So my boss is finally buying me a new robot and tsc5 to go with the hand me down r10 I'm using now... he knows I do research on this stuff and asked for my input on whether to get the s7 with vision or just an s5. Either way we're getting the multi track prism.?ÿ
I've seen most people on here say vision is useless and guide lights are better, but I'm wondering about my specific uses....I don't know if it's me but I've never found the guide lights helpful on my Leica 1200 series or the Sokkia ix before that.?ÿ
Before I explain the uses I think vision might be useful.. the people who have used it and say it's useless...was this with a tsc3 or a modern data collector? Because the tsc3 barely has enough power to handle a DXF on the map, so I can't imagine it loading video well at all... I asked for the tsc5 since I found the tsc7 way too heavy for solo work with a bipod on the pole, carrying everything else myself.
I'm hoping they can get me a demo to try an s7 out with vision but if that isn't going to happen:
I usually work alone and sometimes I'm struggling to get a lock when I cannot see the robot at all...I know this will be dependant on lighting but sometimes it could save me a lot of time and frustration if I can manage to find myself with the camera.?ÿ
I take a ton of reflectorless shots shooting new building corners on buildings still under construction. Currently I often have to walk up to see if the beam is landing on the actual corner of the concrete or not, if it's not I have to walk back and adjust manually...I don't know how good the joystick is on Trimble but with fieldgenius and a Leica robot the slowest speed moves the beam about a meter per second, so useless for this situation.?ÿ
The last thing I could and will use vision for is taking pictures. I often take pictures with my phone and waste a lot of time getting them from my phone to the download folder. On construction sites sometimes I have to show why the job I was doing was impossible and taking the picture from the robot would be very handy.?ÿ
Thanks in advance for any thoughts on this!?ÿ
That's great news - you wont know yourself
Me, I much prefer the Vision' to 'Tracklight' (even on a TSC-3). That plus 'Active Tracking' make the S6 such a workhorse for me
I have vision on my S-6 & S-7 and love it.?ÿ I've used it Access on a Yuma2 (7" tablet) and now on a T7 tablet (TSC7 with keyboard).?ÿ Vision is also handy if you need to shoot objects at high angles where previously you would have needed a 90?ø eyepiece to get the shot.
?ÿ
TSC-3 is (was) a Windows Mobile device, so it isn??t a thing you can buy new anymore. Any discussion about it going forward is moot.?ÿ
From reading your post I would be more worried about the reflectorless. The beam is much wider (x2?) on the Trimble robots than the Leica ones. You mention taking relectorless shots directly on building corners. I would never do that with my Trimble robot knowing the limitations of it.
I was a little worried after reading about that...and may do some testing between the 2 robots once I get it, and compare to a prism... however if you saw the building corners we're tieing in you probably wouldn't be so concerned. They are usually missing chunks all over, rounded off at the top and will be parged later on. If 2 people tie in the corner during construction phase there is a good chance you will get 2 different results by about 0.010m depending on where the shot was taken on the corner. If we are shooting the foundation before the walls have been started I can walk the foundation wall and not worry about using reflectorless but often I'm shooting the corners through porch framing etc in my way.?ÿ
If I was shooting a finished building corner I would use a mini prism.?ÿ
How you will use a mini prism? it's a little tricky.
Knowing the limitations of the Trimble reflectorless it is easy enough to work around, for example perpendicular shots as much as possible, ending wall/building line a few inches back and getting another shot for corner and projecting line in cad and also using prism when required. I think these are issues for most reflectorless it's just the Leica dot is smaller eliminating some of the error. It wouldn't be a deal breaker for me and I am heavily invested in Trimble gear.
For knocked about corners (or indeed good ones) we made this up. The back quadrant isn't there so it leans up square against the wall corner and gives a choice of targets 50mm. offset from the mean face of the corner. With a load of metre extension rods screwed in underneath we can get points up to 8 metres above ground. Even on solo working you can usually lean it against the corner OK. Instrument can be anywhere in the quadrant, as you'll always have a target at better than 45 to observe, although best results are from square.
?ÿ
?ÿ
From reading your post I would be more worried about the reflectorless. The beam is much wider (x2?) on the Trimble robots than the Leica ones. You mention taking relectorless shots directly on building corners. I would never do that with my Trimble robot knowing the limitations of it.
Inside corners are one of those things that was easier with an instrument man and a mini prism. Put the point on the back of the prism in the corner, face to gun, i-man sights the inside corner, sets gun to 0 offset (or offsets shot 30mm). Done. 5-6 seconds, maybe.
Have to stick it in front of the other prism and "trick it" into locking onto the peanut. Not sure this will be possible with the mt1000, I used to do it with the Sokkia robot even with it's RC unit.. before I started using reflectorless a lot. The Sokkia reflectorless was also garbage... I'd sight it in and walk over to the corner and it would never be on the actual corner, always offset a bit. The Leica reflectorless was night and day difference from the Sokkia.?ÿ
@dmyhill?ÿ
Definitely the way to go when you actually have an I man.?ÿ
I used to take a sharpie and mark the inside corners so I could make them out from the instrument. Corners being rounded always makes it harder to see from a distance.?ÿ
If I don't have a decent perpendicular shot I usually sight it in then walk over with a piece of wood to hold against the corner creating a perpendicular corner.?ÿ
The office won't probably won't like me if I take 2 shots and leave it to them to intersect, at least on buildings under construction, they would consider it unnecessary work... If it was a really critical point I would just take the shots and calc the intersection myself on the data collector so it's already done.?ÿ
One question I've been meaning to ask... would shooting in 2 faces reflectorless help with Trimble's handicap in this area? It would still be easier than trying to get it with a mini prism by myself.?ÿ
@350rocketmike Yes it's possible.?ÿ You'll setup a prism type in Access for the mini then when you're ready to use the mini, just toggle the prism in Access and it will stay locked on the MT-1000, treating it as a passive prism, then put the mini in front of the MT-1000 and the gun will lock on it.?ÿ I usually toss my hat on the MT-1000 to be sure it keeps tracking the mini.?ÿ Alternatively, I just put the MT-1000 on the inside corner and use the distance offset routine to specify an offset to the rear and also a bit to the side if necessary.
I shoot pretty much everything that sticks up with reflectorless. Signs, trees, lampposts, power poles, and especially building walls. With building walls I do not attempt to?ÿ get the corner. I get the face of the building and project the lines to form corners back at the office.?ÿ ?ÿ
I'm working in an urban environment these days. The trees I tie are almost universally street trees. As such, the precise locations may be critical. So I'm tying, reflectorless, 3 shots on the circumference of the trunk. From that I can develop the 3 point circle and determine the diameter accurately. This creates a bit of work, but not as much as?ÿ measuring the diameter with a diameter tape, figuring the offsets to apply, entering all that info, etc.?ÿ ?ÿ?ÿ
