Looking at buying a new rover to add to the fleet instead of a Robot. I am very interested in the Javad-LS but we have a few R10s already and I love them.
Just curious how the LS works with topo (changing field codes, linework, etc.) and construction staking? I know for strictly boundary work it will be fine.
Would one of you Javad Folks please post your procedures, experience on how the topo/field coding work with the LS?
A video would be very nice as well....
I would be happy to do so. My schedule is packed through Friday. I will reply back Saturday.
My quick comment is that I was able to teach someone with zero surveying experience how to make nice maps in less than an hour.
There are a few video's here about the LS. I wouldn't bother watching any of the older ones. They are a bit out-dated.
https://www.javad.com/jgnss/support/video.html
I've thought a bit about this whole Javad thing.
The TOP 3 reasons to go with Javad IMHO are:
1.) CONFIDENCE. You can have 100% confidence in your data. It has a quality check built in, that is second to none.
2.) The company LISTENS to feedback from users.
They update, and change the software on a regular basis. What it was yesterday, is not what it is today, and Tomorrow is still better.
3.) SPEED. There is no other system that can run at this Speed, with this Confidence.
Nate
John Evers, post: 394138, member: 467 wrote: I would be happy to do so. My schedule is packed through Friday. I will reply back Saturday.
My quick comment is that I was able to teach someone with zero surveying experience how to make nice maps in less than an hour.
Sounds good thanks.
Nate The Surveyor, post: 394155, member: 291 wrote: I've thought a bit about this whole Javad thing.
The TOP 3 reasons to go with Javad IMHO are:
1.) CONFIDENCE. You can have 100% confidence in your data. It has a quality check built in, that is second to none.
2.) The company LISTENS to feedback from users.
They update, and change the software on a regular basis. What it was yesterday, is not what it is today, and Tomorrow is still better.
3.) SPEED. There is no other system that can run at this Speed, with this Confidence.
Nate
And that is the exact reason why I am drawn to Javad. However, my local Trimble dealer, Seiler, is great with any help and support that I need. But, with Trimble you still have that damn data collector, I just love the package deal with the Javad-LS where it is all in one unit, at eye level.
Do Javad dealers offer a 30 day rental, or multi-day trials?
StL, I have a few minutes this morning. The LS has the ability to be controlled remotely, you can give it a look-see if you like.
PM received, I will follow up. Thanks
Historically, TDS, and the early versions of similar data collectors, were designed to make localizations, and data collection as painless as possible. The purpose of this philosophy was to make the transition from total station, to gps smooth.
It generally came at a price though. It tended to isolate the end user, from the actual mechanics of true gps based data.
The javad philosophy was different. It assumed that the end user understood state plane coords. And projections, and scale factors, and the theta angles. And, that this end user was FLUENT with it.
So, somebody who FELT proficient with TDS, could feel lost with javad data collection software.
So, there is a general bump, when transitioning from tds, (or tds like) to javad data collection.
However, it's all stuff we "knew about, but were isolated from" with tds. Now, it's all in our hands.
With the javad LS, you can have up to 10 different coord systems, set up, AND RUNNING. Without messing up your core data. You could never do this with tds. (there were some round a bout work arounds, but nothing like this.)
It puts power in the user's hand...
To Quote a few other users, "it'll make you hard all over", once you comphehend what it does.
Here is a "fer instance".
Inverse.
Javad inverse outputs:
Both grid dist, and ground dist.
And, the ground dist is done by an avereage elevation, of the 2 points being inversed.
It's powerful, but it will assume you are up to speed with this sort of thing.
We live on a round earth, but for too long, are living, and computing, like bona fide members of the flat earth society!
It has been some work for me. But it has been a good thing for me.
It'll make you a better surveyor. It has me.
Nate
StLSurveyor, post: 394464, member: 7070 wrote:
Do Javad dealers offer a 30 day rental, or multi-day trials?
30 day money back return policy. Buy direct from the factory/company in California.
toivo1037, post: 394481, member: 973 wrote: 30 day money back return policy. Buy direct from the factory/company in California.
Customers are certainly free to purchase factory direct. Purchasing from any of the 5PLS team adds no additional cost and provides some insight into the best configuration for the customer. Also, 5PLS team members typically include some training with the equipment purchase.
