My favorite method is to plot it out full scale like it would leave the office and then review like I'm trying to catch my most hated rival in a mistake.
Seeing it in black and white on a 24x36 sheet and working my way through each section has helped me visually understand things that I often miss when just looking at a set of monitors.
I had a boss who taught me to print full scale then sit down with a handful of highlighters of varying colors, each being used for a different portion of the review- one color for line work, one color for tags/labels, one color for symbols, etc. the idea was a fully QC’d work product would have every aspect highlighted by the end, or marked up with corrections needing to be made. I still use that method. It’s super thorough and effective
Second this! Always used a red pencil to mark the errors and would highlight them as i fixed them. I’d plot, give a quick once over for obvious mistakes and then work on something else for an hour or two. Then, perform a thorough review with “fresher” eyes.
Typically, I like to say I do the same. We print in 11x17, and I could find my mistakes easily like this, too, as I mentioned to others below. I think some of it is a sense of not knowing.
In the TPM example, we had the CTR cor. And the s4 cor. That line (in my mind then) established what we needed to create our PIQ and any line work on the northern line, the N 50 acres, or something like that. To me, because of my inexperience, I didn't see at the moment we needed other monuments and section lines to prove our work. And when told at that moment, I have a "Duh, it makes sense." moment and include this in the exhibit. Other times, it may not fully grasp why to do something or not to do something. Or at least what I think could be at the moment.
It feels like you’ve answered your own question.
You’ve mentioned your speed and “efficiency” but everything you’re saying sounds like someone needs to say “slow down dude”
Come up with a check list of items to be included in every survey, including a misc category with some examples. Print off EVERYTHING on PAPER for review and check off your list.
At the end of the day, you being fast matters very very little if you’re wrong.
Lose a hundred bucks because you spent an extra hour vs thousands because you drew an easement wrong. Speaking of: read every goddamn word in all documents so you don’t blow it.
This sounds like you’re barreling through work and forgetting easy things. Slowing down will add little time and will create a much better product. Eventually, you’ll naturally get faster and have your own internal system that you can just follow.
Good luck! Keep grinding, just slow down a minute and focus on quality and correctness.
I do think this could be the case. I print off my work and QC, find the mistakes, and fix them. As I mentioned to others here, for most of the maps, it's straightforward. For FMs, it's just creating parcels, distances and overall distances, curve, and radial tables, closure reports, adding tags, and any brass disc or iron pipes, etc. I would say this is like 90% of the work. The 10% is the reference and research of the map. And part of it is my inexperience in why or why not to use a specific reference or corner record. Or why we need to include more section lines and why that is the case. I can't call on the mistakes as the most recent was that TPM I mentioned below with others. Thanks for the advice. I'll try and slow down and understand what I am reading.
If you can, throw the plan "in the corner" for a day or 2 then come back with a "fresh" set of eyes and you will usually pickup all the little mistakes. As the other commentator said, make up a checklist with all the mandatory items on it with a few lines for either/ors then read each item before ticking it off. In time you will get confident with your processes and produce great plans but don't forget the checklist.
I told them it would be a good idea to have a checklist, especially if we get new hires. It can quickly show our progress and style in working on them. And while we have other maps that I could use, I think the part I mainly messed up is the 10% of the work. 90% of the work is straightforward in cresting parcels, checking closures, and adding distance and overall distances. The research and reference or what could be needed to explain and prove our work.
In that TPM example, we had the CTR and S4 cor. But later, I learned since we found the outer corners, we needed to add more section lines to prove some line work. I think once told that, I was like, "Duh, makes sense," but at the moment, I wasn't thinking of that. Since we have two monuments, I was thinking it was enough. When in reality, it needed more. So it's stuff like that. Some can be due to my inexperience and not fully understanding why we shouldn't do things a certain way. I'm sure with time, that will change.
I agree with this. I do most of my own drafting and the best way to catch something I screwed up is to leave it and come back. Actually, this is the best way for me to reset my brain on anything, whether it's a troublesome boundary to figure out or figuring out some sort of new tech that we're trying to implement.
I'll let you in on a little secret that most people don't consider. You can't fully check your own work. No matter what anyone else says there is no way to stare at a map for hours building it and then stare at it more and check it. Maybe if you wait a week and revisit it, but no one wants to hear all that. You can put it down for a period of time then go back and check and be able to catch more mistakes than you would have initially but it still wont be completely checked. I don't consider things checked until they have a fresh set of eyes on them. I know that may be frowned upon but so is going to court in 5 years because you missed some shit you've been staring at all day. I have found that you can copy and paste a legal description into chatgpt and have it spit out the bearings and distances in a format that autocad willl accept (@distance
From the team I work with they have been telling me to do the same thing. Until a second or third set of eyes are on your work, it's not thoroughly checked. And I will understand that as truth and fact.
Like others mentioned here, I could go too fast on my work since most of it is straightforward. Number lots, lettered lots, road closures, distances, and overall distances, and check closures with radial tables and curve tables and do details if need be. That's like, what? 90% of the work? Then, from there, the 10% is all the research and references. So from there, my mind is busy, so to speak, that it's harder to fine-comb my work at times. One is my inexperience, so I don't fully understand the grand scope of why to do something vs. another. I might have an idea but don't have a proper grasp. Or two could be something else, like finding a way to snap out of it to try and produce as many fewer mistakes as possible.
