Theodolite traversing and plotting accuracy: Which method is considered the most reliable for plotting a theodolite traverse to minimize graphical error?

Introduction / Context:

The graphical reliability of a traverse plot depends on how cumulative angular and linear errors propagate. Coordinate methods convert each traverse side to departures (eastings) and latitudes (northings) and plot stations by their coordinates, thus distributing errors rigorously and enabling checks like the closing error.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Closed or open theodolite traverse with measured bearings/angles and lengths.
• Standard plane surveying accuracy (not geodetic).
• Use of Bowditch (compass) or transit rule to adjust misclosure.

Concept / Approach:

With independent coordinates, each station's easting and northing are computed from an assumed origin and plotted independently, minimizing accumulation of graphical error from one side to the next. It is superior to consecutive plotting, which compounds small drafting inaccuracies side-by-side.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:

Closure checks (ΣD = 0, ΣL = 0 after adjustment) validate the plotted figure and expose blunders before drafting.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Included angles + scaling and tangent methods: convenient but prone to cumulative drafting error.
• Consecutive coordinates: still serial; less robust than independent coordinates.
• Chord-and-offset: not the standard for precise traverse plotting.

Common Pitfalls:

• Plotting from leg to leg without a coordinate framework, which can magnify small protractor/scale errors.

Final Answer:

by independent co-ordinates of each station