technical description and tie line information of Lot 1-A

Using the lot data that was acquired, the PRS92 PTM grid coordinates of the corners were
computed. After that, a geoprocessing software (Global Mapper) was used to convert the PRS92
PTM coordinates into WGS84 coordinates, and vice versa. This said program can convert and
reproject various types of coordinates given its corresponding datum and projection. Using the
software-computed coordinates, 2D Conformal Transformation with least squares adjustment was
used to calculate different sets of parameters to be applied and tested on some sample lots.

Figure 3. Global Mapper Interface

After computing for the coordinates of the first lot, two additional lots were then also used
to compute for its coordinates. Afterwards, the parameters obtained from the previous
transformation equations were then applied, and their differences and effects on the overall nature
and description of the lot were checked and tabulated.

Results and Discussion

Point Northings Eastings

LM#3, Piedad Estate 1621990.518 501203.464
1 1621790.320 501560.943
2 1621865.202 501560.943
3 1621865.202 501672.385
4 1621811.096 501694.521
5 1621790.320 501699.121
Table 1. PPCS-TM/PRS 92 grid coordinates of the mother lot 1-A

Northings (WGS84/PTM) Eastings (WGS84/PTM)

LM#3, Piedad Estate 1621824.471 501228.8
1 1621624.278 501586.287
2 1621699.16 501586.286
3 1621699.164 501697.728
4 1621645.058 501719.867
5 1621624.281 501724.468

Northings (WGS84/UTM) Eastings (WGS84/UTM)

LM#3, Piedad Estate 1848367.712 504841.431
1 1848165.06 505200.923
2 1848240.482 505201.135
3 1848240.168 505313.379
4 1848185.61 505335.523
5 1848164.67 505340.098
Tables 2-3. Converted Cartesian coordinates of Lot 1-A using GlobalMapper 15 software

In comparing the grid coordinates in between different datums using similar

projections, the Northings of the PRS92-PTM coordinates are closer to the Northings of the
WGS84-PTM coordinates as compared to the Northings of the WGS84-UTM coordinates. The
same also holds true for the comparison of the Eastings.

2D Conformal transformation parameters Value

(PRS92 (PTM) WGS 84 (PTM))
Scale 1.000013562
Rotation -0.001692665
X-translation -202.8510301
Y-translation 66.45598947
 2D Conformal transformation parameters Value
(PRS92 (PTM) WGS 84 (UTM))
Scale 1.007213535
Rotation 0.16037788
X-translation 216096.3569
Y-translation -4548.396832
Tables 4-5. Transformation parameters obtained after sufficient iterations using least squares adjustment.

X (PRS92/PTM) Y (PRS92/PTM)
1 1621790.318 501560.9421
2 1621865.199 501560.9427
3 1621865.2 501672.3837
4 1621811.094 501694.5205
Table 6. Given PRS-92/PTM coordinates of Lot #2, a test lot with a relatively smaller area

X (PRS92/PTM) Y (PRS92/PTM)
1 1621790.318 501560.9421
2 1621865.199 501560.9427
3 1621865.2 501672.3837
4 1621811.094 501694.5205
5 1621790.317 501699.1209
Table 7. Given PRS-92/PTM coordinates of Lot #3, a test lot with a relatively medium-sized area

PRS 92 (PTM) to WGS 84 (PTM) Transformation)

N E
N E (WGS84/PTM (WGS84/PTM
(WGS84/PTM (WGS84/PTM ) applied 2D ) applied 2D dx (between dy (between
) Gmapper ) - Gmapper Parameters Parameters methods) methods)
1 0.05577537 0.01224791
1610807.879 514092.289 1610807.891 514092.3448 7 7
2 0.05642841 0.01239589
1610811.308 514084.94 1610811.32 514084.9964 4 7
3 0.05610288 0.01311578
1610820.941 514090.103 1610820.954 514090.1591 2 8
4 0.05636668 0.01278917
1610817.582 514097.21 1610817.595 514097.2664 6 1
Table 8. Comparison of two methods (applied LSA parameters vs. GlobalMapper converter) used to
obtain the WGS 84 (PTM projection) coordinates of Lot #2.