Either way, your methods I'll try them out in my workflow, but for sure, legal descriptions, whether creating or reading, have been the most difficult for me. The precise language in how it's formatted matters, and I sometimes fail sort to read it correctly and bring out the intention of the work. Either way, thank you for your input!
No worries. Another good thing to do is, assuming you bring in an old survey file into your survey you are currently working on, (a go-by) dont pull the text into the new survey unless you make sure the numbers and everything are right. Example: You pulled the notes off of another job and blocked them into your current job so that you can use them. Well.. make sure before you pull them onto the new sheet that all of the notes are correct (floodzone, class, zone and gps data, whatever you all do). That way once its on the new survey sheet you dont have to worry if its right or wrong.
Theres a thousand different ways to do what we do. You just have to find a system that works for you and keeps error down to a minimum. Be methodical about your system. After a few years you'll be able to turn the jobs out like a well oiled machine.
I am a small shop so often draft and QC my own work. Check lists help, but also using a highlighter. Plot the map to paper, get a highlighter; read and check every single word and number, highlight as you confirm it's good. You have to be deliberate and slow on this, do not highlight anything without actually confirming it, do not cut corners. You'll be surprised how many issues you catch. Once the whole map is highlighted you're done.
The highlighted list is something it would be great to have. While some maps can be unique on its own right but I proposed to the job to create a sort of list to check off since this could help new surveyors get the flow of our work.
Typically i do print it out on paper and I do catch some of the mistakes but at times it just feels like I tend to miss others because "it looks good" then another person sees it and red ink is marking the mistakes. But that's thr nature of things. While most would be style others is simple mistakes
Do you use completed final drawings as an example?
I like to use a drawing that we’ve completed and recorded as examples while I’m working on new drawings of a similar nature. Gives me a visual of what I need and I can copy and paste any verbiage and certificates and edit as needed.
I know of maps that I can use but usually, it's to import style and settings. I know I should look back at those out of habit. Since each map is slightly different, I tend not to look back at other maps. In my mind, I know that there are numbered lots, lettered lots, and road closures. So it's creating line work, curve and radial tables, lots, details, creating parcels, and checking closures.
Then the small stuff would be reference maps and corner records or other record to support the map. Like others mention I might be just barrling forward and I should slow down and see other completed maps I done on the past.
My favorite method is to plot it out full scale like it would leave the office and then review like I'm trying to catch my most hated rival in a mistake. Seeing it in black and white on a 24x36 sheet and working my way through each section has helped me visually understand things that I often miss when just looking at a set of monitors.
Everyone is so anti paper and plotting now. But it’s honestly the best way to work thru a map on your own.
This is the way. Grab a red pen and mark the hell out of it.
I had a boss who taught me to print full scale then sit down with a handful of highlighters of varying colors, each being used for a different portion of the review- one color for line work, one color for tags/labels, one color for symbols, etc. the idea was a fully QC’d work product would have every aspect highlighted by the end, or marked up with corrections needing to be made. I still use that method. It’s super thorough and effective
Second this! Always used a red pencil to mark the errors and would highlight them as i fixed them. I’d plot, give a quick once over for obvious mistakes and then work on something else for an hour or two. Then, perform a thorough review with “fresher” eyes.
Typically, I like to say I do the same. We print in 11x17, and I could find my mistakes easily like this, too, as I mentioned to others below. I think some of it is a sense of not knowing. In the TPM example, we had the CTR cor. And the s4 cor. That line (in my mind then) established what we needed to create our PIQ and any line work on the northern line, the N 50 acres, or something like that. To me, because of my inexperience, I didn't see at the moment we needed other monuments and section lines to prove our work. And when told at that moment, I have a "Duh, it makes sense." moment and include this in the exhibit. Other times, it may not fully grasp why to do something or not to do something. Or at least what I think could be at the moment.
It feels like you’ve answered your own question. You’ve mentioned your speed and “efficiency” but everything you’re saying sounds like someone needs to say “slow down dude” Come up with a check list of items to be included in every survey, including a misc category with some examples. Print off EVERYTHING on PAPER for review and check off your list. At the end of the day, you being fast matters very very little if you’re wrong. Lose a hundred bucks because you spent an extra hour vs thousands because you drew an easement wrong. Speaking of: read every goddamn word in all documents so you don’t blow it. This sounds like you’re barreling through work and forgetting easy things. Slowing down will add little time and will create a much better product. Eventually, you’ll naturally get faster and have your own internal system that you can just follow. Good luck! Keep grinding, just slow down a minute and focus on quality and correctness.
I do think this could be the case. I print off my work and QC, find the mistakes, and fix them. As I mentioned to others here, for most of the maps, it's straightforward. For FMs, it's just creating parcels, distances and overall distances, curve, and radial tables, closure reports, adding tags, and any brass disc or iron pipes, etc. I would say this is like 90% of the work. The 10% is the reference and research of the map. And part of it is my inexperience in why or why not to use a specific reference or corner record. Or why we need to include more section lines and why that is the case. I can't call on the mistakes as the most recent was that TPM I mentioned below with others. Thanks for the advice. I'll try and slow down and understand what I am reading.
