What I found really nice about Vision is using the camera to verify the gun is locked on to the passive peanut and not the reflective tape on my vest.?ÿ
I would really like to have an active tracking peanut prism.
I sometimes use the MT-1000 with no pole, just a point. But it is still not as accurate as the peanut.
Just a couple or three of the MT-1000's LEDs on a standard setout prism. Might even be able to do it as a device that clips on.
I'm sure it would reduce frustration, save time and increase accuracy on my worksites
I too wish they would adapt it to the mini/peanut prism.
Or produce an adjustable bracket with LEDs on them that we could attach to a custom prism and just use in semi-active mode? Would track well enough to get close, then initiate a measurement for a tight check.
@jimcox?ÿ
That would be cool but I'd be so afraid of losing something so expensive. I'm amazed I haven't lost the peanut prism for about 3 years now since I got it.?ÿ
@rover83?ÿ
From what I've read semi active mode is the best option for most shots, so it switches to passive to take the shot.... should I be switching to active only for rough topo shots in a field or is that going to make a worthwhile difference in speed? I did find the other crews S5 took longer to shoot than my old Leica does even in IR standard mode. I assume that's because it's switching between active and passive to take the shot? Obviously the Trimble is faster to gain lock, loses lock less frequently and flips faces for double angles faster so it will save me some time in the end, especially when I don't have to deal with crashing software multiple times a day (fieldgenius).?ÿ
@party-chef It shows the diameter after you've turned both angles and gotten the DR shot.?ÿ I'm near positive that it also stores the either the radius or diameter in the raw data.
@350rocketmike I run in semi-active most of the time because it's the best combo of tracking and accuracy. I switch to single face and tracking mode for topo type shots where speed is more important than being dead nuts accurate.?ÿ Active mode will be less accurate as your vertical angles increase and when you're trying to shoot through obstructions where some of the diodes are being blocked by building corners, leaves, etc.
Yup, it's good to remember that for vertical angles, active mode works by splitting the difference between the top and bottom ring of diodes. That's why Trimble literature recommends not going below or above 15 degrees VA in active mode (think it's 30 for semi-active and passive), and why I pretty much do what @stephen-ward does. Semi-active is best of both worlds when you do need good vertical, and active is super fast for when it's not as critical but you have good line of sight.
Regarding the time difference between instruments, in my experience if you set them up the exact same way they are pretty close in terms of time to take a shot. By the same way, I mean you would have to go into the settings and make sure they are both only averaging 3 observations, rather than 3 for one and 5 for the other, and are both in standard not tracking mode.
@rover83?ÿ
That said, how many observations do you prefer to set it to?
I don't even know how many it takes with my current Leica, I have standard or fast IR mode and I use standard for control and backsight shots, usually fast for stakings within 0.010m. There is a difference but both are fairly quick. Tracking shots are instant, I only use that on rough topo.?ÿ
And a lot of times I'm not doing vertical at all but I am still setting nails within about 0.005m horizontally, I assumed I would atill want semi active mode for that?
?ÿ
@350rocketmike I run in semi-active most of the time because it's the best combo of tracking and accuracy. I switch to single face and tracking mode for topo type shots where speed is more important than being dead nuts accurate.?ÿ Active mode will be less accurate as your vertical angles increase and when you're trying to shoot through obstructions where some of the diodes are being blocked by building corners, leaves, etc.
Quick question. In tracking mode using semi active prism is it still measuring the prism passively? I believe it is as it does take a fraction of a second longer. Or does semi-active truly only work fully with standard measuring mode?
?ÿ
@totalsurv I'm not entirely sure but I believe the difference between standard mode and tracking mode is just the number of measurements that it takes.?ÿ?ÿ
@totalsurv I'm not entirely sure but I believe the difference between standard mode and tracking mode is just the number of measurements that it takes.?ÿ?ÿ
That is my understanding as well. If you're running in semi-active and switch to tracking mode, it's only going to use the LED diodes for the shot. The measurement has to be a standard measurement for it to switch.
?ÿ
@rover83?ÿ
That said, how many observations do you prefer to set it to?
