I have had this problem for awhile trying to average RTK points with the same point ID. I am running Carlson SurvCE 3.03.
The first point I do in the file it all appears (but not really) to work out great, but for every point thereafter it gives me a huge error in the averaging. What appears to be happening is that even though I call out the same point ID that I want to average, it wants to average my current point with the previous one that I occupied. Here is an example RW5 file where it happened to me the other day:
The two observations circled in red were supposed to be my first average for point number 142. Notice how the raw file stores the 2nd observation as 143 even though I told it to be point 142. The data collector did show the average and I believed that I stored it, but looking back at the coordinate file it only reflects the coordinate of the first observation of 142. I then observed and stored 143 with no overwrite warning or prompt to average. I then attempted to observe and store 143 again to average and it gave me a huge averaging error. It appears to be trying to average either the observations circled in blue or the observation I was taking (which never got stored because of the error) with my second observation on 142.
Has anybody had this happen?
Also, does anyone know what the information contained within the "GT" record reflects?
> Also, does anyone know what the information contained within the "GT" record reflects?
GT - GPS time, PN point number, SW start week, ST Start time, EW - End week, ET - End time
So the error occurred when the software averaged the two points that had the same number, but they're two different points.
142 and the first 143 are the same and the second 143 is the same as 144.
Somehow, the software thinks it's ok for the same point to have two different numbers and for two different points to have the same
number.
That's just strange, but I'd suspect some sort of weird setup configuration.
Short answer: yes, I have had this happen. And, editing the raw data and reprocessing will make it all work, but it is tedious.
Should SurvCE have a warning?
"Hey, the points you are trying to average are a mile apart!"
Yes, I could use that warning...
But, since that isn't how it is, I have modified my process. I store multiple observations on points, breaking lock in between, and I store each observation as a UNIQUE point number.
Then, I use the point average routine. This enables me to not use observations that I judge to be poor quality, and it enables me to see where I have screwed up.
this is my workflow..I store each point as 142a, 142b, 142c, then average in excel.
Problem Solved
OK, after doing some research, I found this paper which explains how to do point averaging with SurvCE. Apparently to have to have some setting set a certain way and make sure your raw data file and coordinate file names match.
SurvCE GNSS Analysis Point Averaging
I tried it out yesterday and it worked pretty good. It looks like you have to collect at least 3 observations before it will do an analysis. It appears to average after the 2nd observation, but doesn't give you any feedback on how well the averaging worked until the 3rd observation was made. It sure does generate many lines in your raw data file. This was for one point I did:
