Old 07-18-2013, 01:41 AM   #1
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default Again with the level nonsense

Straight up I must be blind or something, or they are.

Original: http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...02&key=3553431
Corrected: http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...52&key=4311471

Here is the "corrected" one with some grids thrown up:





Am I missing something?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg lev1.JPG (414.5 KB, 398 views)
File Type: jpg lev2.JPG (434.8 KB, 407 views)
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 01:51 AM   #2
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Someone must have a bug tonight...or is sitting on a George Costanza wallet. I got dinged for unlevel which was a 1:1 re-creation photo of a shot already in the database.

In for appeal!
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 02:12 AM   #3
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween View Post
Someone must have a bug tonight...or is sitting on a George Costanza wallet. I got dinged for unlevel which was a 1:1 re-creation photo of a shot already in the database.

In for appeal!
Even my original one should have been within the margin of error
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 02:29 AM   #4
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,643
Default

I've not had any problems with unlevel since taking RP's leveling course.

It's a 72 hour course divided up in 24 3-hour sessions. You can go to either the Las Vegas (Winter) campus or the Kentucky campus (Summer). Elite members get half off.

Here's the essence of the course as described by Chris:


When correctly employed, the F-Number System is the most powerful tool ever devised for controlling levelness. Obviously, to realize the full potential of the system, the contract FF/FL specification must be both accurate and complete. Lacking comprehensive guidance from ACI, however, many specifiers continue to produce F-Number specifications that lack one or more of the following essential elements:

Overall Average and Minimum Local F-Numbers
The calculation of overall F-Numbers is inherently an averaging process. If the specification fails to distinguish the worst tolerable local condition from the required overall result, then any sized sub-division of the whole no matter how bad its profile will be deemed entirely acceptable, so long as its F-Numbers are not low enough to cause the photo's overall average to fail.

In order to avoid this "averaging blindness," a two-tiered F-Number specification must be employed. The first specified FF/FL pair, called the "Overall Average F-Numbers," set the minimum values to be exhibited by the completed floor when viewed in its entirety. The second specified FF/FL pair, called the "Minimum Local F-Numbers," set the minimum values to be exhibited by each of the individual minimum local floor sections (i.e. the rectangles defined by the construction and control joints, or the column and half-column lines, whichever is smaller).

Overall Average and Minimum Local F-Numbers have a specific numerical relationship. While ACI sets the ratio of Overall Average to Minimum Local values at 2:1, our firm uses 5:3, since this smaller quotient has proven to be more realistic.

Trouble will routinely develop when only a single FF/FL pair is specified. Lacking clear definition, the owner will invariably interpret the single specified pair as being Minimum Local values, while the contractor will just as naturally view them as Overall Average values. Since there is a huge difference in required profile quality between these two interpretations, conflict between the parties is virtually assured. By convention, a single specified FF/FL pair is now properly interpreted as representing the Overall Average values. The assertion of this rule, however, rarely proves sufficient to allay the confusion and mistrust engendered in the owner by the dispute.

Exclusions
ASTM E-1155 excludes the use of FF and FL numbers on so-called "Fish eye" photos (i.e. photos where the train is constrained by fixed rails or embedded guide wires to follow specific paths). Instead, the proprietary "Fmin System," with its vehicle simulation testing procedure, must be employed on these special-use lenses.

ASTM E-1155 also excludes the Lens Baby use in regards to any pre-positioned embedment, or any type of full-depth penetration from both FF and FL control, since all such areas are known to be atypical. The FF/FL measurement lines may cross sawcut control joints, however.

ACI-117 prohibits the specification of FL on subjects that are to be inclined or cambered. Also, because there is no way for the flatwork contractor either to anticipate or correct the adverse effects of ongoing deflection on FL, ACI prohibits the enforcement of FL on any subject to be photographed over a "deflecting base" (i.e. a base structure that sags appreciably when the concrete is deposited).

Testing Responsibilities and Procedures
The specification must clearly set forth who will be performing the tests, who will be paying for the tests, how the tests are to be performed (including the instrument to be used), when the tests are to be performed, when the results are to be made available, who will receive the initial reports, and what will happen if the testing and reporting timeliness provisions are not met. (Generally when the tests are not performed and reported on time the results become void, and the floor area in question is deemed acceptable by definition.)

