> Maybe... not just "check and adjust" issues.
>
> I've never used a 360 prism for traversing, especially not with a standard prism
> for a backsight. I believe that could generate some error for the ATR given how it corrects to the prism image.
>
> I don't use a 360 for much more than low precision topo work.
>
> Traversing, I am more likely to use matched prisms, and tripods.
>
> I've found this GREATLY reduces traverse error (except for what's off behind the gun, especially on one of my off days).
>
> Cheers!
I absolutely agree, the procedures seem to match the outcome.
Ralph
Bear Bait,
I will admit that the Leica SurvCE was a complete disaster in many ways. That was a very painful experience when I was in Leica Tech Support at the time. This was Leica's first attempt to get an popular software onboard there hardware. The branding of the software as Leica SurvCE was a very bad idea. I still do not know why Leica wanted to brand the software because it was the same version of Carlson that was on every other data collector on the market.
The Leica onboard software up to the TPS1100 was dismal. You had to have a third-party software to be productive unless you were just a die hard Leica fan. The TPS1200 started to get good. The System1200 version of Leica SmartWorx had a learning curve but was pretty decent. The new Viva SmartWorx is the new standard as far as I am concerned. Every software has missing bells and whistles that maybe somebody else has but Leica has many that others do not have.
Now... this is where the rubber meets the road... Who do you call when you have a software or hardware issue? Leica depends on their distributors and direct sales to support their products and maintain good customer relationships. It sounds as though you did not have a good experience. That is unacceptable but unfortunately it happens. I am not making excuses because I was working for Leica Tech Support when this product was launched all the way until it was long off the market.
I would say that the shroud you encountered was sold by someone who was not honest about what was happening and that is a definite black eye for Leica.
This is what I was saying above, the ATR may be having "heartburn" with the 360 prism in "traversing" versus topo or staking.
Try using another standard 30mm offset prism (if you have one) for your foresight when you traverse, and see if that makes the difference.
I know that if the ATR is looking at the "split" in a 360 prism it might select either side of that split, making for an inconsistent angle reading, while giving fairly consistent distance readings. I noticed this on our old 1105 as well.
Just a thought....
My crew uses a ts12, a grz 122 prism for front sight , a cst berger round prism for back sight, and an allegro mx data collector with surv ce 2. Something or other. Pole and bi pod front. Tripod and tribrach back. Except for the first one a few months ago, I have closed every loop I've run over 1 in 75000. Our company has never seen closures that good consistently. I'm talking about 10-80 acre sites as well. To me, Carlson works great with the ts12. Our company has been a topcon company for 20 years, but after seeing these results, that is changing.
Yes, at anything less that about 200' the ATR will pick one or the other side of the 360 prism, depending on things like which side is brighter or which side it sees first (turning clockwise in powersearch it will see the left edge as seen from the instrument first.) Use a full size conventional prism and the problem goes away.
It seems possible that it is the 3rd party software; other than the above I have never seen our Leica 1200 return a big split on anything unless the ATR needs adjusting, and the split goes away after that.
Remember (n-2*180)
Over the years, I have tried to come up with a rule of thumb for how much total angular error is typical if everything is done very carefully and conditions are optimal. I began dividing the total angular error by the number of angles in the traverse.
I came up with an error factor of roughly 1.3
Say there is 10 angles in the traverse, I should have about 13 seconds of error.
I have used this check as a way of making a decent traverse great by re-turning a suspect angle. Odd method, but it works most of the time for me.
Didn't mention that some of the cross checks on my 5 leg traverse were done with a conventional prism and tripod for backsight and foresight. This is actually where I got the worse results on one setup and on another setup got about the same results as I was getting with the 360° prism and bipod. So I don't think that is the issue. The problem is no consistency, some times it will repeat measurements within 4",but then 2 minutes later the angle measurements will vary by 20". Checking the backsight after one turn will have this 20" error also and we always use a conventional prism on a tripod for the backsight.
I wanted to test the traverse using a bipod and 360° prism because this is usually the way operate on the job site.
Does seem like the issue is with the Carlson sofware mating with the Leica Instrument, but if this is the case why were we told that this was the best combination by our Leica dealer when we purchased this instrument new? We were told that the Leica software at the time was pretty bad. (2006)
I appreciate the comments posted by "surveythemark". I find, and I think that others will agree with me that his comments on this board are both helpful and productive to the Leica users, as well as others. He obviously has had a ton of experience as both a user and an employee of the manufacturer. I find it funny that your negativity is pointed at him when he is trying to help. Where the heck are the Topcon dealers, the Sokkia dealers, the Trimble dealers, etc on this site that offer their help to complete strangers?!? Between the two of us we listed dozens of reasons why this user could be having this problem. Could it be software? Sure. Could it be the tripod? Hell yeah, I've been repairing instruments for twenty years...ALL MANUFACTURERS and 8 out of 10 times, instruments that come back after being calibrated are being used with loose tripods, or secondary tribraches. Could it be the instrument? Yeah, that too. Don't tell me that everytime you call those other manufacturers they always pick up the phone willing to help, I know for a fact they don't.
