I was out yesterday setting some control for a little road project with our brand, new one week old, R10. In light of the recent discussions and a practice round for the field comparison with [USER=1138]@mattsib79[/USER] I took a few shots....
Here is a patch of trees that were set off from the road that I used for the testing.
I set one nail, "A" in the center of the patch and another nail "B" right against a tree to check to see how the brand new 25K dollar R10 would perform...
Point "A"
Point "A" looking up
I reset the RTK from under the canopy (I was using MoDOT VRS cell network for all shots) and achieved a fixed location right a way. 180 epochs, observed control point.
I observed for the 180 epochs and the residuals came down and the point was stored using the typical parameters for that I have set, 0.04, 0.06 H/V.
I then went over to a tree and set a nail directly under it, reset RTK again, gain a fixed and under went the same procedures. This is point "B"
Looking up at "B"
I observed point "B" for 180 epochs, same parameters as "A"
I waited about 30 mins or so and used the stake out function to check the initial observation of each point. When I occupied both points I reset the RTK and observed the stakeout point for 30 epochs.
Here are the results.....
Point "A"
0.045, 0.081, -0.05
Point "B"
The true test will come when I check point A with the total station.
Overall, I was impressed at how fast a fix was gained, much faster than the R8, and not even sure the R8 would even gain a fix. I am pretty confident that had a I let the unit burn for 15 mins or so the observation would have tightened up a bit..
I can't wait for the Javad- LS Vs. R10 - The Royal Rumble in the Jungle!
When I got my R10 1 year ago I noted similar results in a similar type of canopy.
we use an r8 as a base.
For non-Trimble users, a 180 second Observed Control measurement means that for those 180 epochs the positional "drift" did not exceed the tolerances that are set in the data collector.
It had been my experience that VRS positions aren't as repeatable as positions measured off a local base. All in all your results were about what I would expect.
Just out of curiosity... was the pole oriented the same way the second time you occupied the points?
StLSurveyor, post: 429556, member: 7070 wrote: I can't wait for the Javad- LS Vs. R10 - The Royal Rumble in the Jungle!
St. Louis is within my driving range...can my LS and I get an invitation?
I will buy Lee D. a steak dinner if he can come too.
John Evers, post: 429628, member: 467 wrote: St. Louis is within my driving range...can my LS and I get an invitation?
I will buy Lee D. a steak dinner if he can come too.
Sure anytime and anyplace. I can drive to where ever too. I wanted the Javad but everything from floor to ceiling is Trimble and just makes more sense to stay yellow
I can claim a free schedule after June 11.
Lets see who wants in, come up with a date, and calculate a weighted mean of the participants home location to select the test location.
Only time I ever got an 180 epochs with an R8 under a huge canopy.. Was dumbfounded!!
I would like to see a Javad demo myself.
[USER=10608]@It's not a camera[/USER]
If that dumbfounds you....
I have an idea....
N
Gavin,
Do you have any idea what the cost the construct the anechoic chamber in your attached picture might be? That is an absolutely amazing room.
I agree with the concept of record and playback in such an environment for testing. It has one thing lacking...and that is surveyors getting together in the woods somewhere to make new friends.
There is also one other aspect that needs considered. The data collection software. I am personally aware of at least one model of GNSS equipment, and I would expect that there may be more, that does not simply passively receive output from the receiver. Spoken another way, the data collector can analyze what has been going on, and interact with the receiver. My two cents added would simply be that the data collector should be included in "what" is being tested. Not just a receiver.
Steve Gilbert, post: 429667, member: 111 wrote: I would like to see a Javad demo myself.
That can be arranged. I think your are not too far from Shawn Billings. He is a rather good guy that can be trusted. I recommend that you look him up.
I don't use RTK very often but we did yesterday. 1 R4-3 base with 2 R4-3 rovers in fairly dense oak woodland, trees 20 to 30 feet tall. No problem. The Hipers we traded in a few years ago would not have worked. This is the first time in years that I've done a 100% RTK project. We are doing a static network on the boundary. 26 acres of topo in a sanitary spray field, 100+, fun! WASPO promised me he would not use it last week, seemed dry.
A conifer forest is much more difficult than low oak trees. It's relatively flat too which helps with sky visibility.
We are a Trimble shop, the operation just runs more smoothly by keeping all the brand's the same. I really like Access too.
Good point; if that was piney woods you'd be pulling out a total station.
Dave Karoly, post: 429726, member: 94 wrote: A conifer forest is much more difficult than low oak trees.
Good point; if that was piney woods you'd be pulling out a total station. When you get in the hills and pine woods of north Louisiana RTK is borderline useless.
Gavin,
Awesome explanation btw.
I just want to be clear one this. The analyzer you mentioned above in step 1. Please describe this device for me. How does it differ from a normal GNSS receiver?
I have seen a re-radiating antenna setup before, that re-broadcast the live GNSS signal to an indoor auditorium. Would the step 2 mentioned above, be somewhat imitated if a recorded stream was re-broadcast via a re-radiating antenna into a room where no external signals were able to be received?
Got me started looking at R10's. Are all R10's created equal other than radio components? Or, do you have to know what you are getting option wise?
Thanks
Gavin,
Thanks for taking the time for that reply. You have given me quite a bit to study there.
I. Ben Havin, post: 429826, member: 6834 wrote: Got me started looking at R10's. Are all R10's created equal other than radio components? Or, do you have to know what you are getting option wise?
Thanks
As far as I know all R10s are created equal. There are a few accessories you can buy, but the receiver itself is the same.
John Evers, post: 429652, member: 467 wrote: I can claim a free schedule after June 11.
Lets see who wants in, come up with a date, and calculate a weighted mean of the participants home location to select the test location.
Sounds like a good time. I would love to participate. I'll bring an R10 setup and I am willing to drive to wherever.
StLSurveyor, post: 429859, member: 7070 wrote: As far as I know all R10s are created equal. There are a few accessories you can buy, but the receiver itself is the same.
Thanks for the help
