AI Assistant
Notifications
Clear all

Defining expected accuracy of static GNSS Survey

6 Posts
4 Users
0 Reactions
839 Views
totalsurv
(@totalsurv)
Posts: 810
Member
Topic starter
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

I would like to define for a client the accuracy that can be expected from a static GNSS survey. Would it be sufficient to define in terms of Error Ellipses at 95% CI and would it be wise to include equipment specifications also? My errors ellipses from Survnet are usually around 0.005 major & minor and 0.020 elevation.

Just curious as to how others define the accuracy achievable.


 
Posted : July 10, 2019 2:25 pm
MightyMoe
(@mightymoe)
Posts: 10534
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Use the manufacturer's spec sheet:

Here is the sheet for the R10

?ÿ


 
Posted : July 10, 2019 3:14 pm
thebionicman
(@thebionicman)
Posts: 4524
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

You have to know the question before you provide the answer.

Absolute or relative positions?

Environment?

Time constraints?

Density and configuration of network?

The list goes on....


 
Posted : July 10, 2019 3:30 pm
Norm
 Norm
(@norm)
Posts: 1331
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Precision to be precise.?ÿ


 
Posted : July 10, 2019 4:49 pm
totalsurv
(@totalsurv)
Posts: 810
Member
Topic starter
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 
Posted by: thebionicman

You have to know the question before you provide the answer.

Absolute or relative positions?

Environment?

Time constraints?

Density and configuration of network?

The list goes on....

I think a reasonable expectation of accuracy could be stated with the caveats above.


 
Posted : July 11, 2019 12:54 am

totalsurv
(@totalsurv)
Posts: 810
Member
Topic starter
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 
Posted by: linebender

Precision to be precise.?ÿ

Not much good without accuracy as well. You can precisely hit the wrong point many times.


 
Posted : July 11, 2019 12:56 am