I dream of a rod that has some sort of measuring device on the inside of the rod that communicates the current height via Bluetooth to the collector. Calibrate it monthly like the bubble. Maybe the next gen of rods.?ÿ
No kidding, right??ÿ We've got receivers that you don't even need to plumb but somehow we're working with rods that can't tell how far off the ground they are. ???
It seems the Leica ap20 is north of $11,000. Seems to be quite the contraption.
I would like to see rods offered at a lower price point that read and communicate the height to the data collector but forgo the tilt capability. The thought of not even having to worry about a bubble and plumbing your rod seems amazing but it would just feel wrong to me. Tempting though.?ÿ
If $9,000-$10,000 could be shaved of the rod I could be happy continuing to look at my bubble.
@ryancj31 That tilting rod is the best thing since sliced bread. I have not used the leica one for robot but the gnss Trimble one. I thought how can I not plumb the rod. ?ÿSo I went and helped a solo guy out so I could see this new fangled thing. Its amazing for topo or hard to reach points. Took some getting use to. I ran about 1000 ft of cl road shots both. In tilt mode then in me plumbing up with gnss rod. ?ÿIt is probably more productive in gnss than a prism rod. But it saved a lot of time.?ÿ
@jph I just spent three days fixing data that could have been cleaned in an hour with good notes. It takes minutes a day and smooths out the remainder of the job flow...
Working with me isn't always that easy because I have so many ideas that are foreign to most. They make sense to me, though, and after 30+ years in the business I mostly have the freedom to do my work in the way I think best.?ÿ
@jph I just spent three days fixing data that could have been cleaned in an hour with good notes. It takes minutes a day and smooths out the remainder of the job flow...
It is worth discussing just what "good notes", for a topo, are these days. If a field guy can't get the rod changes in the dc they aren't likely to go in any notes, either.?ÿ?ÿ
@jph in this case missing rod changes made it hard to find the errors. Tracking rod heights in the notes is a trivial investment with potentially big payout.?ÿ
@norman-oklahoma I find the crew is unlikely to screw it up both places. I've required it since the GR and SDR days and it continues to save my bacon from time to time.
That's exactly what guys in the field need, more mindless crap to do, just to appease the people with the climate controlled environment.?ÿ Stuff like that leads to more frustration, less production, and kills morale.?ÿ
Wouldn't be surprised if your guys are writing it down in the fbk, by looking at the raw data on the DC, on their ride back to the office.
There are better ways to limit rod errors, and some of them have been mentioned above.
When I was a greenhorn I-man, I worked for a company (company "x") where the surveyor wanted every setup documented in a field book. The PC recorded angles & distances for traverse points and any secondary control, all rod height changes, unusual circumstances, any visit by the land owner or adjacent owners, etc. I was green on the instrument and working the data collector, and missed some rod changes the PC and/or rodman called out. The surveyor was fired because he & the owner had some personality conflicts.?ÿ I departed company "x" and was working for company "y" under another surveyor when a large project from company "x" shows up as a consulting job for us to determine why the contours shown on the design drawings didn't match the actual contours of the site. Company "x" provided all of the raw data files and field books. The surveyor that was fired never made any rod corrections before he imported his points into AutoCAD and created his TIN. It took 4 days to get all of the rod changes verified/corrected and a new TIN created. We spot checked the new contours (18 months after the plans were initially issued) with no discrepancies noted. The plan set was revised by company "x" and the project was completed without added delays and only minor change orders due to quantity revisions.
4 days to get 18 month old data corrected vs. 45 days to re-survey the entire project site... Company "x" was grateful a favorable outcome was reached in such a short period.
The moral of this story is that the more people that is involved with the data, the more likely a mistake will be made in the collection/processing phases. The excessive documentation of each setup for a 3 man crew might seem pointless (or stupid) to some, and it might be for an experienced crew, but in this particular case, it saved thousands of dollars and countless crew hours.
@jph My policies don't come from a textbook or a desire to assign senseless duties to field guys. I have more time in the field than most of them have on earth. They understand the purpose of taking contemporaneous notes and it pays off. When somebody makes a sensible case for a different way I'm all ears.
