Okay so maybe I'm missing something but what is the big deal with tilt compensation? Why are Trimble and Leica going bananas about this??ÿ
Anyone tested it again a proper shot?
N10,000, E7,000, Z100.00
PLS - IL, MO, AR, KS, MN, KY
I use this quite often. Works great on surveying in monuments against fence corners, under fences or other obstacles where you can't get your rod level. Beats measuring in offsets.
@hblair how often do you end up calibrating your units for this?
I could see this being useful, but I??d probably get paranoid about the calibration. Seems like you could take a couple tilt shots and average them out for a warm and fuzzy feeling.
I see one worthless GNSS data collector in that video opening screen. I mean the guy with the rod. Can't take the time to step up 18 inches to get a proper shot? If only TDD could see that guy. ?????ÿ
Does that 45?ø angle cause any satellites to be obstructed? With the antenna on top, I would think any birds to the guy's left might have issues because of the receiver itself. Doesn't take much to obstruct signals to my receiver.
Is that the quintessential button pusher? I wonder what other "shortcuts" that guy takes. What kind of error is being introduced to an RTK solution that has its own set of issues.
I suppose that guy is an actor and some poetic license was used for the video production.
In my 48 years in the biz, I have seen that guy.
JA, PLS SoCal
It works great, but you need to be sure it's calibrated.
That's the downside, the time it takes to calibrate vs. a couple of offset points and tracking the correct position all the way through.
So as always it depends.
If you have lots of those types of points to locate, you don't want your drawings and coordinates to be messy with offset points, then you will really like the tilt option, it will keep your data "cleaner".?ÿ
It's simple to test to be sure it's working correctly. Locate a point near an obstruction tilted then do it plumb. If it's off you will see it.?ÿ
I do NOT own a tilt compensated GNSS receiver yet, but from reading it sounds like at least the Leica GS18T does NOT need calibrating (other than a bubble adjustment as you should do with any pole). It self calibrates using an integrated MEMS IMU and just motion normal to field rover activities.
SHG
The experience I've had with the ebubble would lead me to believe it wouldn't be as precise as some of you guys desire. If the electronic ebubble can't match the bubble vial how close is it going to determine the tilt?
I do NOT own a tilt compensated GNSS receiver yet, but from reading it sounds like at least the Leica GS18T does NOT need calibrating (other than a bubble adjustment as you should do with any pole). It self calibrates using an integrated MEMS IMU and just motion normal to field rover activities.
Yeah, from what I have seen, Leica has jumped ahead of Trimble with the GNSS+INS tilt solution. The Leica operator still needs to track a good number of SVs for it to work properly, but beats the Trimble magnetometer-style tilt sensor. And I generally lean (tilt?) toward Trimble gear...but I would be more comfortable relying upon the Leica solution.
We have new R10-2s, and it is rare that we use compensated points for anything other than general topo and auto-stored ground shots. In this part of the world, if a point is under something, it's usually in GNSS-hostile territory anyways. We do a lot more total station work than GNSS.
I'm not familiar with the tilt compensated GNSS equipment but wonder how far you can "tilt" before the observation degrades.?ÿ For example, what if you lay the rod on the ground (90?ø tilt)?
Phil would be fired on most jobs I have worked on. You cannot work around a construction site with such a lackadaisical attitude. Good way to become roadkill.
A 30?ø tilt on the rod gives a 40?ø horizon, unbalancing your SV geometry. That skews your solved data and yes, within small timeframes, the results are repeatable, but wrong both times. Typical GNSS satellites fall within 3 of 4 quadrants, NE-SE, SE-SW & SW-NW. Losing the southern quadrant leaves you with a shot at a balanced East and West configuration but 2 times out of 3 you are going to get a mathematical bias and it affects location more than elevation.
But then these receivers may not have a ground plane for the antenna and may be accepting signals from below the antenna.
Paul in PA
But then these receivers may not have a ground plane for the antenna and may be accepting signals from below the antenna.
I'm talking through my hat but think that a true ground plane antenna is much larger than any pole mounted receiver, which have simple patch antenna(s) due to size constraints.
Trimble Siteworks and Tilt Compensation - The Plumb Pole Routine
Leica gs18t is for the moment the only gnss antenna where the tilt function doesn??t need the tilt calibration. I do not use this on my galaxy g1 plus, Tilt result are messy sometimes
There are many receivers available now that have an IMU that in theory does not require calibration.?ÿ ?ÿ?ÿ
The smaller the patch size the smaller the ground plane has to be.
To be properly effective, a ground plane needs to be at least a quarter wavelength in radius, and more is better.?ÿ Here, that would be around 5 cm radius minimum.?ÿ
not too mention that that shot is wildly outside of the range that any real value would be useful except for say O-Lot or GIS.?ÿ We use ours and keep it super tight tolerances so people don't get lazy and act like that actor surveyor wanna be dude....
Okay so maybe I'm missing something but what is the big deal with tilt compensation? Why are Trimble and Leica going bananas about this??ÿ
🙂 It depends on the type of work you do and the environment.
?ÿ
Get more work done in less time (+25 ?ÿ 30% depending on the type of work you do and when using BEI+GAL)
?ÿ* More shots with GNSS, less need for Totalstation (no setup, no walking to backsight, no need for Line of Sight)
?ÿ* Add to that the new Leica GNSS Visual tool and you may increase efficiency with another 15% I hope.
?ÿ
Our typical ratio GNSS/Totalstation on our Topo-jobs in Belgium is now (with GPS+GLO) 20/80, it would be nice if we can evolve to a 50/50 or 60/40 with the new technologies.?ÿ?ÿ
Unless they have somehow augmented their technology Trimble tilt compensation (like what we have in the R10) is not on par with Leica GS18T.
We just leave it turned off in the R10 and only take shots plumb with the rod bubble.
I think it would be even more powerful if the receiver used a specially matched rod that had an IMU at the bottom, also.
Not in the specific form factor, but I predicted the GS18i about five years ago - a receiver that creates point clouds via camera.