# Experimental Research of the Structure Condition Using Geodetic Methods and Crackmeter
## 4 Results and Discussion  
As shown in Table 1, four series of measurements were carried out for determining the displacements of the controlled points in the network: measure 0--2020.07.28, measurement 1--2020.08.07, measurement 2--2020.11.04, and measurement 3--2020.12.02, which were characterized by variables temperature conditions. The temperature was read from the infrared images using the FLIR TOOLS software. Below is a detailed summary of the structure thermic observed for each measurement series (Table 2). Points T1, T2, T3, and T7 are on the external walls, while points T4, T5, T6, and T8 are on the internal walls. The location of the points for which the temperature was read is shown in Figure 6. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Point No.**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Construction Temperature (\({}^{\circ}\)C)**} \\ \cline{2-5}  & **2020.07.28** & **2020.08.07** & **2020.11.04** & **2020.12.02** \\ \hline T1 & 33.0 & 36.5 & 6.9 & \(-\)3.4 \\ T2 & 32.7 & 36.4 & 7.1 & \(-\)3.2 \\ T3 & 35.7 & 44.3 & 7.7 & \(-\)3.0 \\ T4 & 27.3 & 26.7 & 17.6 & 13.2 \\ T5 & 27.9 & 27.5 & 17.7 & 12.9 \\ T6 & 27.5 & 27.0 & 17.9 & 13.4 \\ T7 & 32.0 & 34.5 & 8.0 & \(-\)2.6 \\ T8 & 26.1 & 25.2 & 17.4 & 12.0 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Construction thermal overview. Based on geodetic measurements, it was possible to determine the horizontal and vertical displacements of the controlled points. The values of the determined vertical displacements (\(dZ\)) and their mean errors (\(m_{dZ}\)) are summarized in Table 3.  
Figure 6: Point temperature distribution. (**A**) The location of the structure’s external points for which the temperature was read. (**B**) The location of the structure’s internal points for which the temperature was read. (**C**) The location of the structure’s external points for which the temperature was read. (**D**) The location of the structure’s internal points for which the temperature was read. Using the transformation methods: isometric and Helmert, the horizontal displacements of the network control points were determined [57,58]. The displacement values are shown in Table 4.  
The analysis of the determining horizontal displacements accuracy in the first phase of calculations was based on the isomorphic transformation error determination for each station of the laser station. The values of these errors are presented in Table 5.  
After merging the positions, starting from the second measurement series, using the reference points (R1-R6), the network points were transformed into the system from the \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Point No.**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Meas. 0–Meas. 1**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Meas. 0–Meas. 2**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Meas. 0–Meas. 3**} \\ \cline{2-7}  & \(\mathbf{dX}\) (mm) & \(\mathbf{dY}\) (mm) & \(\mathbf{dX}\) (mm) & \(\mathbf{dY}\) (mm) & \(\mathbf{dX}\) (mm) & \(\mathbf{dY}\) (mm) \\ \hline
1 & 0.16 & 0.33 & 0.85 & 0.90 & 1.42 & 0.67 \\
2 & 0.17 & 0.31 & 0.86 & 0.69 & 1.33 & 0.42 \\
3 & 0.36 & 1.01 & 0.66 & 1.69 & 0.87 & 1.08 \\
4 & 0.17 & 1.02 & 0.39 & 1.59 & 0.70 & 0.92 \\
5 & 0.29 & 1.95 & \(-\)0.05 & 2.29 & \(-\)0.60 & 2.40 \\
6 & 0.11 & 1.91 & \(-\)0.31 & 2.21 & \(-\)0.81 & 2.19 \\
7 & 0.29 & 2.39 & \(-\)0.70 & 2.78 & \(-\)2.00 & 3.20 \\
8 & 0.08 & 2.53 & \(-\)1.07 & 2.82 & \(-\)2.39 & 3.04 \\
9 & \(-\)0.15 & 2.13 & \(-\)1.41 & 2.84 & \(-\)2.96 & 3.54 \\
10 & \(-\)0.05 & 1.94 & \(-\)1.41 & 2.71 & \(-\)2.87 & 3.19 \\
11 & \(-\)0.37 & 0.41 & \(-\)2.46 & 1.28 & \(-\)4.42 & 1.49 \\
12 & 0.08 & 0.51 & \(-\)1.88 & 1.35 & \(-\)3.91 & 1.46 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Determined horizontal displacements values. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Point No. **} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Meas. 0–Meas. 1**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Meas. 0–Meas. 2**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Meas. 0–Meas.