Comparing the accuracy of trigonometry methods versus direct measures for distance estimation

Authors

  • Mark Ren D. Villaflor Nueva Ecija University of Science and Technology, San Isidro, Nueva Ecija, Philippines
  • Rhian Margarette C. Pineda Nueva Ecija University of Science and Technology, San Isidro, Nueva Ecija, Philippines
  • Erries L. Villena Nueva Ecija University of Science and Technology, San Isidro, Nueva Ecija, Philippines
  • Loel P. Cunanan Nueva Ecija University of Science and Technology, San Isidro, Nueva Ecija, Philippines
  • Titin Rahmiatin Rahim Muhammadiyah University of Kendari, Kendari, Sulawesi Tenggara, Indonesia
  • Usman Muhammadiyah University of Kendari, Kendari, Sulawesi Tenggara, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.64171/JAES.6.4.22-25

Keywords:

Trigonometry, Direct measurement, Distance estimation, Percentage error, Surveying

Abstract

This study investigates the accuracy of trigonometric methods compared to direct measurement in estimating distances. Measuring distance is essential in mathematics, engineering, surveying, and construction, where precision ensures successful outcomes. Direct measurement using tools such as measuring tapes provides actual values but can be impractical in certain contexts. Trigonometry, particularly through the tangent function, offers an alternative by estimating distances using angles of elevation and object heights. The researchers conducted trials in a controlled campus setting, measuring distances from fixed objects using both methods. Data were analyzed by computing percentage errors to determine reliability. Results revealed that trigonometric methods can approximate distances effectively, but small errors in angle measurement significantly affect accuracy. Direct measurement consistently produced lower percentage errors, making it more reliable. The study concludes that trigonometry is useful when direct measurement is not feasible, but precision remains higher with direct tools.

References

Briggs WH, Cochran L, Knill N. Briggs Calculus: Early Transcendentals. 3rd ed. Pearson, 2022.

Harvard Math Fun Facts. Eccentricity of Conics. Harvard College Mathematics Research. Available from: https://math.hmc.edu/funfacts/eccentricity-of-conics/

Deering M, et al. Performance of tree height measurement instruments technology in New Zealand forestry. ResearchGate, 2024. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Matt-Deering/publication/396843414_Performance_of_tree_height_measurement_instruments_technology_in_New_Zealand_forest

Etzlinger B, Nußbaummüller B, Peterseil P, Hummel KA. Distance estimation for BLE-based contact tracing: A measurement study, 2021. Available from: https://arxiv.org/abs/2101.09075

Lim YC, Shakor ASA, Shaharudin R. Reliability and accuracy of 2D photogrammetry: A comparison with direct measurement. Front Public Health, 2022. Available from: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/public-health/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2021.813058/full

Kim J, et al. Reliability and comparison of sonographic methods for in vivo measurement. Med Sci Sports Exerc., 2022. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000003015

Leow MQH, Teo WZW, Lim JX, et al. Visual estimation of lengths and angles: How accurate are we? 2023. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37171441/

Li Y, et al. Measurement technologies and accuracy assessment in remote sensing applications. Electronics. 2024;13(23):4762. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics13234762

Liu X, et al. Advances in remote sensing measurement and estimation techniques. Remote Sens. 2021;13(11):2062. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13112062

Meyer TH, Elaksher AF. Simple short-line formulas for the geodetic direct and indirect problems. 2022. Available from: https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/aags/salis/2022/00000081/00000001/art00002

Norman JF, et al. The visual perception of long outdoor distances. Sci Rep, 2024. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-53835-1

Omogunloye OG, Omar DM, Okolie CJ, Daramola OE, Salami TJ. Comparative accuracy assessment of the Bowring, Chord and Power Series methods for direct determination of geodetic coordinates, 2021. Available from: https://www.sajg.org.za/index.php/sajg/article/view/716

Roman LA, et al. Urban forestry measurement methods and their applications. Arboric Urban For. 2023;48(6):319-331. Available from: https://auf.isa-arbor.com/content/48/6/319

Xing X, Melek W, Wang W. A recursive trigonometric technique for direct digital frequency synthesizer implementation. Electronics. 2024;13(23):4762. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/13/23/4762

Yang D, Zou J. Precise levelling in crossing river over 5 km using total station and GNSS. Sci Rep, 2021. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-86929-1

Yang D, Zou J, Shen Y, Zhu H. Research and application of trigonometric leveling to replace precise levelling, 2021. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/353623982_Research_and_Application_of_Trigonometric_Leveling_to_Replace_Precise_Leveling

Yoon JW, Park H, Kim NS, Park T. Cost-effective asynchronous inter-sensor distance estimation using trigonometry. Electron Lett, 2021. Available from: https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/el.2016.0442.

Downloads

Published

2026-07-14

How to Cite

Villaflor, M. R. D., Pineda, R. M. C., Villena, E. L., Cunanan, L. P., Rahim, T. R. ., & Usman. (2026). Comparing the accuracy of trigonometry methods versus direct measures for distance estimation. Journal of Advanced Education and Sciences, 6(4), 22–25. https://doi.org/10.64171/JAES.6.4.22-25

Issue

Section

Articles

Most read articles by the same author(s)