Nate, maybe i'm not understanding it fully, but i think Leica does it similarly, as John said in his post. WGS84 LLH and geocentric coordinates are stored for every measured point, these are the base coordinates and the user can't change them in any way. Plane coordinates and ellipsoidal coordinates (to which this plane is based on) are calculated from the WGS84 coordinates and can also be seen under every measured point. If you change the coordinate system for the job, all points are re-calculated but the WGS84 coordinates still stays intact as these are the base coordinates and you can view them any given moment. What is different is that you can only select one coordinate system at a time for a job, but then again it is not difficult at all to change the system if it's necessary. But the base coordinates always stays intact no matter how many times you change the coordinate system for the job.
But the idea to be able to inverse between points that have coordinates in different coordinates systems and see this inverse distance in different coordinate systems sound indeed very high level. Not handy in my country but i can see it being very useful for others.
Well, Arturs, you are probably right. EVERYBODY is improving everything. It's only a matter of time, till EVERYBODY can do what Javad has done, (And maybe even a simpler interface) I just like the complete fluidity, where I can build a local projection, and make coords and then EXPORT them on ANY system, without compromising my other localizes. ie, I can have MULTIPLE projections on the same project.
If you write a letter in English, then, have tabs in the top of the screen, to SEE what you wrote in Spanish, German, Chinese, Japanese, and the CONVERSION is well nigh perfect, then you see what Javad has.
What you describe, with Leica, is that you can Re-express those coords. in other projections. But, it's a singular expression.
What I am describing, with Javad, is that you can have MULTIPLE expressions, or tabs, (up to 10) and inverse between them, with the conversion happening internally. Painlessly.
In any case, and with whatever software you are going to use, SEEING, and knowing what is happening INSIDE, as you build or use these multiple projections is important. When I used TDS, I bumped my head in the fact that things were happening that I could not SEE and modify, and address. (to be fair, this was a 10 yr old copy of TDS, and MUCH has changed since then) .
I am happy that the magic of projections will someday be an area of "simplicity" due to our software making it so.
I was bizarrely frustrated, when I did a recent demo of the Javad, to another surveyor, who had done a "One Point Setup" and he did not know what his Bearings were.
What he HAD done, was a "One Point Setup", then moved his base, a few miles, and had localized on his previous work. He had done this TWICE!, so he did Job 1 with ONE POINT SETUP.
Job 2 with LOCALIZE to Job one.
Job 3 with LOCALIZE to Job two.
What he actually had, was Geodetic North, at his FIRST Job base, and since he had localized onto this first job, With his second, he was on the Same bearings as his first Job, but, it had about 2-3 minutes of rotation to be on Geodetic north. His second plat reflected "Bearings = True", but there was quite a distance East to WHERE it was actually TRUE....
My problem with this setup was:
He had the combined slop of the RTK errors of BOTH jobs combined.
He had no way to address SPC with these odd rotations and scale factors.
He was climbing further and further out on a limb, with his mechanism.
Now, you are going to say "He did not know how to use the tools he had". Yes, I know. But, I know another surveyor who runs ONE POINT SETUP, and PRETENDS that all his coordinate systems are interchangeable. He SAYS that "You have to leave a few mysteries out there" Oh! wow!
I addressed the TDS problem, by installing a theta angle, off of geodetic, on EVERY base setup. This made all bearings GRID. But, the scale factors were continuously changing. The amount algebraic difference between most setups CSF was small. But, it BUGGED me, to know it existed.
Well, The Javad solved that for me.
O well. I like it. And, anybody who figures out how all this works, will too.
Nate
There is absolutely ZERO arrogance associated with Javad. They steadily improve their products, and they provide top notch support. If you spend 10 minutes talking to Shawn Billlings or any of his colleagues at Javad, or at the factory, you will see what I mean. If I had one complaint about Javad, it is a bit confusing as to which units do which special things, sort of like it used to be when trying to figure out which Sony camcorder would be best. But that isn't really a complaint. When you tell them your mission they will explain EVERYTHING to you vividly. You will not get any bugs that they deny or say just work around.
Their stuff is well thought out, thanks to the group of surveyors Javad contracted with to help in the development. For example the tilted pole correction routine in the firmware works during stakeout, which is the highest and best use for that. One of the main competitors does tilt correction for taking shots, but doesn't even do it for stakeout, where it is needed most.
I'd say get Javad and don't look back; not even close.
My opinion only.
Was comparing to Javad and other some competitors in general; no one in specific.
Leica and the others do have strong points too, but the MO of Javad is way better suited for me. We have only leased Javad during peak workload, and I love them. when my current GPS receivers burn out, it will be javad for me for sure.
Leica just announced the GS18T rover and it is equipped with IMU. I would think that it is the GS16+IMU.
Really! I just bought two GS16s in March. Go figure, I bought a MS50 & CS15 about five months before the released Captivate.
Leica has an IMU? Hey! That's news! I want to see how this plays out.