This is a dealer/customer problem. If the dealer was doing what they were supposed to and the customer had a good relationship with them this problem wouldn't be posted on a message board. It would have been taken care of by them, in a timely manner.
We all know that Surveyors hold their brands as tight as their reputations. I find that funny. Without a good dealer and a good service and support team...locally...you might as well use nothing. I favor Leica instruments. Why? Because with my service and my support I know that my customers are using the best piece of equipment that they can be using in the field. I know that I'll be there for them if they go down and I'll have something to them quicker then they can get off the job and back to the office if it is needed.
But hey, someone send me a link for these unbreakable Robots you guys have found. I may need to start selling something else.
what are you using for prism offsets with this mismash of prisms?
the swiss miss only likes to see one kind of prism in a setup, maybe that's just in resections, but it can bite sometimes in the difference between a setup and a sideshot and a stakeout, and that's just inside the instrument and who knows how a 3rd party data collector is going to handle it.
have you tested that Carlson knows which prism is which and applies the offsets correctly?
have you tested the prisms to see what their offset is from Leica's perspective on the number line?
simple traverse adjustment (angle balance) isn't going to tell you where the error is.
if you are not using least squares to resolve all this, when you try to resolve the cross ties they will look like angle error when you are looking at prism offset error... just possibilities ... it's all stuff to be aware of or maybe even check.
But ... It does sound like the Brand X data collector is not being consistent with how it handles the ATR offset. If you turn off the ATR everywhere (in the instrument, in the DC) and shoot a set, by eye do you get the same split? Probably not. OK, big waste of time. What you really want to know is does the Leica instrument repeat well in both faces once the ATR is adjusted? I betcha it does. Now throw away the DC and use the Leica onboard stuff.
I went through all this once. I bought a robot and a 360 and nothing closed worth a darn. I borrowed tripods and random tribrachs and random glass to fulfill the old superstition that you needed tripods and tribrachs at every setup, and STILL NOTHING CLOSED. I tried various combinations, learned to adjust tribrachs and bubbles, ran the "check and adjust" on the instrument ... it got better but never as good as the instrument spec would suggest.
One day I went and got 2 more of everything Leica -- tripods, carriers, tribrachs, 0mm glass, and suddenly it closed around my yard at a million to one, 4 setups in 400 feet roughly.
The next day I woke up and traversed the yard again, only this time with one rod in a bipod and one glass, and walked it all BSD-FSD-BSR-FSR, just to be pedantic about it. Closed about one in half a million. The extra tribrachs-tripods-carrriers and glass have been spares ever since. I pretty much do robotics with one glass (a cylindrical Leica -34.5mm er... 0mm) and a rod ever since then. Mostly gave up the bipod and working towards just a plumb bob.
Cwlawly,
I also appreciate the comments from “surveythemark” and yourself concerning Leica problems – as long as you don’t automatically blame something other than Leica for the problems. As far as personal attack is concerned, surveythemark responded to my comments about my experiences with Leica. I never mentioned him or you so why are you directing your comments to me instead of toward the Leica customer?
I did respond a little harsh to “surveythemark” but the Leica rhetoric sends me over the edge.
Let’s be clear to everyone here though, I believe you also are a Leica rep and make money from the sale of Leica equipment, if I am wrong than please clarify that.
Also, the things I have encountered are some dealer problems and some Leica company policy, neither of which, have you had any knowledge of or participated in as far as I know, so please don’t make it sound like it was some off the wall dealer and then deliver yet again the ever popular
“ IT’S NOT LEICA’S FAULT “
Check the horizontal circle.
Setup two targets, approx 120 degrees apart from your instrument.
Shoot several sets to both, then remove the instrument from the tribrach, turn the base 120 degrees and repeat.
Do all 3 possibilities and check your angles.
We had similar issue with a ts15.
Don't use a 360 target for traversing until your absolutely sure you can prevent it being a source of error.
I forgot to add this - From what I have seen what you and surveythemark do for Leica customers on this site is to be commended as long as you are not getting paid to do this. If you are getting paid then its your job to help Leica customers.
I would love it if you were my dealer, I would rather stay a Leica Surveyor and successfully use Leica equipment in my business. Unfortunately Leica doesn’t fix problems because that’s what dealers are for, according to Leica.
I have asked other dealers if I could purchase Leica instruments, GPS from them and they have told me that Leica uses exclusive dealer areas and if I was to try and go around that with them than it could jeopardize their dealership.
I have to tell you that if everyone that wanted a survey in my area was required to come to me to get it than I would be on easy street.
