Dear Jim,
I am not a surveyor but I have on my desk a 300 millimetre metric rule
that bears the following markings:
METRIC AS1212-2 KENT NO. 62M
I suspect that the AS1212-2 refers to an Australian standard.
The rule has these 8 scales (2 to each edge):
1:1
1:5
1:10
1:100
1:20
1:200
1:50
1:500
Cheers,
Pat Naughtin
On 2008/08/01, at 5:44 AM, James Frysinger wrote:
Thank you, Pierre!
I got a private response that suggested A3 paper with a scale of
1:1000.
This is new territory for our county. There's not a lot of technical
depth in the cadre of people working on the problem. I found may
scales state "backwards" -- e.g., run over rise but with "no more
than" as if it were rise over run. It's almost as if they were
saying "steeper is better" for erosion control. Obviously, that was
not the intent.
I'll do what I can to help out, if they are willing to accept my
suggestions. But these folks are more used to Rand-McNally maps that
say "One inch equals ..." than USGS maps giving "1:...." scales.
From working to teach people how to use nautical charts, I know that
most folks get "small scale" and "large scale" mixed up. A small
scale chart (or map) shows a large area and vice versa.
Jim
Pierre Abbat wrote:
On Thursday 31 July 2008 12:06:51 James Frysinger wrote:
I could use the advice here of someone conversant in drawing survey
plats in metric units. I am reviewing a proposed set of Subdivision
Regulations for my county and they fail to include metric
equivalents,
which I will push for.
The proposed regulations call for plats to be drawn on 18 in by 24
in or
24 in by 36 in paper. What paper sizes are normally used in the
metric
world that are roughly equivalent to that? I'm guessing at A2 and
A1,
respectively. Are those commonly used in drafting of survey plats?
Here in North Carolina the law requires that plats be one of those
two sizes or 21×30 (762×533.4). ISO sizes are not allowed. I
haven't gotten around to asking the NCBELS to change that. Not
having seen plats on ISO paper, I say go with A2 and A1, with B2 if
you need one between.
I suggest adding a clause specifying a year after which inch sized
paper shall no longer be allowed. My original idea was that if 10%
of plats are on ISO paper in some year, all plats shall be on ISO
paper ten years later.
The statement on scales is that no less than 1 in = 50 ft [which
would
be 1:600] be used with 1 in = 100 ft [which would be 1:1200] being
the
absolute minimum. What typical metric scales should I suggest that
are
roughly equivalent and do not exceed these stated values? I'm
guessing
at 1 mm = 0.5 m [1:500] and 1 mm = 1 m [1:1000], respectively.
The absolute minimum scale should be independent of the measuring
unit used, so set it to 1:1200. If you set it to 1:1000, then it
will be illegal to draw at 1 in = 100 ft. The recommended minimum
may be different for foot drawings than for meter drawings. Both
1:500 and 1:1000 are typical, as is 1:200. I drew my map of the
Facilities Center at 1:500.
My scale (which is at the office) has 1:500, 1:1000, 1:1250,
1:1500, 1:2000, and 1:3000. This is lopsided; there's probably
another one that has 1:600, 1:400, 1:750, and 1:800, or something
like that.
The scale should be specified as a ratio. If someone who draws in
feet wants to say how many feet are drawn as an inch, let him
figure it out.
Pierre
--
James R. Frysinger
632 Stony Point Mountain Road
Doyle, TN 38559-3030
(H) 931.657.3107
(C) 931.212.0267