StLSurveyor, post: 394464, member: 7070 wrote: Do Javad dealers offer a 30 day rental, or multi-day trials?
30 day trial periods are available for the cost of shipping. Contact a 5PLS team member for details.
Yesterday at the MO Conference I had a very nice chat with Jason from Klein Survey Systems out of Omaha. Thankfully he brought a Triumph-LS with him.
I got to touch and hold the LS as well as spend a decent amount of time asking questions and getting direct and clear answers.
The Triumph-LS seems to be the coolest GNSS receiver available at nearly a third of the price of a R10 setup. I am just so excited about the idea of no data collector and the size of the entire unit. Literally this thing can fit in my wife's purse.
One of the more interesting aspects of the LS, is that after you do a survey, it's pretty much permanent. Verify, and screenshots, and all, it's becoming the "100% confidence GPS". Yup, that's what the doc ordered!
🙂
Been thinking of one myself. 2 questions;
1.How much confidence do you have in the elevation of a fixed solution inside tree canopy? I've seen the video someone posted of the LS under tree cover and showing a fixed solution on the screen.
2. We use Carlson Survce and F2F for all our collection work. How easy is it to use our existing codes in LS?
Thank you,
John
OK, I have been meddling with it, ATTEMPTING to get it to lie to me. I mean, sticking it in thickets. Things that you DON'T do, with GPS.
AFTER it does it's complete verification, the general idea is that the WORST it can be off is 0.16' horiz, and 3x that, vertically. Now, I have not thoroughly checked the verticals. I am more interested in HORIZONTAL.
So far, with all verification ON, the worst I have gotten, is 0.14' horiz. error. And, it came with some warning.
The recommended procedure is to shoot a point 3x, and take an average of these 3. MOST of the time, these 3 points are LESS than 0.08' apart, and are usually around 0.045' apart. Then, the LS has some sort of weighted averaging in it, that takes into account how bad the data is, and does an average... that is weighted. So, from point 150 to 151 is N 05å¡10'13" E 0.085'. And, after averaging it, the AVERAGE point is 150 to 150AVG N 16å¡14'25" E 0.025'. This is NOT in the straight line, and it is not at the mid point. It takes into account the other factors.
Since I do not often care about elev, I have only observed that MOST of the time, take horiz error, and multiply that by 1.5, and that's pretty close, but I have not been watching that AS CLOSE.
I have been sticking mine up between trees, and beside huge oaks, and just generally trying to get it fooled. Has not happened yet.
This is dream GPS, as far as I am concerned. I'll post a pic in a bit...
John, as a general rule the vertical is always weaker than horizontal. In canopy time, multiple observations, and averaging will yield vertical accuracies within a tenth. Most of the time better. Everyone has a different opinion on what canopy is, so it's a hard question to answer. I use Carlson f2f in the office, I can help you set up the point export from the LS to work smoothly with Carlson.
The angle I took this pic from, was not so good, but the LS is about 8" off that oak. I was on the point for about 30 mins. I needed this shot, because it was a REBAR, driven into the toe of the oak, and I needed it to search for other corners. I suspected that the person who set this corner, had run into trouble setting it. The final computed coord was some half a foot into the tree. I am looking about S 40 W with this pic.
As I recall, the PPK shot (Post Processed Static) is about 0.08' from the RTK verified shot. After all the testing I have done, I'd probably lay a 1000+ dollar bet that it is correct, within 0.2 feet of the actual position. I am not a betting man, but I do have to "manage the slop in shots".
Again, I have not been as focused on Vertical as I have been on Horiz. Somebody else could probably help you more in the vertical dpt.
I hope this helps.
Nate
johnhls, post: 395355, member: 3240 wrote: Been thinking of one myself. 2 questions;
1.How much confidence do you have in the elevation of a fixed solution inside tree canopy? I've seen the video someone posted of the LS under tree cover and showing a fixed solution on the screen.2. We use Carlson Survce and F2F for all our collection work. How easy is it to use our existing codes in LS?
Thank you,
John
As stated I suggest three shots and then take an average. This just builds in confidence that your shot is correct.
It will also allow you to export a relative accuracy report and a factors report showing the grid to ground factor, combined factor, grid convergence and magnetic declination.
"Nobody does it better...."
🙂
N