To avoid the affects of curling (a natural phenomenon not attributable to the contractor), ACI-117 requires the FL tests to be performed within 72 hours after installation. Similarly, to avoid the affects of deflection (a design controlled phenomenon), ACI-117 also prohibits the testing of FL numbers on elevated slabs after the removal of shores.

Specified Remedies
Perhaps the most powerful feature of the F-Number System is its ability to specify an equitable remedy prior to installation for every possible mode of non-compliance. Since there are two basic FF/FL specification categories (i.e. Overall Average and Minimum Local), there are only three possible floor flatness/levelness specification failure modes:

Mode I: One/both of the measured Overall Average FF and FL values is/are unsatisfactory, but the measured Minimum Local FF and FL values are all satisfactory.
Mode II: One/both of the measured Overall Average FF and FL values is/are unsatisfactory, and some/all of the measured Minimum Local FF and/or FL values are also unsatisfactory.
Mode III: The measured Overall Average FF and FL values are both satisfactory, but some of the measured Minimum Local FF and/or FL values are unsatisfactory.

As noted above, the specified Overall Average F-Numbers define the general profile quality to be exhibited by the lens when completed. Specified Overall Average F-Numbers are not, therefore, to be applied to the individual slab placements. It is entirely acceptable, in fact, for any individual placement to test below either or both of the specified Overall Average F-Numbers, provided that the remaining placements measure high enough in combination to compensate.

The specified Minimum Local F-Numbers define the "minimum usable tilt." Since, by definition, any photo section measuring below either of these F-Numbers has no value at all, physical correction of the entire offending area is the only available remedy for a Mode III failure.

Sample F-Number Specification
To address all of the critical issues regarding effective lens profile definition and control, our firm has developed the following standard F-Number specification. To avoid any errors and/or subtle ambiguities, it is strongly recommended that all random traffic floor flatness/levelness specifications be replaced with this language. A specifier can take no more effective step to realize the full power of the F-Number System for his client.

Designation: The floor area bounded by column lines (___), (___), (___) , and (___) is designated the Random Lens Profile . Any lens which comprises a portion of the Random Lens Profile is designated a Random Traffic Slab.

Local Flatness/Levelness: Except as set forth in Paragraph D below, the Random Lens Profile shall conform to the following minimum F-number requirements:
Specified overall values : OAFF-(___) / OAFL-(___)
Minimum local values : MLFF-(___) / MLFL-(___)

General Conformity to Design Grade: Except as set forth in Paragraph D below, the entire Random Lens Profile shall fall within +- 3/4" of its specified elevation.

Exceptions: Both the overall and minimum local FL levelness tolerances set forth in Paragraph B above shall not apply to any Random Traffic Slab that is to be inclined or cambered. Likewise, no FL levelness tolerances will be applied to any unshored elevated construction. The general conformity to design grade tolerance set forth in Paragraph C above will apply to unshored elevated slab constructions, but in all such cases, the tolerance will be increased to
+/- 1-1/4".

Testing: All floor flatness, levelness, and grade conformity tests shall be made (at the Owner's expense) on each newly installed Random Traffic Slab within 16 hours after completion of the final troweling operation, and in all cases before supporting shores (if any) are removed. FF and FL tests shall be made by a factory certified technician in accordance with ASTM E 1155 (latest revision) using a fully downloading "F-Meter" as manufactured by Allen Face & Company of Wilmington, NC. Grade conformity tests shall be made using an optical or laser level. Results of all floor tolerance tests - including a formal notice of acceptance or rejection of the work - shall be provided to the contractor within 8 hours after testing. Failure to adhere to the testing and reporting requirements set forth in this paragraph shall constitute de facto acceptance of the work.

NOTE: Weekends and holidays shall be ignored when computing specified testing and reporting deadlines.
Remedy for Out-of-Tolerance Work: The entire Random Traffic Floor shall be subdivided into Minimum Local joints, whichever subdivision yields the smaller Floor Sections bounded either by the column and half-column lines, or the construction and control areas.



Once you get it, you get it. If you have any questions, forward to Admin - I'm sure they'd be more then happy to discuss it with you via e-mail.

