Nice!
Now you don't have to dig the leaves off the control point every time you visit it in the fall.
Even better, you can tie in that rail road spike without having to chip away the asphalt.
Don't tell me that doesn't happen already. Been to numerous "fnd spike" locations only to find a paint spot and undisturbed AC.
Nate The Surveyor, post: 382811, member: 291 wrote:
DMYHILL, you should get one too.
I have, and I am not anti-Javad. The ad made me laugh out loud, not because of the offering, but because it appears that Javad is poking some fun at himself.
And, with all these things in the LS, the only thing that matters still isn't there: It cannot run a robotic total station.
And, I will make this comment: If the interface is so difficult that it takes a significant time to learn, my ability to switch to that product is greatly limited. I have a built in larger cost in training time, a huge chunk up front for the existing employees, and additional costs every time there is a new hire. If I was by myself AND the LS could run a Total Station, there is a good chance I would buy one.
Nate The Surveyor, post: 382821, member: 291 wrote: I find in my limited experience, that all the Javad users that I know, are Javad users, because they are striving for excellence, not because they are retards, with paint and flagging.
I am sure, that there are poor practitioners, driving Fords, but that does not make a Ford bad. To associate is to say that because you met a drunk Indian, that all Indians are drunks. It is just not true.N
I would agree. Don't let Kent's dislike of RTK get you bent out of shape.
Kent McMillan, post: 382850, member: 3 wrote: Okay, so you don't care about working quickly, but you spend the money on RTK? That's novel.
I'm sure that it will be possible to implement a Locate-a-Ping feature that will give you that will give you multiple processing engines that signal when the location converges to within some tolerance that may meet Arkansas minimum standards.
Kent,
I use RTK because it produces a better or equal product than short static sessions in my testing. This is largely because I have access to an extraordinary resource called the WSRN. Being able to make decisions in real time regarding the accuracy/satellites, etc helps, it isn't just the tech, it is how you use the tech.
You will likely go apoplectic over that statement, but it is the truth. You can visit anytime you like, and I will demonstrate.
dmyhill, post: 382873, member: 1137 wrote: Don't let Kent's dislike of RTK get you bent out of shape.
Hey, I think that once RTK is integrated with a tilt sensor and Locate-a-Ping technology with a success rate of 75% or better, it won't matter what I think. It will be the standard for producing $150 mortgage surveys, sort of the self-driving car in the race to the bottom.
dmyhill, post: 382875, member: 1137 wrote: I use RTK because it produces a better or equal product than short static sessions in my testing.
[...]
You will likely go apoplectic over that statement, but it is the truth. You can visit anytime you like, and I will demonstrate.
So, you can't explain or document your claim, but have to show which buttons you press? Why is this oddly familiar?
Adam, post: 382817, member: 8900 wrote: I am the first to say that the shovel is higher on the list of my must have tools, above locators, robots, gnss receivers. It trumps all except the machete. As for the goobers who would not dig up a corner and verify it, well you can't fix stupid.
I have said and continue to advance the same thing Adam. The two most important tools in the truck are the shovel and hammer. The shovel is used to find the monuments and the hammer is used to set them. This gets to the foundation of what we do: leaving monuments found or set to define real property boundaries.
Having said that, I would not want to work without the convenience of a metal locator. I could conceivably find monuments without it, and have in the past, but I wouldn't want to make it my normal procedure. I'm not sure where the rub is on this. Do the $150 mortgage surveyors not have metal detectors? Will making a smaller, more convenient detector suddenly cause these hypothetical drive-by surveyors to do even more inferior work than was already done? Seems highly unlikely.
As a solo operator, it will be very nice to no longer need to carry a metal locator along with all of the other items I have to carry in the field. One less thing that I have to tote around and keep up with. For the most part a locator is useless except when it's being used to locate. So most of the time, I'm just carrying it around with all of my other reconnaissance gear. My hands will be much more free now and I'll be much less weighted down.
Shawn Billings, post: 382883, member: 6521 wrote: I have said and continue to advance the same thing Adam. The two most important tools in the truck are the shovel and hammer. The shovel is used to find the monuments and the hammer is used to set them. This gets to the foundation of what we do: leaving monuments found or set to define real property boundaries.
Having said that, I would not want to work without the convenience of a metal locator. I could conceivably find monuments without it, and have in the past, but I wouldn't want to make it my normal procedure. I'm not sure where the rub is on this. Do the $150 mortgage surveyors not have metal detectors? Will making a smaller, more convenient detector suddenly cause these hypothetical drive-by surveyors to do even more inferior work than was already done? Seems highly unlikely.