The difference of the position of the points of the two sets of coordinates is in the centimeter level,
which is favorable in terms of accuracy.

dx (pt shift) dy (pt shift) dd (pt shift)

1 -25.3449 166.04 167.9632268
 2 -25.3433 166.039 167.9619968
3 -25.3443 166.036 167.9591821
4 -25.3465 166.036 167.959514
5 -25.3471 166.036 167.9596046

dx (pt shift) dy (pt shift) dd (pt shift)

1 25.83408202 -165.8180075 167.8183882
2 25.83437467 -165.8181761 167.8185998
3 25.8342422 -165.818603 167.8190012
4 25.83423411 -165.818792 167.8191867
5 25.83373991 -165.8184535 167.8187762

dx (pt shift) dy (pt shift) dd (pt shift)

1 25.83432045 -165.8174305 167.8178547
2 25.83411948 -165.8176011 167.8179923
3 25.8339049 -165.8173179 167.8176795
4 25.83410052 -165.8173635 167.8177546
Tables 9, 10 and 11. Shift in position of points of lots 1-A, 2 and 3 respectively.

The tables above show the shift of the points from PRS92 (PTM) to WGS84 (PTM). All of the
points have shifts in their Northings and Eastings that are near in value, resulting to all of them having
almost similar shift in positions which surmount to around 168 meters.

ddx (length change) ddy (length change) dd (length change)

1-2 0.001 -0.0016 0.001886796
2-3 0.003 0.001 0.003162278
3-4 -2.32831E-10 0.0022 0.0022
4-5 0 0.0006 0.0006
5-1 -0.004 -0.0022 0.004565085

ddx (length change) ddy (length change) dd (length change)

1-2 -0.000200961 -0.000170581 0.000263597
2-3 -0.000214586 0.000283167 0.00035529
3-4 0.000195623 -4.55554E-05 0.000200857
4-1 0.000219924 -6.70303E-05 0.000229913

ddx (length change) ddy (length change) ddd (length change)

1-2 0.000292656 -0.000168564 0.00033773
2-3 -0.000132472 -0.000426904 0.000446985
3-4 -8.09296E-06 -0.000189009 0.000189183
4-5 -0.000494195 0.000338493 0.000599005
5-1 0.000342105 0.000445984 0.000562083
Tables 12, 13 and 14. Shift in position of lines of lots 1-A, 2 and 3 respectively.

The tables above show the shift in the position of the lines from PRS92 (PTM) to WGS84(PTM).
Lots 2 and 3 have their shifts near the sub-millimeter level, while Lot 1-A has almost all its shifts in the
millimeter level.
 Known Area (PRS92/PTM) Computed Area (WGS84/PTM)
Lot #2 86.99504549 86.99717562
Lot #3 233.0603475 233.0654837
Table 15. Comparison of Areas of Lots 2 and 3.

LINE Azimuth DD MM SS
1-2 0.000493645 0 0 1.78
2-3 269.9994739 269 59 58.11
3-4 337.7487883 337 44 55.64
4-5 347.5149598 347 30 53.86
5-1 89.99947387 89 59 58.11
Table 16. Azimuths of Lot 1-A (PRS 92 PTM)

LINE Azimuth DD MM SS
1-2 -0.000765148 0 0 2.75
2-3 269.9979435 269 59 52.6
3-4 337.7466882 337 44 48.08
4-5 347.5135373 347 30 48.73
5-1 89.99875607 89 59 55.52
Table 17. Azimuths of Lot 1-A (WGS 84 PTM)

Line Difference
1-2 -0.001258793
2-3 -0.001530406
3-4 -0.002100152
4-5 -0.001422502
5-1 -0.000717803
Table 18. Differences of Azimuths of 2 datums

The differences of the azimuths of Lot 1-A are at most at the millimeter level, with the largest
being around 2 millimeters, and the smallest being 0.7 millimeters.