N
As for the WGS thing, I was that way on the first Leica GNSS gear I purchased years ago. For that matter, I think it was that way on my Trimble SSi RTK system back in the mid 90's. Each project has a geodetic WGS84 coordinate (which is really incorrectly named by most manufactures), a local geodetic coordinate which is the result of any transformation and a projected grid. Changing the grid coordinate changes the local geodetic and the grid values but the 'WGS84' value remains. All receivers work in geodetic coordinates (LLH or XYZ) exclusively and only convert to grid. I'm not trying to put Javad down, just saying that this is a marketing red herring.
I think I am probably the origin of this so called "Red Herring".
John Putnam, post: 449684, member: 1188 wrote: All receivers work in geodetic coordinates (LLH or XYZ) exclusively and only convert to grid. I'm not trying to put Javad down, just saying that this is a marketing red herring.
What I did say is that the Javad uses Lat Lon for it's internal coords. That is it's Data Base.
To my knowledge, it's the only one that uses this exclusively in it's data base.
ALL GPS has to use lat lon to generate rectangular coords, through a projection.
Under the hood, there's alot going on.
My old TDS will allow ANY coordinate.
I can start a new job. Input coords of Point 1, 50k 50k, 100' elev. Then, I can ASSIGN an autonomous Lat Lon to this. I can now survey. However, when I upload computed coords, they DO NOT have an underlying Lat Lon, or Geodetic coord.
It will ASSIGN a Lat Lon to this coord, and it will allow you to set a theta.
This is generating all kinds of things, UNDER the HOOD, that a user does not realize.
IS anybody elses data base GEODETIC at it's core?
Nate
John Putnam, post: 449680, member: 1188 wrote: Really! I just bought two GS16s in March. Go figure, I bought a MS50 & CS15 about five months before the released Captivate.
I always feel sorry for everyone who unintentionally buys an instrument just before the next "best thing" comes out...
Nate The Surveyor, post: 449688, member: 291 wrote: IS anybody elses data base GEODETIC at it's core?
yes.
There are also some that are not geodetic such as Carlson.
When you upload rectangular SPC design coords, into a Javad, onto the SPC page, it ASSUMES they are SPC, with an assigned SPC. They are converted, at the upload, into Lat Lon.
When you upload rectangular design coords, into a Javad, with a localize, you must load them into the page, with the localization parameters, where they are all processed, into Lat Lons.
IF your core coords and data base ARE lat longs, it essentially "frees" you from flat earth surveying. It lets you model the whole earth, and look at certain parts, with a projection, AS YOU PLEASE. I just think that is AWESOME.
Nate
Yes!
But you can not just assign an assumed point with a grid coordinate without going through some form of transformation.
[USER=1188]@John Putnam[/USER] Absolutely. However, you can do this with a TDS 200c.
And MANY things happen "under the hood" that the user does not see.
This has been my complaint about this paradigm.
Nate
John Putnam, post: 449680, member: 1188 wrote: Really! I just bought two GS16s in March. Go figure, I bought a MS50 & CS15 about five months before the released Captivate.
Ouch! :dizzy::D
I dunno, much of this conversation about "geodetic v. local" (whatever "local" means), doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me.
We all know that the end user can SCREW UP any of the software packages used for RTK (or any other software for that matter).
We should also realize that when PROPERLY SETUP (and configured), all of the RTK Software out there SHOULD be capable of doing things RIGHT.
Matt has been using Carlson for that last couple of years, and although I don't particularly like some of what it does (and doesn't do), it still uses GEODETIC (NAD83 or WGS84) X/Y/Z (or Latitude, Longitude, Ellipsoid Height) as its underlying basis (IF you set it up right). The dx,dy,dz data is there (directly with some receivers, indirectly with others). The 3x3 co-variance data is also somewhat receiver dependent (which I hear is going to be "fixed" in the next version of Surv-CE)
Can YOU screw it up? Of course, and I suspect that one could screw up the Javad system too.
It does appear that Javad may be easier to Un-screw(up), but nothing is idiot-proof.
The ability to switch between projections (as described by Nate), sounds okay, but I have yet to encounter a need for such "field" capability in my work (although I do that a LOT here in the office).
Just my 2-bits
Loyal
Nate The Surveyor, post: 449683, member: 291 wrote: Leica has an IMU? Hey! That's news! I want to see how this plays out.
N
Leica is claiming that GS18T is the fastest rover todate with a hashtag #ForgetTheBubble. According to Leica, GS18T is the only sensor that is truly tilt compensating. What I see here is the dramatic increase in stakeout performance. If the IMU is accurate and fast enough to address machine control requirement then it is I guess a game changer. How about under heavy canopy? That remains to be seen. I hope Javad can address this question before I reach the decision point. I am buying a new set of RTK soon.
What i find interesting about Leica GS18 T is the concept how it utilizes the IMU sensor, which is a unique way at the moment. Saw it at Intergeo, looked quite cool. I also like that there's a new 4G LTE modem inside, so it will stay compatible with networks for a longer time.