I don't even know how many it takes with my current Leica, I have standard or fast IR mode and I use standard for control and backsight shots, usually fast for stakings within 0.010m. There is a difference but both are fairly quick. Tracking shots are instant, I only use that on rough topo.?ÿ
And a lot of times I'm not doing vertical at all but I am still setting nails within about 0.005m horizontally, I assumed I would atill want semi active mode for that?
I have mine set to average 3 for a standard observation, I think the default is 5. And I would recommend semi-active mode even if you don't need perfect vertical. In my experience it does tend to be tighter overall.
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
I presume height is of no importance when you shoot like this?
I presume height is of no importance when you shoot like this?
That is true. These things are not included in my DTM.
In fact, I set the rod height to 99 feet when making these reflectorless ties. If I do nothing more that makes the elevations absurd. Nevertheless, I always run my data through StarNet, pro forma. When I do I add the inline command?ÿ ".3r" before the block of reflectorless shots and ".3d" at the end of the block. This causes the 3d data to be treated a 2d data and the elevations on these shots to be "-99999".?ÿ Very clearly out of range. Then, the points are sorted in C3d to layers that are not included in the DTM data. So there are a number of lines of defense in my procedure to keep these shots from fouling the DTM data.
If I should happen to be shooting something with reflectorless for valid elevation I'll use a 0.00 rod height. Or whatever might be appropriate in the circumstance. But those are rare special occasions. Not routine.?ÿ
I use C3d, and the survey figures on the following layers go into my DTM:
- gutter line (aka flow line)
- top back of curb line
- edge of concrete
- edge of pavement (asphalt or brick)
- edge of gravel surface
- change of grade breakline?ÿ
then the spot elevation point group is added. Note that I have no separate codes for top, toe, centerline, ditch, creek, swale, etc. Nor any for top of concrete, top of asphalt, brick, gravel, ground surface, etc. Just breakline, and spot elevation. ?ÿ Nothing else goes into my DTM. No fence shots, no building walls. This does mean that I need breaklines near buildings and the top and bottom of retaining walls. But I'm getting those wall shots reflectorless and super quick, and only need shots at changes of direction. And I don't need to physically penetrate the bushes that are ubiquitous along building walls to get dual purpose building corner/ground shots.?ÿ
There was a time before reflectorless, before data collectors, before digital cameras on every cell phone, and before Google Earth Street View when it made sense to dogmatically limit the number of shots and make each shot serve dual purposes if you could.?ÿ And to highly detail the shot descriptors.?ÿ Those days are in the past. Make your field procedures work with the resources you have at hand today, not what worked 20 years ago.?ÿ
I presume height is of no importance when you shoot like this?
That is true. These things are not included in my DTM.
In fact, I set the rod height to 99 feet when making these reflectorless ties. If I do nothing more that makes the elevations absurd. Nevertheless, I always run my data through StarNet, pro forma. When I do I add the inline command?ÿ ".3r" before the block of reflectorless shots and ".3d" at the end of the block. This causes the 3d data to be treated a 2d data and the elevations on these shots to be "-99999".?ÿ Very clearly out of range. Then, the points are sorted in C3d to layers that are not included in the DTM data. So there are a number of lines of defense in my procedure to keep these shots from fouling the DTM data.
If I should happen to be shooting something with reflectorless for valid elevation I'll use a 0.00 rod height. Or whatever might be appropriate in the circumstance. But those are rare special occasions. Not routine.?ÿ
I use C3d, and the survey figures on the following layers go into my DTM:
- gutter line (aka flow line)
- top back of curb line
- edge of concrete
- edge of pavement (asphalt or brick)
- edge of gravel surface
- change of grade breakline?ÿ
then the spot elevation point group is added. Note that I have no separate codes for top, toe, centerline, ditch, creek, swale, etc. Nor any for top of concrete, top of asphalt, brick, gravel, ground surface, etc. Just breakline, and spot elevation. ?ÿ Nothing else goes into my DTM. No fence shots, no building walls. This does mean that I need breaklines near buildings and the top and bottom of retaining walls. But I'm getting those wall shots reflectorless and super quick, and only need shots at changes of direction. And I don't need to physically penetrate the bushes that are ubiquitous along building walls to get dual purpose building corner/ground shots.?ÿ
There was a time before reflectorless, before data collectors, before digital cameras on every cell phone, and before Google Earth Street View when it made sense to dogmatically limit the number of shots and make each shot serve dual purposes if you could.?ÿ And to highly detail the shot descriptors.?ÿ Those days are in the past. Make your field procedures work with the resources you have at hand today, not what worked 20 years ago.?ÿ
Very nice workflow Norman. So your "change of grade breakline" can be used for any sort of material or position on site.?ÿ
Consistency is key. Makes life a lot easier in the end.