As a solo operator, it will be very nice to no longer need to carry a metal locator along with all of the other items I have to carry in the field. One less thing that I have to tote around and keep up with. For the most part a locator is useless except when it's being used to locate. So most of the time, I'm just carrying it around with all of my other reconnaissance gear. My hands will be much more free now and I'll be much less weighted down.
I have mine in the cell phone pocket of my carhart britches, it weighs less than my cell phone.
Adam, post: 382884, member: 8900 wrote: I have mine in the cell phone pocket of my carhart britches, it weighs less than my cell phone.
And, what do you have?
Shawn Billings, post: 382883, member: 6521 wrote: Do the $150 mortgage surveyors not have metal detectors?
Sadly some of them don't. I have been out working on a boundary survey and a guy across the street was working on a mortgage survey and asked to borrow my locator. I got a reading in the road and he said he would just use that. I believe the only tools he had was a notepad and a Disto. We usually tell people that most mortgage surveys aren't worth the paper they are written on.
The SmartTip's ability to store the location of magnetic readings is just a tool. The surveyor should decide the appropriate use for it. It can be useful when several readings are detected in area to sort out which one is the probable monument before having to dig up all the locations where objects are detected.
Another interesting product by Javad. Glad to see someone changing things up and not giving us more stuff we can only use on occasion. Would like to see them make it compatible with other software. technology is ever increasing what we can do and how we can do it. Every piece of technology isn't a fit for each surveyor and should be used with careful consideration for the task at hand On a side note if Javad ever improves their marketing I see them really improving their position of market share.
I have worked in many areas with magnetic materials in the ground and roadway, other than the desired monument. Being able to map points based on a magnetic signature, collect further evidence to help confirm which of the signals has the highest likelihood of being the searched for monument, and then digging your hole has always been the smart way to accomplish recovery.
How efficiently we search is our own business, and has nothing to do with fraudulent work. Failure to dig the hole is the problem. My second irritation is those who only rely upon a magnetic locator. I work in an area where it is common to find stones. These are found with a probe. What am I to think when I find a new pin with cap 3 feet from the stone? To blame substandard surveying, upon a magnetic locator being incorporated into a GNSS receiver seems like an absurd proposition. I will leave it at that.
The most valuable, and inconvenient item I have ever carried into the woods was that trusty yellow box on the end of a stick. Unfortunately it was the one item that was easily damaged. I always have used a lath bag to carry the magnetic locator, shovel, probe, machete, lath, and who knows what else. Now having a metal detector that fits on the end of the pole like a tip, or simply hand held, and carried in your pocket is nice. Because it is from Javad, it functions differently than any I have ever used, and I am sure it will make a wonderful and welcome addition to my toolkit.
John Evers
Consultant to Javad GNSS
Kent McMillan, post: 382803, member: 3 wrote: The natural further development of this integration of a magnetic locator into the rover will be to use the receiver software to "correct" a position taken offset from the center of the magnetic signal, thus obviating the need for shovels! I see $150 mortgage surveys on the horizon!
That does seem to be part of the claim of the advertisement. If it works, why not do it that way? If you test it by digging them up and keep getting the same answer, then at some point it becomes unnecessary to dig them up merely for location purposes. I'm looking forward to the full GPR roller tip that will enable utility locations. I'm serious, and admire JAVAD innovations. I understand the future of surveying is a tough pill to swallow for some, but the future is here and almost now.
The only equipment development that could lower fees around here is a camera that spits out a map already signed and sealed with one click. Mortgage surveys go for $80, full surveys maybe $700 tops, or as one advertises "will beat any price". Technicians with a 2 year degree are offered $10/hr while the local EZ stop offers $12-$16 plus benefits.
When surveying is deregulated due to its low value and resulting lack of new personnel, the equipment suppliers that have everything in one unit for the untrained novice will make a killing. A full JAVAD setup could sell for a couple k to thousands (maybe 10's of thousands) of people across the country.
Duane Frymire, post: 382920, member: 110 wrote: I'm looking forward to the full GPR roller tip that will enable utility locations. I'm serious, and admire JAVAD innovations.
GPR has been discussed, as has a tracer wire locator.
Duane Frymire, post: 382920, member: 110 wrote: That does seem to be part of the claim of the advertisement. If it works, why not do it that way? If you test it by digging them up and keep getting the same answer, then at some point it becomes unnecessary to dig them up merely for location purposes.
