RW02 — Land Area and Perimeter Determination Using Google Earth - Report

RW02 — Land Area and Perimeter Determination Using Google Earth

Representative Report — Baguio City Public Market

Sample baseline only. The Baguio City Public Market is used here to demonstrate the required RW02 report structure. It is not one of the assigned student sites. The coordinates and measurements below form an internally consistent instructional polygon for report-format demonstration and must not be interpreted as a cadastral, legal-boundary, or current official site-area record.

Research Work Record

Item	Representative Record
Activity	RW02
Sample Group	Demonstration Group
Group Members	Demonstration members — replace with actual student names
Tool	Google Earth workflow with WGS84 coordinate-based QA check
Study Area	Baguio City Public Market, Baguio City
Measurement Type	Desktop closed-polygon reconnaissance measurement
Polygon Direction	Clockwise
Measurement Date	Sample / instructional record
Required Submission Format	Civil Engineering Standard A4 Format with Grid
Required Handwritten Portion	Conclusion only

Objectives

The representative report demonstrates how to:

define a defensible visible boundary for a real site;
trace and document a closed polygon using a Google Earth workflow;
record vertices, coordinates, boundary segments, and approximate segment lengths;
determine and independently check perimeter and plan area in consistent engineering units;
prepare traceable digital evidence with technical figure descriptions; and
distinguish preliminary digital reconnaissance measurements from cadastral or survey-grade boundary determinations.

Study Area and Boundary Definition

The representative polygon follows the visually identifiable outer market-development boundary represented by the sample vertices. Major road edges, developed-lot limits, and visible changes in direction are used to demonstrate how an RW02 boundary should be justified.

The purpose of this sample is to demonstrate traceability: every vertex corresponds to a boundary segment, every segment has an approximate length, and the final polygon closes back to the starting point.

The chosen boundary is an academic measurement boundary only. It does not establish ownership, title limits, cadastral corners, or legal property lines.

Measurement Method

Locate the Baguio City Public Market in Google Earth and verify the site using surrounding roads and recognizable urban features.
Change to a near-vertical or top-down view before defining the measurement boundary.
Identify visible features that reasonably represent the outer study-area limit.
Select a starting vertex and trace the polygon clockwise, adding vertices only at significant changes in direction.
Close the final segment back to the starting vertex and inspect the polygon for crossed lines, omitted corners, or inconsistent boundary interpretation.
Record representative vertex coordinates and boundary-segment lengths.
For an actual student submission, record the area and perimeter displayed by Google Earth for the final saved polygon.
Perform an independent segment-sum or coordinate-based QA/QC check where practicable. The representative values below use WGS84 ellipsoidal geodesic distances and polygon area from the listed coordinates.
Preserve screenshots of the site context, boundary basis, complete polygon, measurement panel, and any ambiguous boundary portion.
Document uncertainty and explain any difference between independent checks without altering raw observations merely to force agreement.

Boundary Vertex and Segment Record

Vertex	Latitude	Longitude	Boundary Segment	Segment Length	Boundary Description / Remarks
A	16.415135	120.593454	A–B	146.9 m	Northern market edge; long visible developed-lot boundary
B	16.415226	120.594826	B–C	75.6 m	Northeastern change in direction near the road-side limit
C	16.414818	120.595394	C–D	100.6 m	Eastern boundary following the visible developed edge
D	16.413910	120.595441	D–E	79.9 m	Southeastern corner and transition to the southern boundary
E	16.413683	120.594731	E–F	122.2 m	Southern market edge; imagery-defined developed-lot limit
F	16.413819	120.593596	F–G	72.0 m	Southwestern change in direction
G	16.414409	120.593312	G–H	55.4 m	Western boundary adjacent to the surrounding road network
H	16.414908	120.593359	H–A	27.1 m	Closing segment returning to the northern boundary

Segment-Sum Check

P_{segments}=146.9+75.6+100.6+79.9+122.2+72.0+55.4+27.1

P_{segments}=679.7\text{ m}

The listed segment lengths are rounded from the same WGS84 coordinate set and reproduce the coordinate-based perimeter check to the displayed precision.

Representative Measurement Summary

Quantity	Representative Result
Number of polygon vertices	8
WGS84 coordinate-based perimeter QA check	679.7 m
Sum of listed boundary segments	679.7 m
WGS84 coordinate-polygon plan area	32,386 m²
WGS84 coordinate-polygon plan area	3.2386 ha
Boundary condition	Irregular developed urban parcel
Principal uncertainty	Interpretation of the visible outer market boundary

For an actual RW02 submission: record the area and perimeter displayed directly by Google Earth for the group's final saved polygon. A coordinate-based or segment-sum check may be added as QA/QC. If the independent check differs from the Google Earth display, retain both values and explain the difference rather than forcing agreement.

Area Conversion

Using:

A_{ha}=\frac{A_{m^2}}{10{,}000}

then:

A_{ha}=\frac{32{,}386}{10{,}000}=3.2386\text{ ha}

The hectare value is a direct unit conversion of the representative polygon area and is not an independent area determination.

Digital Documentation Register

Each image in the final report must be placed in a properly proportioned box, preserve its original aspect ratio, and include both a caption and a technical description. The documentation page must contain at least 4 and no more than 8 images.

Figure	Required Evidence	Representative Caption	Technical Description
Figure 1	Site location and context	Baguio City Public Market and surrounding road network	Shows the complete sample study area and recognizable surrounding urban features used to confirm the correct location before polygon tracing.
Figure 2	Boundary definition	Visible features controlling the sample market boundary	Identifies the principal road edges and developed-lot limits used to decide where the polygon should be placed. This figure documents the basis of the measurement rather than only the final result.
Figure 3	Completed polygon and measurement	Closed eight-vertex Google Earth polygon	Shows the complete A–H polygon and the Google Earth measurement panel that students must capture for their own actual site.
Figure 4	Critical boundary detail	Enlarged western and southwestern boundary	Shows an area where vertex placement requires interpretation because the visible developed edge is less distinct. The enlarged view explains why vertices F, G, and H are positioned at direction changes.