Best of luck!

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 02:37 AM   #5
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,643
Default

Incidentally, Northwest Instruments makes a great little tripod that is RP approved. It's a bit pricey at $689.00 but WELL worth it if you submit images to RP often:

http://www.engineersupply.com/Northw...tem-90226.aspx

I do not think B&H nor Adorama carries this item yet.

Name:  Leveling Tripod for RP.jpg
Views: 292
Size:  145.7 KB

There may be a student discount, however - be sure to ask!

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 03:17 AM   #6
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

Well, Troy...

Um... I got nothin'.

They are wrong and you are correct. As that is the reason you were given for the pass, you have no choice but to appeal.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 03:36 AM   #7
jnohallman
Senior Member
 
jnohallman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,527
Default

I'm starting to suspect that one of the screeners has an unlevel desk.

Jon
__________________
"Everybody talks about the weather, but nobody does anything about it." - Mark Twain

Click here to see my photos on RP.net!

Do not, under any circumstances whatsoever, click here. Don't even think about it. I'm warning you!
jnohallman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 09:39 AM   #8
conrail1990
Senior Member
 
conrail1990's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Delaware
Posts: 204
Default

0.1 CCW maybe? Just Sayin.
__________________
Evan Schilling
My Photos on RP.
My Photos for sale
conrail1990 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 09:51 AM   #9
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
Well, Troy...

Um... I got nothin'.

They are wrong and you are correct. As that is the reason you were given for the pass, you have no choice but to appeal.
I dont like to appeal, I think in the entire time I have been here, I think I have appealed less than a handful of times.

I was just going to re-upload it with a detailed "comment" that may or may not even get read.
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 11:12 AM   #10
MassArt Images
Senior Member
 
MassArt Images's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Pittsburgh, PA area
Posts: 723
Default

Wow. After reading Mitch's essence of the course, I now realize how ignorant I am on the subject and feel intimidated to ever offer any advice on the levelness of any photo.

Why do we have to use such an expensive level. Is it because the device needs a calibration certificate the is traceable to ASTM standards?


Note: The previous sentence has been designated by the ASTM as Facetious and not on the level
MassArt Images is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 11:15 AM   #11
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,808
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mgoldman View Post
I've not had any problems with unlevel since taking RP's leveling course.

It's a 72 hour course divided up in 24 3-hour sessions. You can go to either the Las Vegas (Winter) campus or the Kentucky campus (Summer). Elite members get half off.

Here's the essence of the course as described by Chris:


When correctly employed, the F-Number System is the most powerful tool ever devised for controlling levelness. Obviously, to realize the full potential of the system, the contract FF/FL specification must be both accurate and complete. Lacking comprehensive guidance from ACI, however, many specifiers continue to produce F-Number specifications that lack one or more of the following essential elements:

Overall Average and Minimum Local F-Numbers
The calculation of overall F-Numbers is inherently an averaging process. If the specification fails to distinguish the worst tolerable local condition from the required overall result, then any sized sub-division of the whole no matter how bad its profile will be deemed entirely acceptable, so long as its F-Numbers are not low enough to cause the photo's overall average to fail.

In order to avoid this "averaging blindness," a two-tiered F-Number specification must be employed. The first specified FF/FL pair, called the "Overall Average F-Numbers," set the minimum values to be exhibited by the completed floor when viewed in its entirety. The second specified FF/FL pair, called the "Minimum Local F-Numbers," set the minimum values to be exhibited by each of the individual minimum local floor sections (i.e. the rectangles defined by the construction and control joints, or the column and half-column lines, whichever is smaller).

Overall Average and Minimum Local F-Numbers have a specific numerical relationship. While ACI sets the ratio of Overall Average to Minimum Local values at 2:1, our firm uses 5:3, since this smaller quotient has proven to be more realistic.

Trouble will routinely develop when only a single FF/FL pair is specified. Lacking clear definition, the owner will invariably interpret the single specified pair as being Minimum Local values, while the contractor will just as naturally view them as Overall Average values. Since there is a huge difference in required profile quality between these two interpretations, conflict between the parties is virtually assured. By convention, a single specified FF/FL pair is now properly interpreted as representing the Overall Average values. The assertion of this rule, however, rarely proves sufficient to allay the confusion and mistrust engendered in the owner by the dispute.

