Conclusions

 

The Least squares method proved a very affective way to coordinate the cadastre. Its ability to get the best fit solution and make the smallest changes to observations, allowed the plan dimensions of each lot to remain very close to its stated dimensions. Fixit 3’s ability to generate measure of precisions as well as a detailed output file made the analysis of results an easier task. The programs ability to identify any outliers made large gross error easy to detect and correct. The one draw back of using Fixit 3 to model the cadastre is that it takes a very long time to process large datasets. This project involved a relatively small area and if a larger area such as a town, city or even a state, were to be adjusted, Fixit 3 wouldn’t be appropriate.

 

The techniques that were investigated to maintain certain cadastral features, such as straight lines, parallel line and arc radii proved to be effective in this project.

 

It is very important to have cadastral references mark when modelling the cadastre. The more marks that can be held fixed throughout the adjustment the closer the final coordinates are likely to be to the actual boundary position. They are also helpful because the often survive longer than corner marks and can be measured (connected to) by surveys of neighbouring lots and by future surveyors.

 

As a future investigation, the coordinates of the cadastral reference marks could be weighted appropriately instead of being held fixed as though they were perfect.

There are commercial software packages on the market that are designed for cadastral modelling along with other tasks. Investigations into the workings and the capabilities of these software packages may also be a topic of interest for future students.