Is this the case today? We all use a magnetic locator already.
If it is, then this fact is perfect proof that our concept has nothing to do with substandard work, as this device has not yet even been sold to any customers. The old maps and deeds laying on my desk, and the holes I dug this week are enough evidence for me that plenty of sub standard work has been performed in the past.
Duane Frymire, post: 382920, member: 110 wrote: I understand the future of surveying is a tough pill to swallow for some, but the future is here and almost now.
Actually, to be clear, the tough pill to swallow is how carelessly RTK tends to be used and how little RTK users seem to be able to document about the uncertainties of RTK-derived positions aside from "I checked those numbers and they looked good", which is a subprofessional answer. The whole trend toward "number box" technologies devoid of any real Q/A trail is bizarre from a professional perspective, to say the least.
Kent McMillan, post: 382924, member: 3 wrote: Actually, to be clear, the tough pill to swallow is how carelessly RTK tends to be used and how little RTK users seem to be able to document about the uncertainties of RTK-derived positions aside from "I checked those numbers and they looked good", which is a subprofessional answer. The whole trend toward "number box" technologies devoid of any real Q/A trail is bizarre from a professional perspective, to say the least.
Kent,
I gave you a like!
You have just highlighted why the Javad RTK is so great!
It does all of the things that you stated need to be done regarding documentation of uncertainties, and quality assurance. Not counting mass topo shots, all of my RTK work is double checked with a comparative static solution and redundant procedures.
This is pretty much the equivalent of measuring using two independent methods, such as an EDM and a chain to confirm yourself.
I also think you should be more concerned with people in possession of a total station running a dog leg traverse, and not closing it, than you are with RTK users.
As Adam said above, "You can not fix stupid".
John Evers, post: 382923, member: 467 wrote: Is this the case today? We all use a magnetic locator already.
If it is, then this fact is perfect proof that our concept has nothing to do with substandard work, as this device has not yet even been sold to any customers. The old maps and deeds laying on my desk, and the holes I dug this week are enough evidence for me that plenty of sub standard work has been performed in the past.
It's not the case today because you don't have enough information with current locators. The JAVAD method is akin to GPR.
I agree the concept has nothing to do with substandard work; you must have misunderstood me. I have seen that less than desirable results have been obtained over the years by well meaning and diligent surveyors using new and innovative technology while in the process of learning about it. But the same could be said about all equipment.
I recently had cause to look up a local court proceeding from 1909 as the property in dispute was once again in dispute for the same exact reason. Two well known surveyors (one with a surveying certificate from ICS, the other a bridge engineer with a surveying certificate from college) testified to a certain location. One other testified to a differing location. Opposing counsel objected to the one being qualified as an expert but the judge said forget it, let him talk. He explained that he had worked for both other surveyors and had 10 years experience, was mainly a farmer but now provided surveying on the side. Unfortunately when questioned, he proclaimed he had never heard of a "calibrated tape" and thought they were all the same. He hadn't found (or looked for) the lines marked by the other surveyors and extensively marked new lines in the wrong locations, the remains of which are now causing problems again.
John Evers, post: 382925, member: 467 wrote: You have just highlighted why the Javad RTK is so great!
Not counting mass topo shots, all of my RTK work is double checked with a comparative static solution and redundant procedures.
The question then is how you adjust RTK-derived positions with conventional measurements and static vector solutions by least squares, which is what professional practice would require. What I've read is that the Javadites are mainly just using the static solutions to trap incorrect RTK solutions.
To me, professional-grade use of any positioning technology means the ability to include the results in a realistically weighted least squares adjustment together with other observations such as conventional measurements. The realistic weighting of RTK-derived positions is a problem many users appear to confuse with the processor-estimated uncertainties of the same, which is why the combination with conventional measurements is so important as a test.
Kent McMillan, post: 382878, member: 3 wrote: So, you can't explain or document your claim, but have to show which buttons you press? Why is this oddly familiar?
Because apparently you have not done what I have done. Have you used and tested RTK GPS yourself? Which one? Have you tested the Javad unit? I have.
Since my story starts with the Ashtech LOCUS units.
I took my old L-1 GPS LOCUS units, set control in the OPEN. Took my Leica Total Station, and shot corners in the woods, and in trees, and where "RTK Don't go" . I will also say that I did several 20 hour plus observations, with L-1 The longest was 36 hrs. These were done, in the woods, as a test. I later compared these shots, against Total station observations. Often, these long observations resulted in points that were less than 0.05' from the total station shots.
