De La Salle University Manila

Civil Engineering Department

LBYCVS1 EH2

Experiment No. 1: Pace Factor

Field Survey

Written Report

Name: Dacullo, Kathleen Ann R.

Group Number: 2
Date Perfected: September 3, 2015
I. Computations

Activity A
Trial Number Directions Number of Paces
1 A-B 44.3
2 B-A 45.7
3 A-B 43.6
4 B-A 44.4
5 A-B 43.8
6 B-A 43.5
7 A-B 45.3
8 B-A 44.3
9 A-B 44.8
10 B-A 44.5
Average Number of Paces 44.5
Pace Factor 0.562

Activity A and B

Trial Number Directions Number of Paces

1 C-D 67.1
2 D-C 66.4
Average Number of Paces 66.8
Distance (meters) 37.5 m

Activity C
A. Breaking-Tape Method
Segment Distance (meters)
D1 1.0225 m
D2 1.6120 m
D3 3.1125 m
Total 5.7470 m

B. Slope Distance and Vertical Angle of Slope Method

Slope Distance (meters) 6.198 m
Clinometer Reading (degrees) 22
II. Illustrations
III. Data Analysis

For the first activity (Activity A), we were asked to determine our
pace factor. Pace factor is determined by dividing the average number of
paces by the total length or distance of the entire line or course. In this
activity, the length given to us is 25 m. We walked from point A to point
B and back as well for a total of 10 trials, and jotted down each of
number of paces we made. After finishing all the trials, we took the
average of our paces and divided to it the length of course. The average
number of paces I got was 44.5 m and my pace factor was 0.562.
The next activity (Activity B), was connected to the first activity.
However, the difference between the two was that for the second activity,
we were not given the length or distance of the course. We were asked to
find out the distance from two points using the pace factor we got form
the first activity. The idea was to count again the number of steps we
made and multiply it with our pace factor. In my case, the average
number of paces I had was 66.8. So following the said method I
mentioned above, the distance of the course based on my pace factor was
37.5 m, which has a 5 m difference with the actual distance, 42.5 m.
Determining the slope of a particular stairs was the objective of the
last activity (Activity C). However, we were not allowed to measure the
slope directly and was rather asked to use the breaking-tape method
which was the best way to measure the length of any sloping ground. In
using this method, we divided the total distance to be measure into three
parts: the length from the initial point on the ground to the edge of the
stairs at the bottom (D1), the length from the bottom stairs to the sixth
step of the stairs (D2) and the length from the sixth step to the final point
on the top of the stairs (D3). We used a plum bob to mark the final
position of every part for us to know the starting position of the next part.
The measurements we got were 1.0225 m, 1.6120 m, and 3.1125 m,
respectively, with a total of 5.7470 m. This length is only the
measurement of the horizontal distance of the stairs. Next, we measured
the angle of the stairs using the clinometer. One of our members stood on
the mark placed on the ground at the bottom of the stairs with the
clinometer placed in front of one of her eyes, and pointed it up to the
 other member standing on the top of the stairs. The marker (the finger of
the other member) on the top of the stairs by our actually has the same
height with the member holding the clinometer at the bottom. The height
was measured using the ____. The remaining members in our group were
assigned in reading the clinometer and making sure that the steel tape is
stretched so as to avoid any incorrect measurements due to sag. Lastly, to
find the actual length or the slope of the stairs, we computed for it using
SOHCAHTOA since we already had the horizontal side of the stairs and
the angle made by the slope and the horizontal. The slope or the actual
length of the stairs we were able to obtain was 6.198 m.

IV. Conclusions and Recommendations

For the first and second activity, it is safe to say that measuring any
distance using the pace factor is not suitable especially when measuring
huge ones. This is because after doing the experiment, I noticed how each
and every one of us had a different measurement on the unknown
distance in Activity B. There were actually obvious causes as to why we
had these differences. One was because there were instances some of us
were interrupted by other students walking on the field or even by our
own members since we were walking simultaneously on the same path,
another was because some were not actually walking in a straight line. So
in order to eliminate or at least lessen the errors, it is best to do this
activity in a field where other people could not interrupt you while also
making sure that you are walking a straight line.
On the last activity involving the slope of the stairs, we were not able
to compare the measurements we got because each group measured a
different stair which had a different initial and final position as well. But
based on the procedures we did for this activity, there is also a possibility
for errors. Those errors could come from the sag created when we
measured the horizontal length of the stairs (if there was any) or from the
angle. In the case of the angle, our group actually got a different angle
and we thought that this was due to the height of the person looking
through the clinometer. So in the end, we settled for the angle measured
by our member with an average height.
To conclude the whole experiment, having errors in measurements is
inevitable, but as civil engineers, it is a must to be able to measure things
 accurately because even small variations could have a very significant
role in constructing any infrastructures. Thus, it is best to have to have a
good deal of trials to truly determine whether what we got is correct or
not.

V. Group Members Grade

Member Grade
Bolivar, Erica 60
Delos Santos, Maverick 60
Santos, Dennis 60
Valbuena, Kigia 60
Yang, Denise 60