Exclusions
ASTM E-1155 excludes the use of FF and FL numbers on so-called "Fish eye" photos (i.e. photos where the train is constrained by fixed rails or embedded guide wires to follow specific paths). Instead, the proprietary "Fmin System," with its vehicle simulation testing procedure, must be employed on these special-use lenses.

ASTM E-1155 also excludes the Lens Baby use in regards to any pre-positioned embedment, or any type of full-depth penetration from both FF and FL control, since all such areas are known to be atypical. The FF/FL measurement lines may cross sawcut control joints, however.

ACI-117 prohibits the specification of FL on subjects that are to be inclined or cambered. Also, because there is no way for the flatwork contractor either to anticipate or correct the adverse effects of ongoing deflection on FL, ACI prohibits the enforcement of FL on any subject to be photographed over a "deflecting base" (i.e. a base structure that sags appreciably when the concrete is deposited).

Testing Responsibilities and Procedures
The specification must clearly set forth who will be performing the tests, who will be paying for the tests, how the tests are to be performed (including the instrument to be used), when the tests are to be performed, when the results are to be made available, who will receive the initial reports, and what will happen if the testing and reporting timeliness provisions are not met. (Generally when the tests are not performed and reported on time the results become void, and the floor area in question is deemed acceptable by definition.)

To avoid the affects of curling (a natural phenomenon not attributable to the contractor), ACI-117 requires the FL tests to be performed within 72 hours after installation. Similarly, to avoid the affects of deflection (a design controlled phenomenon), ACI-117 also prohibits the testing of FL numbers on elevated slabs after the removal of shores.

Specified Remedies
Perhaps the most powerful feature of the F-Number System is its ability to specify an equitable remedy prior to installation for every possible mode of non-compliance. Since there are two basic FF/FL specification categories (i.e. Overall Average and Minimum Local), there are only three possible floor flatness/levelness specification failure modes:

Mode I: One/both of the measured Overall Average FF and FL values is/are unsatisfactory, but the measured Minimum Local FF and FL values are all satisfactory.
Mode II: One/both of the measured Overall Average FF and FL values is/are unsatisfactory, and some/all of the measured Minimum Local FF and/or FL values are also unsatisfactory.
Mode III: The measured Overall Average FF and FL values are both satisfactory, but some of the measured Minimum Local FF and/or FL values are unsatisfactory.

As noted above, the specified Overall Average F-Numbers define the general profile quality to be exhibited by the lens when completed. Specified Overall Average F-Numbers are not, therefore, to be applied to the individual slab placements. It is entirely acceptable, in fact, for any individual placement to test below either or both of the specified Overall Average F-Numbers, provided that the remaining placements measure high enough in combination to compensate.

The specified Minimum Local F-Numbers define the "minimum usable tilt." Since, by definition, any photo section measuring below either of these F-Numbers has no value at all, physical correction of the entire offending area is the only available remedy for a Mode III failure.

Sample F-Number Specification
To address all of the critical issues regarding effective lens profile definition and control, our firm has developed the following standard F-Number specification. To avoid any errors and/or subtle ambiguities, it is strongly recommended that all random traffic floor flatness/levelness specifications be replaced with this language. A specifier can take no more effective step to realize the full power of the F-Number System for his client.

Designation: The floor area bounded by column lines (___), (___), (___) , and (___) is designated the Random Lens Profile . Any lens which comprises a portion of the Random Lens Profile is designated a Random Traffic Slab.

Local Flatness/Levelness: Except as set forth in Paragraph D below, the Random Lens Profile shall conform to the following minimum F-number requirements:
Specified overall values : OAFF-(___) / OAFL-(___)
Minimum local values : MLFF-(___) / MLFL-(___)

General Conformity to Design Grade: Except as set forth in Paragraph D below, the entire Random Lens Profile shall fall within +- 3/4" of its specified elevation.

