I am truly excited about this new feature. Javad was so incredibly excited to offer this application and it has already lived up to our great expectations.?ÿ
http://www.javad.com/jgnss/javad/news/pr20200703.html
Several years ago, Javad developed DPOS, a cloud-based service for post-processing Javad base station data to the CORS. Around 2015, Javad added processing base-rover vectors to the cloud service which added an unprecedented capability for surveyors. No need for download cables, office software, manually processing and editing results and exporting to yet another software for further use. The cloud-based application was robust enough to deliver results that were as good as any results from a desktop application, without all the effort.
?ÿ
With RTPK the post-processor is now in the box. No need for an internet connection. Results are post-processed in near real-time before the user even walks away from the point. The rover gathers the correction stream from the base (or network) and creates a raw data file. The rover also collects a raw data file from the signals it observes. At the user's prompting, the application begins processing while RTK is ongoing. The results are presented graphically along with the RTK position. The general consensus has been that when RTK and post-processing agree, the solution is highly reliable, regardless of environment.?ÿ
?ÿ
Many years ago I dreamed of a receiver with post-processing onboard, but the technology of the day was simply not mature enough. Today with the incredible processing power available, the unbelievable number of satellites being tracked, and the years of processing experience that have accrued, we now have fast and reliable processing that can help demonstrate and RTK solution is good, or, in some cases even yield a good solution when RTK cannot.
?ÿ
As useful as RTPK is, I believe that we've only scratched the surface of what it can do. It remains an exciting time to be a RTK surveyor.
?ÿ
Very Cool!?ÿ
It really is. RTK and Post-processing look at data very differently. Each approach has its relative strengths. For years we've gathered more data than needed for post processing to ensure that the processing would succeed, because the cost to return to a point was greater than the additional time spent on point. However when you compound all of that extra time spent on a point by every point you've ever occupied the additional time is tremendous. With RTPK you can keep processing in real time until the results are successful. It's amazing.
?ÿ
Here is a video from Matt Sibole using the new Triumph-LS Plus with RTPK in a difficult environment.
?ÿ
So how much longer do you need to occupy an RTK point to save the observation files needed to post-process that same point? If longer than the RTK occupation, are you not defeating the purpose of using RTK in the first place?
You don't need to post process in the office.?ÿ You can post process a point and compare it to your RTK while making another observation.?ÿ You can keep collecting RTPK and RTK point until you are satisfied that you have an accurate point.
So how much longer do you need to occupy an RTK point to save the observation files needed to post-process that same point?
Standard Surveyor Answer No. 714: "It Depends". 🙂
?ÿ
In seriousness, I've been very impressed with how little data is required for the post-processor to get a correct result. I was using this feature a couple of months ago at a distance of about 5 miles from my base (using TCP over cellular). I was using four constellations and I was locating a county road centerline with trees on either side of the road, open sky overhead. I was getting results in 15 seconds that agreed with the RTK result. Maximum recommended occupation time for Javad's RTPK is 6 minutes when using four constellations (duration depends on canopy, with 6 minutes being recommended for heavy canopy). This doesn't mean post-processing always has a result at 6 minutes, only that more data beyond this is unhelpful to the processor and it is better to start again. But usually, I would say even in medium to heavy canopy (for my work area in East Texas), six minutes or less will provide a reliable result even in canopy. I often find 3 minutes to be suitable for medium canopy and I really enjoy seeing RTK and RTPK agreement as a form of verification on my RTK observation.
?ÿ
Sometimes RTK is more than adequate to the task and post-processing is unnecessarily redundant. Usually, for observations less than 30 seconds, I would give RTK the edge over post-processing. For observations longer than 60 seconds, I would give post-processing a slight edge over RTK, increasingly so with more time. But as I said before, I'm very happy to have both and would not want to be without either.?ÿ
3-6 minutes to get an agreement between RTK/PRTK? Might as well use the TS to measure the road points and use?ÿ RTK on intermediate traverse points that are in the open for rotation and adjustments.
I am not sure how many TS points of the roads you will be able to get in 3-6 minutes but I am sure it will be more than your 1 RTK/PRTK point. My former boss used to drill into us newbies on the job that the newer high-tech survey gears should make the job go faster not slower. The job needs to be done faster in order to justify the high costs of investments in those new instruments. We used to hear the same repeated lecture everytime we get a new equipment - EDM, TS, 1-sec TS, Prismless TS, L1 GPS, L1/L2 GPS, RTK. Sorry that he is no longer around or we would be hearing him for the drones, Lidar equipment.
?ÿ
Reread what i said entirely. I've had agreement on road centerline shots 5 miles from the base in 15 seconds. But more to the point it's a tool. Use it when it makes sense. Don't try to apply it in all cases if a better tool is available for the task.?ÿ
If you walk a half an hour to a remote corner and can get both an RTK and a post processed solution in 3-6 minutes I think you will be pretty happy.?ÿ Every time I do that I turn to my helper and say "it sure beats traversing!"
Licensed Land Surveyor
Finger Lakes Region, Upstate New York
@jt1950
It's all relative.
If you had 10 shots, 10 feet apart, in the deep canopy, a robot would serve you very well.
If you had 10 shots, 200' apart, in deep canopy, and you spent 10 or so minutes each, or if you had 10 shots 500 feet apart..... You can see that the total station wins on short shots, and gps wins on the ones far apart. The further apart, the greater the margin of difference.
Thank you,
Nate