Optional Figures 5–8 may document additional ambiguous boundaries, vertex details, measurement-panel close-ups, or other evidence that improves reproducibility. A second documentation page may be used when needed, but every documentation page must independently satisfy the 4–8 image rule.

Engineering Interpretation

The representative coordinate polygon encloses approximately 32,386 m² or 3.2386 ha and has a perimeter of approximately 679.7 m.

For preliminary engineering work, a digital area-and-perimeter estimate of this type may support:

early site reconnaissance;
conceptual space-allocation studies;
preliminary access and circulation discussions;
comparison with alternative sites or boundary interpretations;
approximate planning calculations; and
preparation for a subsequent field survey.

The measurement is not sufficiently reliable for property relocation, cadastral certification, final design control, land-title interpretation, or other work requiring legally or technically established boundaries.

Remarks and Measurement Observations

1. Boundary features used

The northern, eastern, and southern portions of the sample polygon are controlled mainly by visible developed-lot and road-side edges. The western side requires more interpretation because the transition between the market development and surrounding urban features is less visually distinct.

2. Easiest boundary to identify

The long northern and eastern segments are the easiest to reproduce because their direction changes and adjacent road features are comparatively clear in plan view.

3. Most ambiguous boundary

The western to southwestern portion is the most interpretive. Vertices F, G, and H are placed at visible direction changes rather than treating the entire side as one straight segment.

4. Effect of zoom and imagery

At a very small map scale, the boundary appears smoother and may encourage too few vertices. At excessive zoom, shadows, roof edges, and individual structures can be mistaken for the intended outer site boundary. A consistent top-down working scale is therefore necessary.

5. Perimeter agreement

The listed boundary segments total approximately 679.7 m, agreeing with the WGS84 coordinate-based perimeter check to the displayed precision. In an actual student measurement, any discrepancy between Google Earth, segment sums, and an independent coordinate check should be retained and explained rather than edited away.

6. Expected difference between independent groups

Two groups tracing the same location may obtain slightly different areas and perimeters because they may interpret the outer boundary differently, position vertices at different locations, use different numbers of vertices, or work at different zoom levels.

7. Most influential measurement decision

For this sample, the definition of the western and southwestern site limit has the greatest potential to change the computed area because shifting several related vertices moves a comparatively large portion of the polygon boundary.

8. Improvement for a repeated measurement

A repeated measurement should use a documented fixed zoom range, saved polygon, clearly annotated boundary basis, independent retracing by another member, and comparison with reliable field or cadastral information when higher confidence is required.

Measurement Limitations

The sample result remains an approximate desktop reconnaissance exercise. Its uncertainty includes:

imagery resolution and acquisition date;
manual placement of vertices;
the selected zoom level;
shadows, structures, and vegetation obscuring visible limits;
uncertainty over which visible feature represents the intended study boundary;
plan-view treatment of sloping terrain; and
differences between visible development limits and any actual cadastral or legal boundary.

The number of displayed decimal places must not be interpreted as proof of equivalent field-survey accuracy. Google Earth advises that distance and area measurements are estimates, that top-down measurement gives better results, and that ordinary measurements do not account for elevation changes.

Handwritten Conclusion

This section must not be supplied as finished digital text in the student submission. The conclusion is the only required handwritten portion of RW02. For a digital submission, the completed handwritten conclusion must be scanned or photographed clearly and inserted here before exporting the final PDF.

Use the following questions to guide a coherent handwritten conclusion rather than answering them as a numbered questionnaire:

What approximate area and perimeter were obtained for the site?
How confident are you that the polygon represents the intended boundary?
What was the largest source of uncertainty?
Which boundary decision had the greatest influence on the result?
How did vertex placement affect the measured area or perimeter?
Why might another independent group obtain a different result?
For what preliminary civil-engineering work is the measurement useful?
For what legal or engineering purposes is it insufficient?
What field equipment, control, observations, or procedures would improve the measurement?
What surveying principle was most clearly demonstrated by the activity?

Handwritten Conclusion Placeholder

[Insert the student's or group's scanned handwritten conclusion here.]

The handwritten conclusion should synthesize the answers into a concise technical discussion and should reflect the group's own observations and judgment.

Required Submission Format

The actual RW02 submission must use the official Civil Engineering Standard A4 Format with Grid available from the required format page below. The standard grid—not this web-page preview—is the governing submission template.

Students may edit the provided format file to add names and required identification before downloading, but the original A4 grid and page proportions must be preserved. Do not replace it with blank A4 paper, recreate an approximate grid, crop the page, or stretch the template.

Report Format and Submission Check

Requirement	Sample Compliance
Required template	Civil Engineering Standard A4 Format with Grid
Template source	Required format link above
Original grid / proportions	Preserved
Digital preparation	Permitted for all sections except Conclusion
Printed submission	Permitted using the prescribed A4 grid format
Image density	4–8 images per documentation page
Image aspect ratio	Preserved; no stretching or squashing
Figure documentation	Figure number + caption + detailed technical description
Conclusion	Handwritten only
Digital final submission	One ordered PDF using the prescribed grid format with handwritten conclusion inserted clearly
Due date	Next class meeting unless otherwise announced

References

Final Sample Note

This Public Market report is a format and reasoning baseline, not an answer key for the assigned sites. Student groups must independently measure their designated locations: Burnham Park, Melvin Jones Grandstand, Mines View Park, or Baguio Botanical Garden, according to their group assignment.