FWIW,
Inspired by some of the useful comments in the toxic thread ??OPUS down? I offer the following.
If one is interested in the workings of tools like OPUS and some of the other government/academic based processing tools one need only visit sites like:?ÿftp://igs.org/pub/center/analysis/noaa.acn (this is for NGS). It lists the approaches and models used. Some board members have inquired about issues like tidal loading, they might find these reports as well as the related IERS standards on their pages to be useful. The IERS Conventions are especially interesting reading?ÿ https://www.iers.org/IERS/EN/Publications/TechnicalNotes/TechnicalNotes.html
My experience with commercial/productivity based packages is that the level of detail in reports linked from the site above are considered to be proprietary. Am I incorrect on this? Doing some comparisons of commercial packages with PAGE-NT showed me differences in approaches as well as a failure to support fixing problematic data. Of course, this was in the early 2000s.
I should also say that even though the NGS and MIT make their processing packages available to the public and researchers, they require a good deal of time to learn and use (hopefully correctly). Commercial packages are better suited to most users.
Hope this is of interest,
?ÿ
DMM
My experience is with Trimble, so the RTX processor is the one available, they also offer a connection to OPUS that is a one click operation. All you need to do is type in your email as you send the file.
It's all quite a difference from the old days of spending hours looking at the data.
RTX will process the file and send a position that is dropped into the job within a few tens of seconds. Of course even as seemless as it is OPUS sends it to the email and you need to manipulate it over to the job. Not that I'm complaining, it's all really easy either way. I like?ÿthat Trimble takes care of the HI, you don't need to worry about shifting from the measure point to the OPUS point for the antenna height, Trimble takes care of that for you.
I see little difference between the two processors when the final numbers are compared horizontally, I used to say that RTX gives a better vertical solution, but after more usage I will now say that isn't so clear.
However, RTX will process data that OPUS will not. And the internal processor in TBC?ÿwill process data that neither RTX or OPUS will.
RTX and OPUS are radically different approaches to data processing. They are as close to an independent check as you can get with one data set.
TBC does a great job with static data; the results are precise and repeatable. Beginning with version 4.00, they made enhancements that specifically improve the performance on long baselines. In addition to importing CORS data and IGS orbits straight into your project using Internet Download, you can also now import IGS Earth Rotation Parameters and IGN Differential Code Biases. And it will process baselines unbelievably fast, only a couple seconds apiece once it's rolling. It truly is a far cry from what we used to have to do.
TBC is different than the NGS software (at least as I understand it) in that it's a single baseline processor. If you're interested in seeing the reports it can generate I'll create a couple and post them.
TBC is different than the NGS software (at least as I understand it) in that it's a single baseline processor. If you're interested in seeing the reports it can generate I'll create a couple and post them.
TBC is far superior to a?ÿservice like OPUS; if what you need is accuracy and productivity. Why set on a point for hours when you can set on it for minutes?