LINE Azimuth DD MM SS
1-2 115.0180701 115 1 5.05
2-3 208.1883836 208 11 18.18
3-4 295.2985854 295 17 54.91
4-1 26.89510557 26 53 42.38
Table 19. Azimuths of Lot 2 (PRS 92 PTM)

LINE Azimuth DD MM SS
1-2 115.0163774 115 0 58.96
2-3 208.1866909 208 11 12.09
3-4 295.2982763 295 17 53.79
4-1 26.89391304 26 53 38.09
Table 20. Azimuths of Lot 2 (WGS 84 PTM)

Line Difference
 1-2 -0.001692666
2-3 -0.001692665
3-4 -0.000309104
4-1 -0.001192533
Table 21. Differences of Azimuths of 2 datums

Similar to the results in Table 18, the differences are also small, with the largest being around 1.6
millimeters, and the smallest 0.3 millimeters.

LINE Azimuth DD MM SS
1-2 23.86170727 23 51 42.15
2-3 91.9498103 91 56 59.32
3-4 67.79531032 67 47 43.12
4-5 189.7522377 189 45 8.06
5-1 282.8345412 282 50 4.35
Table 22. Azimuths of Lot 3 (PRS 92 PTM)

LINE Azimuth DD MM SS
1-2 23.86029159 23 51 37.05
2-3 91.94709543 91 56 49.54
3-4 67.79361766 67 47 37.02
4-5 189.750545 189 45 1.96
5-1 282.8328486 282 49 58.25
Table 23. Azimuths of Lot 3 (WGS 84 PTM)

Line Difference
1-2 -0.00141568
2-3 -0.00271486
3-4 -0.00169266
4-5 -0.00169267
5-1 -0.00169267
Table 24. Differences of Azimuths of 2 datums

In table 24, all the differences are in the millimeter level, with the largest being around 2 to 3
millimeters, and the smallest 1.4 millimeters. Such results could be attributed to the fact that although the
coordinates were obtained using different datums, the projection used was the same, leading to the small
change in the figure. Another reason for this is that the transformation method used to convert the
coordinates from one method to another is the 2D Conformal Transformation Method, which is mainly
used for retaining the shape of the desired area.

LINE Distance (PRS92) Distance (WGS84) Difference

1-2 74.88068759 74.88200001 0.001312414
2-3 111.4409602 111.4420001 0.00103992
3-4 58.45969389 58.46019635 0.000502461
4-5 21.27984885 21.2803414 0.000492546
5-1 138.1788095 138.181 0.00219056
Table 25. Distances of Lot 1-A in meters (PRS 92 PTM and WGS 84 PTM)
 LINE Distance (PRS92) Distance (WGS84) Difference
1-2 8.108974995 8.109084965 0.00010997
2-3 10.92970844 10.92985666 0.000148223
3-4 7.860991502 7.86118783 0.000196329
4-1 10.88033262 10.88029291 -3.97023E-05
Table 26. Distances of Lot 2 in meters (PRS 92 PTM and WGS 84 PTM)

LINE Distance (PRS92) Distance (WGS84) Difference

1-2 13.59173082 13.59176659 3.57716E-05
2-3 9.0993774 9.099495281 0.000117881
3-4 5.819796881 5.819875806 7.89251E-05
4-5 18.42707061 18.4273205 0.000249899
5-1 17.29126404 17.29149853 0.000234496
Table 27. Distances of Lot 3 in meters (PRS 92 PTM and WGS 84 PTM)

The tables above show the differences in the distances of each lots. Of all the lots, only Lot 1-A
has a difference in the millimeter level; the others have at least a difference in the sub-millimeter level.
Similar to the observation from the differences in the azimuths, the small discrepancies can be attributed
to the fact that the datum transformation method used was the 2D Conformal Transformation.

LOT PRS92 (PTM) WGS84 (PTM) Difference

1-A 119.2502778 119.2488605 -0.001417278
2 41.33333333 41.33164067 -0.001692665
3 42.23333333 42.23164067 -0.00169267
Table 28. Differences of Azimuths of Tie Points to Point 1 of the Lots

LOT PRS92 (PTM) WGS84 (PTM) Difference

1-A 409.72 409.7245324 0.00453236
2 873.06 873.07184 0.011840017
3 886.4 886.4120209 0.012020928
Table 29. Differences of Distances of Tie Points to Point 1 of the Lots

LINE BEARING DISTANCE (M)

1-2 Due North 74.88
2-3 Due East 111.44
3-4 S 22'15' E 58.46
4-5 S 12'29'E 21.28
5-1 Due West 138.18
TIE LINE
LM 3 Piedad - 1 N 29'15 E 409.72
Table 30. Technical Description of Lot 1-A (PRS 92 PTM)

