Anyone ever seen this before? New crew on the job...
1007 The RINEX dataset submitted to OPUS failed to pass an initial
1007 test for one or more of the following reasons.
1007 1. The data only contained values for a single frequency.
1007 2. RINEX file not formatted correctly.
1007 3. One of the lines in the RINEX file is over 80 characters
1007 in length.
1007
Yes...
Usually for one of the above stated reasons.
RINEX files are highly formatted, and it doesn't take much to screw them up.
If you would like me to take a look at the file in question, shoot me a copy:
LDOGEO at aol dot com
Loyal, post: 355988, member: 228 wrote: Yes...
Usually for one of the above stated reasons.
RINEX files are highly formatted, and it doesn't take much to screw them up.
If you would like me to take a look at the file in question, shoot me a copy:
LDOGEO at aol dot com
Thanks Loyal, Ill be sending shortly
I got that same message last week while I was goofing around with Convert to Rinex. I had sent the same file earlier and gotten the message about two MARKERS so I went in and deleted the wrong one and resent. The resend resulted in the error you received above. I undid my edit, deleted the correct marker and resent. This time I got and error saying my file contained less than 7.2 mins of data so I kicked my trashcan and moved on to something else.
For the life of me I cannot figure out why OPUS does not give an honest answer such as "The dog ate my homework."
Quite often that error goes away in a few days when all the CORS data is finally settled in.
Most probably your new crew started collecting data too soon after turning the receiver on, removing the first few minutes will usually clear that up.
The most classic error I have ever received was "Your file ends before it begins."
Paul in PA
Has anyone ever parsed out the body of an OPUS FS observation? As a network solution, not vector line, it has a very different processing method from commercial packages.
My understanding of the OPUS results is somewhat limited to the top paragraph.
OBS USED:
QUALITY IND.
NORMALIZED RMS:
After that it tends to get like reading a computer manual. The top has a summary of the quality which is good, but it would be nice to know if the results could have been better by editing out any broken observations from the "o" file (of which I have limited knowledge).
Sounds like file might have tabs. If I open a rinex to edit something (station ID) I make sure that "no tabs" is set in my editor.
Reconvert the file.
