Activity Feed › Discussion Forums › Strictly Surveying › Finally Spilling the Beans on RTK GNSS
Brian McEachern, post: 425237, member: 9299 wrote: [USER=12678]@Roby_[/USER] , going to your article and briefly searching specifically for “mm”, “cm” or “.0” it appears that your article makes no references to the accuracy of the cheaper units you are referencing. Most of the references I saw to accuracy were in the comments below the article.
Brian — 100% Agreed. You’re right that absolutely NO EMPIRICAL TEST was given in the article. I’m working on that (comparing the ComNav to the best L1 competition) as we speak. I doubt any L1/L2 manufacturers are interested in robotics, but if any of you guys would like to test your equipment mano-a-mano with the ComNav, I’ll be happy to add your receivers to the show-down.
Brian McEachern, post: 425237, member: 9299 wrote: [USER=12678]@Roby_[/USER]First thing I noticed in your photo that you referenced is that it is situated on an “eyeball” 42″ mower deck.
DUDE ARE YOU CALLING MY 72″ MOWER A 42″ MOWER??? C’mon now, those are fighting words!
Brian McEachern, post: 425237, member: 9299 wrote: [USER=12678]@Roby_[/USER]The receivers that you are questioning, the more exponentially expensive ones are used to measure very precisely, and relied upon as [USER=10]@Jim Frame[/USER] mentioned earlier in the thread. There are always alternatives and other ways to skin the cat, but for surveyors, who are held to accuracy standards the price of quality equipment comes out in the wash. That’s my .02
100% Agreed and appreciate pointing this out. All the robot above needs is robust 1cm accuracy. I think a lot of you guys are looking for 1mm accuracy — no idea how well ComNav does at that.
Roby_, post: 425277, member: 12678 wrote: Brian — 100% Agreed. You’re right that absolutely NO EMPIRICAL TEST was given in the article. I’m working on that (comparing the ComNav to the best L1 competition) as we speak. I doubt any L1/L2 manufacturers are interested in robotics, but if any of you guys would like to test your equipment mano-a-mano with the ComNav, I’ll be happy to add your receivers to the show-down.
Might want to look into these system as well.
https://www.deere.com/common/docs/products/equipment/agricultural_management_solutions/guidance_systems/brochure/en_GB_yy1114823_e.pdfhttp://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/self-driving-tractors/
Also, in your photo, what is all of that you have connected to your receiver? A major selling point to the modern stuff the surveyors use is that it is all self contained. No wires. Bluetooth receiver and data collector with internal modems.
Roby_, post: 425277, member: 12678 wrote: 100% Agreed and appreciate pointing this out. All the robot above needs is robust 1cm accuracy. I think a lot of you guys are looking for 1mm accuracy — no idea how well ComNav does at that.
Most all current RTK dual frequency GPS + GLONASS receivers should have similar accuracy specs when in good conditions (open sky, short baseline between base and rover, no multipath, etc.). Typically these are:
[INDENT]Horizontal: 1 cm + 1 ppm * base_line_length
Vertical: 1.5 cm + 1 ppm * base_line_length
[/INDENT]
What can separate receivers and different brands are how they perform in adverse conditions (long baselines, under trees, near buildings, etc.), how good of customer support they have and the software features they have:- How robust are their fixed solutions?
- Do they have some method to confirm the fixed solution is good?
- What options do they have to receive corrections (UHF, Spread Spectrum, TCP, NTRIP VRS) and how difficult are they to configure?
- Do they offer any method to obtain solutions when outside of radio coverage?
- How difficult or easy is it to post process the base data with CORS stations and adjust the rover points?
- Do they offer built in post-processing in the field controller?
- What all types of data formats can the field controller import and export (txt, dwg/dxf, LandXML, KML, Shapefile, NGS G-Files, PDF reports, etc)?
- How good are their COGO functions?
- Does the field controller have built in CAD?
These are some of the features that can make a big difference in surveyor’s profitability and justify higher equipment cost.
[USER=29]@Kris Morgan[/USER]
When I lived and worked Rusk County, it did not take long to learn not to reach anywhere you could not see your hand and what was in front of it.
The Surveyor I was working for had a pop can to jump out of the tray and roll under a coke machine and he reached under and pulled out a cotton mouth attached to his hand and then smoothly passed out.
The Angelina River is a haven for snakes.Brian McEachern, post: 425281, member: 9299 wrote:
Also, in your photo, what is all of that you have connected to your receiver?Hi Brian! The big components are: computers, servos, radio antennas, radio receivers, strobe lights, displays and all kinds of wiring hooking that stuff together.
“resistance is futile” (seven of nine)
“go baby go” (Chuck Berry)Interesting post!
[USER=12678]@Roby_[/USER]
Did you consider to mix in the Bluetooth Beacons tehnology for postioning naar buildings and under trees?
Chr.christ lambrecht, post: 440106, member: 284 wrote: Interesting post!
[USER=12678]@Roby_[/USER]
Did you consider to mix in the Bluetooth Beacons tehnology for postioning naar buildings and under trees?
Chr.[USER=284]@christ lambrecht[/USER] No experience here with Bluetooth Beacons.
Log in to reply.