I then, took my RTK Legacy E system, and observed the same points. I found that the AVERAGE of many woods shots, fits the correct location, with less than 0.20' pretty well all the time. (A few shots were poorer, but those had warning signs, ie, excessive RMS values, and bouncing values, during time of observation) Most of the time, it is within 0.10' Some of the time, it is within 0.05'. I have LEARNED when it is doing what. And how to test it.
I was taking alot of shots in the woods, to get this kind of accuracy. ALSO, I found that occasionally I got a BAD initilize. The worst to date was 8.64''.
This was with the Legacy E units. I shot the point some 2 times. (on the first day) These shots were 0.035' apart. I had a record plat, that I knew was reasonable, and knowing this, I found the bad init. Went back, and reshot 4 times. The 4 shots were all within a circle 0.21' dia. This was in a huge mountain area. Lots of trees. The ones farther away, also had a poor RMS, but were fixed. The other 2 were 0.07' and 0.05' from the computed corner.
I held the computed. This was one of the poorer observations, but was a good test of what to expect, In deep mountain ravines, and tall pines.
NOW, enter the JAVAD. It quality checks these down to a typical 0.05' in the woods. IF you let it cook for a while, and average 4 shots. The ones that take longer, get post processed. Typically, things are in the 0.10' range, on most individual shots. Unless the RMS values indicate otherwise. I have played with it, and gotten these numbers in the dirt.
So, I have made this one of my studies.
Now, when I need to survey a SQUARE mile, having 8 GLO corners, and I have to take 5 to 30 minutes on each one, (Typical) and most require an in depth search for GLO evidence, you can see the value of this. Sometimes this time on the point is spent SEARCHING, and documenting.
And, to have eliminated the BAD INITIALIZE, when used properly is a great relief.
So, the bottom line is, Using your methods, would take approximately 2x the time, (And add another person to the crew) and would only generate a few hundredths of a foot better accuracy. It would not materially improve the value of my services.
Such it is.
And, a metal detector on the tip, will make one less thing to carry.
Kent you have criticized, and lumped all RTK practitioners into one pile. I will grant, some do the "One fix and were done" thing. But, that is unethical. And, I will grant, there are people committing crimes, with cars, and pickups, and vans. But, the tool of the crime, is not responsible. The PERSON who is responsible, for the Fast and un ethical surveying is.
I ALSO went and watched a RTK Practicioner shoot 3 FLOAT solutions, average them, and USE it.
To blame new tools, quite simply shows your lack of knowledge of new technology, and the fact that it is easier to blame the equipment, than to blame the practitioner, who is in need of leadership, instruction, and moral change.
Now, CHANGE, and new tools, and the work to learn them gets harder, as we age. however, throwing all the RTK practitioners, and poorer "Wham bam" surveyors together, is disrespectful, and indicates a lack of knowledge of the rest of the story.
Some of my shots are sloppy. But, when they are in the middle of a 50' creek bed, (I shoot the banks with a Yardage Pro laser distance device) to determine the banks.
I'm fed up with your diatribe. Enough is enough.
"Best Regards" won't cut it, when you are pouring out contempt, about things you do not understand.
I am now formally asking you to "put your money where your mouth is" and get a JAVAD demo. Call me, or call Billings, or any one of the other USERS of the equipment, who knows what they are doing. Get a demo. Then, tell us about it. Publish the coordinates. Don't be abusive, or they won't come.
Retrace some of your own points. Post Process it. Pick some woods shots. And, some field shots.
Look at the tool. I am politely asking you to "put up, or shut up". Go and see. Modern RTK, when used properly, by a person who understands what he is doing, has it's place. And you should learn what you are talking about, before you rattle on about stuff, you know only a little about.
One more thing. Driving a truck, instead of a horse and buggy will not drive the profession down. A compass and chain is good gear. A transit and tape, are also good gear. Theodolite, and EDM is good gear. Post processed static, combined with Total Station, and good procedure will yield good results. And, Top of the line RTK GPS gear, when used properly will also yield good results.
But all the above can be abused. Don't abuse it. Be professional.
I have one more thing to say to you. I HAVE for several years, done what you do. Post Processed Static GPS, typically 2 hr + observations. Combined with total station, to survey. Yields GREAT results. So, I KNOW what you are doing. Now it is YOUR turn. LEARN what I am doing. I can do what you do, and have done a boat load of it.
Your turn, learn what I am doing.
With respect for the surveying profession, and education.
"Best Regards"
Have a great day. I know I will.
Nate