If I should happen to be shooting something with reflectorless for valid elevation I'll use a 0.00 rod height.
I'd do that as standard practice (after all that is the "rod" height you are using). It's surprising how often you later want to know the rough height of the point you aimed at, if only as a check on something else.
Mike, please let us know about your experience with the S series robot once you had some time to use it. I do construction layout and an active prism sounds appealing. Let us know about the accuracy and the Reflectorless measurements and also how well it works with a passive mini prism. Thanks.
If I should happen to be shooting something with reflectorless for valid elevation I'll use a 0.00 rod height.
I'd do that as standard practice (after all that is the "rod" height you are using). It's surprising how often you later want to know the rough height of the point you aimed at, if only as a check on something else.
Our policy is similar. We have the crews retain/note the true rod height, but add a "no surface" code for any shots that are not wanted in the surface - it's just tacked on to the end of the feature code and the Surface/Contour point group will automatically remove it from the group while still symbolizing/layering it correctly. If we need the elevation, it's there.
Difference between s5 and 7 is mainly angle accuracy. I used a s6 with vision for 4 years and very rarely sighted through the optical telescope, using the video feed. Track light would be useful for a person very new to surveying and new to robotics, but it??s like training wheels of which you can??t change.?ÿ
a standard prism is set in TA as custom prism. Each target has its own auto lock setting. Custom prism only as passive option. On the MT1000, the recommended auto lock setting is ??semi-active? which means the diodes (active) are used during searching, but once locked on it uses the prism and passive tracking mode. That allows the tracking to continue if something blocks your diodes.
so those if you putting a mini prism in front of your MT1000 are really missing the boat. I now use a SX10 which can track only passive prisms. I very, very rarely have a tracking issue with car headlights.
Difference between s5 and 7 is mainly angle accuracy.
Both S5 and S7 come in 1" 2" 3" or 5" versions
Both have DRPlus edm
The difference is that the S5 does not have a scan function, and appears to only come with Tracklight
The brochure here finishes off with a useful comparison chart.
When you use the reflector less dr mode. It defaults to height of 0.00 or ? ?ÿ If you set it to ? In rod height no elevation will be calculated. Same if you use rod and any prism. If you delete the rod height out and leave the ? Only northing and easting will be calculated. Even in raw dat hz angle za angle slope distance. You can set up cad to see this as there infamous-999999999. ?ÿThat use to drive me nuts on jobs because you would tell the robot to turn to whatever stake out point and some cad person exported that out and it was seen as an elevation. ?ÿSo no need to place a rod height of 99 or 0 if you don??t want and elevation. Just make it the ? ?ÿ O and 99 -999999999 or any other real number is or can be an elevation. ?ÿI use to take and eliminate the -99999999 out of cad junkies calcs for field crews. This was in survey controller. So my csv would be something like N 1000.000, E 5000.00,, end of pipe. ?ÿ ?ÿBut just wanted to throw that out. ?ÿI assume all of this is still correct in Trimble Access if I am wrong I apologize. I am just now re learning the Trimble Access. But it should still work. If you do use 0 in dr it will calculate the elevation. ?ÿ? No elevation. I hope i am right i need to check some data i did last Friday and will know for sure. ?ÿ
@ramses?ÿ
I will do that. I'll do some side by side reflectorless comparisons since we're keeping the Leica as a backup.?ÿ