LINE BEARING DISTANCE (M)

1-2 N 64'59' W 8.11
2-3 N 28'11' E 10.92
3-4 S 64'42' E 7.86
 4-1 S 26'54' W 10.88
TIE LINE
LM 3 Piedad - 1 S 41'20 W 873.06
Table 30. Technical Description of Lot 2 (PRS 92 PTM)

LINE BEARING DISTANCE (M)

1-2 S 23'52' W 13.59
2-3 N 88'3' W 9.10
3-4 S 67'48' W 5.82
4-5 N 9'45' E 18.423
5-1 S 77'10' E 17.29
TIE LINE
LM 3 Piedad - 1 S 42'14'0" W 886.4
Table 30. Technical Description of Lot 3 (PRS 92 PTM)

LINE BEARING DISTANCE (M)

1-2 Due North 74.88
2-3 Due East 111.44
3-4 S 22'15' E 58.46
4-5 S 12'29'E 21.28
5-1 Due West 138.18
TIE LINE
LM 3 Piedad - 1 N 29'15 E 409.72
Table 30. Technical Description of Lot 1-A (WGS 84 PTM)

LINE BEARING DISTANCE (M)

1-2 N 64'59' W 8.11
2-3 N 28'11' E 10.92
3-4 S 64'42' E 7.86
4-1 S 26'54' W 10.88
TIE LINE
LM 3 Piedad - 1 S 41'20 W 873.07
Table 30. Technical Description of Lot 2 (WGS 84 PTM)

LINE BEARING DISTANCE (M)

1-2 S 23'52' W 13.59
2-3 N 88'3' W 9.10
3-4 S 67'48' W 5.82
4-5 N 9'45' E 18.423
5-1 S 77'10' E 17.29
TIE LINE
LM 3 Piedad - 1 S 42'14'0" W 886.41
Table 30. Technical Description of Lot 3 (WGS 84 PTM)

Excel plots of Lot 1-A (used for parameter determination), Lot 2 and Lot 3; with different datums
but with the same projection (PTM):
Figure 4. Plot of Lot 1-A in both PRS 92 and WGS 84 datums and with same map projection (PTM)

Figure 5. Plot of Lot 2 in both PRS 92 and WGS 84 datums and with same map projection (PTM)
 Figure 6. Plot of Lot 3 in both PRS 92 and WGS 84 datums and with same map projection (PTM)

Conclusion and Recommendation

Based from the values computed, it can be concluded that there are considerably small
differences in the shift in the position of the points when performing datum transformation while
using the same projection, as compared to when converting coordinates while also changing the
projection. This is due to the fact that the parameters used in projecting the coordinates are the
same, and the only thing that makes a difference are the parameters of the datum used.

It is recommended to try out a wide variety of areas, such as larger ones that encompasses
more than 1 hectare so that it can be compared with the smaller lots that the group has already been
used in this research.

It is also better to use 3D data to have more accurate and precise results as compared to 2D
data, since it takes into account more aspects (z-axis, height, etc.) when computing and analyzing
the differences of the datums.

References
Survey and Mapping Office Lands Department. (1995.) Explanatory Notes on Geodetic Datums
in Hong Kong. Retrieved from: http://www.geodetic.gov.hk/data/pdf/explanatorynotes.pdf

Esri. (n. d.) Datums. Retrieved from: http://desktop.arcgis.com/en/arcmap/10.3/guide-

books/map-projections/datums.htm#GUID-E49F0E1B-8F0D-4704-8384-735EA002FDDC

Van Sickle, J. (n. d.) Geocentric Datum. Retrieved from: https://www.e-

education.psu.edu/geog862/node/1798

Geodesy Division Mapping and Geodesy Branch. (n. d.) Modernization of Philippine Geodetic
Reference System Strategic Plan 2016 2020. Retrieved from:
http://www.namria.gov.ph/jdownloads/Others/StratPlan_Modernization.pdf

Vanicek, P. (February 1975.) Report on Geocentric and Geodetic Datums. Retrieved from:
http://www2.unb.ca/gge/Pubs/TR32.pdf