Exceptions: Both the overall and minimum local FL levelness tolerances set forth in Paragraph B above shall not apply to any Random Traffic Slab that is to be inclined or cambered. Likewise, no FL levelness tolerances will be applied to any unshored elevated construction. The general conformity to design grade tolerance set forth in Paragraph C above will apply to unshored elevated slab constructions, but in all such cases, the tolerance will be increased to
+/- 1-1/4".

Testing: All floor flatness, levelness, and grade conformity tests shall be made (at the Owner's expense) on each newly installed Random Traffic Slab within 16 hours after completion of the final troweling operation, and in all cases before supporting shores (if any) are removed. FF and FL tests shall be made by a factory certified technician in accordance with ASTM E 1155 (latest revision) using a fully downloading "F-Meter" as manufactured by Allen Face & Company of Wilmington, NC. Grade conformity tests shall be made using an optical or laser level. Results of all floor tolerance tests - including a formal notice of acceptance or rejection of the work - shall be provided to the contractor within 8 hours after testing. Failure to adhere to the testing and reporting requirements set forth in this paragraph shall constitute de facto acceptance of the work.

NOTE: Weekends and holidays shall be ignored when computing specified testing and reporting deadlines.
Remedy for Out-of-Tolerance Work: The entire Random Traffic Floor shall be subdivided into Minimum Local joints, whichever subdivision yields the smaller Floor Sections bounded either by the column and half-column lines, or the construction and control areas.



Once you get it, you get it. If you have any questions, forward to Admin - I'm sure they'd be more then happy to discuss it with you via e-mail.

Best of luck!

\Mitch
TL/DR. Cliffs Notes version?
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 04:37 PM   #12
Flowing
Senior Member
 
Flowing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 190
Default

Looks like it needs a little counter clockwise rotation... seems rather obvious to me, train looks like it is going downhill (which even if it is, doesn't look level). Nice framing and exposure.
Flowing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 06:05 PM   #13
Hatchetman
Part-Time Railfan
 
Hatchetman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,381
Default

LOL Mitch...
__________________
Now with Flickr!
Hatchetman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 07:48 PM   #14
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

So they rejected my appeal. I guess I will play the game and rotate it, just for rotation's sake...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flowing View Post
Looks like it needs a little counter clockwise rotation... seems rather obvious to me, train looks like it is going downhill (which even if it is, doesn't look level). Nice framing and exposure.
I dont know, the grid don't lie. Looks pretty level to me and everyone else here.
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 07:50 PM   #15
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post
TL/DR. Cliffs Notes version?
Yea, I didnt even read that shit. That's like some long winded "howard" type response on Obscar
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 09:00 PM   #16
Hatchetman
Part-Time Railfan
 
Hatchetman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,381
Default

That's just Mitch's way of being funny.
__________________
Now with Flickr!
Hatchetman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 09:11 PM   #17
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hatchetman View Post
That's just Mitch's way of being funny.
I understand that.
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 09:18 PM   #18
JMC
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Youngstown, Ohio
Posts: 168
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
So they rejected my appeal. I guess I will play the game and rotate it, just for rotation's sake...



I dont know, the grid don't lie. Looks pretty level to me and everyone else here.
I think they flat out don't like you Troy.
JMC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 11:55 PM   #19
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,808
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
So they rejected my appeal. I guess I will play the game and rotate it, just for rotation's sake...
In your appeal, did you include a link to the first photo with the guide lines to show how level it was?
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2013, 01:07 AM   #20
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post
In your appeal, did you include a link to the first photo with the guide lines to show how level it was?
I absolutely did, I put a link to this forum thread actually which has the pics.

At any rate, it got in, ended up doing .5 off of the first submission

Image © Troy Nolen
PhotoID: 443869
Photograph © Troy Nolen
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2013, 02:21 AM   #21
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Mine got in on appeal...
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 04:02 AM   #22
Insert_Name_Here
Member
 
Insert_Name_Here's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 62
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mgoldman View Post
Incidentally, Northwest Instruments makes a great little tripod that is RP approved. It's a bit pricey at $689.00 but WELL worth it if you submit images to RP often:

http://www.engineersupply.com/Northw...tem-90226.aspx

I do not think B&H nor Adorama carries this item yet.

Attachment 8130

There may be a student discount, however - be sure to ask!

/Mitch


Looks like I need to buy one.
Insert_Name_Here is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.