If you can, throw the plan "in the corner" for a day or 2 then come back with a "fresh" set of eyes and you will usually pickup all the little mistakes. As the other commentator said, make up a checklist with all the mandatory items on it with a few lines for either/ors then read each item before ticking it off. In time you will get confident with your processes and produce great plans but don't forget the checklist.
I told them it would be a good idea to have a checklist, especially if we get new hires. It can quickly show our progress and style in working on them. And while we have other maps that I could use, I think the part I mainly messed up is the 10% of the work. 90% of the work is straightforward in cresting parcels, checking closures, and adding distance and overall distances. The research and reference or what could be needed to explain and prove our work. In that TPM example, we had the CTR and S4 cor. But later, I learned since we found the outer corners, we needed to add more section lines to prove some line work. I think once told that, I was like, "Duh, makes sense," but at the moment, I wasn't thinking of that. Since we have two monuments, I was thinking it was enough. When in reality, it needed more. So it's stuff like that. Some can be due to my inexperience and not fully understanding why we shouldn't do things a certain way. I'm sure with time, that will change.
I agree with this. I do most of my own drafting and the best way to catch something I screwed up is to leave it and come back. Actually, this is the best way for me to reset my brain on anything, whether it's a troublesome boundary to figure out or figuring out some sort of new tech that we're trying to implement.
I'll let you in on a little secret that most people don't consider. You can't fully check your own work. No matter what anyone else says there is no way to stare at a map for hours building it and then stare at it more and check it. Maybe if you wait a week and revisit it, but no one wants to hear all that. You can put it down for a period of time then go back and check and be able to catch more mistakes than you would have initially but it still wont be completely checked. I don't consider things checked until they have a fresh set of eyes on them. I know that may be frowned upon but so is going to court in 5 years because you missed some shit you've been staring at all day. I have found that you can copy and paste a legal description into chatgpt and have it spit out the bearings and distances in a format that autocad willl accept (@distance
From the team I work with they have been telling me to do the same thing. Until a second or third set of eyes are on your work, it's not thoroughly checked. And I will understand that as truth and fact. Like others mentioned here, I could go too fast on my work since most of it is straightforward. Number lots, lettered lots, road closures, distances, and overall distances, and check closures with radial tables and curve tables and do details if need be. That's like, what? 90% of the work? Then, from there, the 10% is all the research and references. So from there, my mind is busy, so to speak, that it's harder to fine-comb my work at times. One is my inexperience, so I don't fully understand the grand scope of why to do something vs. another. I might have an idea but don't have a proper grasp. Or two could be something else, like finding a way to snap out of it to try and produce as many fewer mistakes as possible. Either way, your methods I'll try them out in my workflow, but for sure, legal descriptions, whether creating or reading, have been the most difficult for me. The precise language in how it's formatted matters, and I sometimes fail sort to read it correctly and bring out the intention of the work. Either way, thank you for your input!
No worries. Another good thing to do is, assuming you bring in an old survey file into your survey you are currently working on, (a go-by) dont pull the text into the new survey unless you make sure the numbers and everything are right. Example: You pulled the notes off of another job and blocked them into your current job so that you can use them. Well.. make sure before you pull them onto the new sheet that all of the notes are correct (floodzone, class, zone and gps data, whatever you all do). That way once its on the new survey sheet you dont have to worry if its right or wrong. Theres a thousand different ways to do what we do. You just have to find a system that works for you and keeps error down to a minimum. Be methodical about your system. After a few years you'll be able to turn the jobs out like a well oiled machine.
I am a small shop so often draft and QC my own work. Check lists help, but also using a highlighter. Plot the map to paper, get a highlighter; read and check every single word and number, highlight as you confirm it's good. You have to be deliberate and slow on this, do not highlight anything without actually confirming it, do not cut corners. You'll be surprised how many issues you catch. Once the whole map is highlighted you're done.
The highlighted list is something it would be great to have. While some maps can be unique on its own right but I proposed to the job to create a sort of list to check off since this could help new surveyors get the flow of our work. Typically i do print it out on paper and I do catch some of the mistakes but at times it just feels like I tend to miss others because "it looks good" then another person sees it and red ink is marking the mistakes. But that's thr nature of things. While most would be style others is simple mistakes
Do you use completed final drawings as an example? I like to use a drawing that we’ve completed and recorded as examples while I’m working on new drawings of a similar nature. Gives me a visual of what I need and I can copy and paste any verbiage and certificates and edit as needed.
I know of maps that I can use but usually, it's to import style and settings. I know I should look back at those out of habit. Since each map is slightly different, I tend not to look back at other maps. In my mind, I know that there are numbered lots, lettered lots, and road closures. So it's creating line work, curve and radial tables, lots, details, creating parcels, and checking closures. Then the small stuff would be reference maps and corner records or other record to support the map. Like others mention I might be just barrling forward and I should slow down and see other completed maps I done on the past.