> I appreciate the comments posted by "surveythemark". I find, and I think that others will agree with me that his comments on this board are both helpful and productive to the Leica users, as well as others. He obviously has had a ton of experience as both a user and an employee of the manufacturer. I find it funny that your negativity is pointed at him when he is trying to help. Where the heck are the Topcon dealers, the Sokkia dealers, the Trimble dealers, etc on this site that offer their help to complete strangers?!? Between the two of us we listed dozens of reasons why this user could be having this problem. Could it be software? Sure. Could it be the tripod? Hell yeah, I've been repairing instruments for twenty years...ALL MANUFACTURERS and 8 out of 10 times, instruments that come back after being calibrated are being used with loose tripods, or secondary tribraches. Could it be the instrument? Yeah, that too. Don't tell me that everytime you call those other manufacturers they always pick up the phone willing to help, I know for a fact they don't.
>
I agree, Surveythemark is head and shoulders above anything I've ever dealt with from Trimble USA. He has Survey Experience and he's well versed on the equipment.
Keep up the good posts.
Cheers
Ralph
I understand exactly.
Leica still uses pretty exclusive dealers. There are so many negatives associated with this (i.e.. a bad dealer) but there are some positives associated with it. For example, we repair everything, however, Leica is the only manufacturer that actually demands a standardized repair shop. In fact, they audit the authorized repair shops to make sure they have proper tooling, are properly setup, that the tools are in the correct calibration/condition they should be in, are ESD (static) compliant, etc. The process is grueling and expensive but it allows for the repair process to be correct in every aspect. In fact, because our office repairs other brands (Trimble, Topcon, etc) we have brought that into the rest allowing us to properly repair and calibrate instruments. We believe our customers deserve the best we can give them. That all being said, Leica is becoming less exclusive as we see with the new Geomax dealers.
I don't get paid for being on this site. I started reading it so I could keep active in the survey community, other than what we deal with here in NC. While a lot of this site is opinion related, I have learned quite a bit. It has helped me support my customers and has made me a better salesperson.
I grew up doing this. I learned to appreciate the Surveyor, and their work. For me, I like making money, but if I'm not happy doing it and Im not helping to make someone else happy I might as well find another job.
In my opinion, measurement adjustments (other than ppm for distances) are not necessary for a trip to the local NGS baseline (verify prism offsets and EDM) and a run around a triangle traverse , manually sighting a plumb bob string and recording/averaging angle measurements. Of course the tribracs and tripods need checked first.
Will least squares allow for a cross check on a triangle traverse? 😉
Assuming everything checks (distances and angles), you can proceed trouble shooting robotic sighting errors and data collection/reduction issues. I would run the traverse manually AND robotically and compare the two.
Since prism constants are easily determined/checked against manufactures specs, do you suppose the quality difference between third party prisms and Leica's prisms has to do with how the robot sights the prism (quality of glass and cut)?
I had a problem with my 1205 once with angle errors. Found out it wasn't the instrument at all, but the tripod legs were loose on the head. Tightened them up and had no more problems. Sometimes we forget the simple things.
BearBait,
I am a Surveyor first, Tech Support second and salesman last in they way we run our business. I can assure you I do not get paid for posting. I was always reviewing RPLS.com before they changed it and I was pleasantly surprised when BeerLeg.com started up. I am just trying to help.
I read all the other posts... if they are interesting... and respond when I can help. I usually steer clear of the opinions on boundary issues ( I am registered in LA and MS) just because they get hijacked too easily.
I am like everyone else on this board... just trying to share information and help when I can.
I used a Lieca System 1200 from 2006-2007. The hardware was great. I had a hard time using the Leica onboard software, but eventually got used to it. I was not a power user by any means.
I have to agree about the prisms.
Our dealer told us that we needed to use the Leica circular prisms for traversing and control work. The 360 prism was not designed for the control work, and that if we used it to set fly points off of our main traverse, then we needed to make sure that the yellow arrow was pointed towards the instrument.
I generally got pretty good results with the instrument, and it had great battery life.
I run a Topcon now, but did like the 1200 hardware when I used it. I did not use it long enough, or have enough say in the purchasing of the equipment to get all the modules of the Leica onboard software that we needed, but I was able ot get the job done.
> We are running Carlson SurvCE Version 1.61.03 which was purchased with our instrument in 2006. Do you know if this is a faulty version? Do you know what versions to use?
I skimmed the Carlson SurvCE change log (PDF), and it looks like there were several Leica-oriented fixes or improvements that were incorporated into SurvCE between version 1.61.03 and the final 1.67 version:
If you would like to apply version 1.67 to your environment, you can freely download from the Carlson SurvCE Resources site. Otherwise, feel free to contact me with questions at your convenience, I'll do my best to assist you.