MightyMoe, post: 455914, member: 700 wrote: I haven't seen that, there would have to be an issue with a set-up for that to happen.
What setup would affect the Cogo calculations? That was my suspecion also.
Skeeter1996, post: 455940, member: 9224 wrote: What setup would affect the Cogo calculations? That was my suspecion also.
bad calibration would do it
Skeeter1996, post: 455940, member: 9224 wrote: What setup would affect the Cogo calculations? That was my suspecion also.
actually Skeeter I'm just guessing, without looking at how you are set-up I can't say, there were lots of issues with DC files over the years, you need to be careful
MightyMoe, post: 455946, member: 700 wrote: bad calibration would do it
But the coordinates are exactly the same each calculation method is using. How would a calibration affect an inverse unless it's doing it in the background?
MightyMoe, post: 455948, member: 700 wrote: actually Skeeter I'm just guessing, without looking at how you are set-up I can't say, there were lots of issues with DC files over the years, you need to be careful
Yep, that's my warning. That's why I avoid using the DC to calculate positions in the field.
Skeeter1996, post: 455951, member: 9224 wrote: Yep, that's my warning. That's why I avoid using the DC to calculate positions in the field.
Everything should work, I had issues with TS and GPS back in the day, also you must understand that GPS files are 3D and you can have issues with certain processes because of that.
I was trying to lay out a 1/16th corner once using stake a line and no way could I get it to work with the station layout. I would mean the distance and create a point, then inverse and the distances would be "off" a tenth. It was because the 1/4 was in a valley and the sec cor was on a mountain, large elevation change the 1/16 was in the valley and the last 1/4 mile had most of the elevation change. It was the first job I ever used GPS on. The Trimble guys just told me we live in a 3 d world.
I was doing it inside a calibrated file, I don't know for sure if that was the issue, but if you project everything on a defined surface then that issue will go away.
MightyMoe, post: 455954, member: 700 wrote: Everything should work, I had issues with TS and GPS back in the day, also you must understand that GPS files are 3D and you can have issues with certain processes because of that.
I was trying to lay out a 1/16th corner once using stake a line and no way could I get it to work with the station layout. I would mean the distance and create a point, then inverse and the distances would be "off" a tenth. It was because the 1/4 was in a valley and the sec cor was on a mountain, large elevation change the 1/16 was in the valley and the last 1/4 mile had most of the elevation change. It was the first job I ever used GPS on. The Trimble guys just told me we live in a 3 d world.
I was doing it inside a calibrated file, I don't know for sure if that was the issue, but if you project everything on a defined surface then that issue will go away.
I don't remember the specific instance I encountered it. If the DC giving you slope distances there should be a toggle to change them to horizontal. I don't think slope was my problem. I think there's a bug in their inverse routine that calculates the inverse. There's no book of tables in the DC it has to calculate everything. Amazing what a DC is doing.
I have a new TSC3 now maybe it's fixed in there now. I'll have to check it out. I experienced it on my older TSC2
A Harris, post: 455623, member: 81 wrote: Where is my popcorn..........
I see Loyal pulling a cart and Skeeter1996 pushing a cart.
Opposite techniques.
I think Loyal and I should be charging admission.
Trolling never gets any bounty.............
Skeeter1996, post: 455969, member: 9224 wrote: I don't remember the specific instance I encountered it. If the DC giving you slope distances there should be a toggle to change them to horizontal. I don't think slope was my problem. I think there's a bug in their inverse routine that calculates the inverse. There's no book of tables in the DC it has to calculate everything. Amazing what a DC is doing.
You made me look:
My DC is a TSC2
inversing from point 210-58 the SW to NW corners of a Sec.17
210-58
DC- 359-56-35, 5255.80??
CAD- 359-56-35, 5255.80??
TBC- 359-56-35, 5255.80?? Grid
359-56-35, 5255.815?? Ground
359-55-37, 5254.80?? Geodetic north and ellipsoid distance.
It's important to make these systems mesh. Otherwise you can create all kinds of issues. You always need to keep checking, I no longer have a 41C so I can't help you there. This is an LDP projection, as you can see the central meridian is close to these section corners. The distance has 3PPM in it.
MightyMoe, post: 456011, member: 700 wrote: You made me look:
My DC is a TSC2
inversing from point 210-58 the SW to NW corners of a Sec.17210-58
DC- 359-56-35, 5255.80??
CAD- 359-56-35, 5255.80??
TBC- 359-56-35, 5255.80?? Grid
359-56-35, 5255.815?? Ground
359-55-37, 5254.80?? Geodetic north and ellipsoid distance.It's important to make these systems mesh. Otherwise you can create all kinds of issues. You always need to keep checking, I no longer have a 41C so I can't help you there. This is an LDP projection, as you can see the central meridian is close to these section corners. The distance has 3PPM in it.
It's possible that the calibration routine screwed things up. I don't trust it anymore so I don't use it.
Skeeter1996, post: 456033, member: 9224 wrote: It's possible that the calibration routine screwed things up. I don't trust it anymore so I don't use it.
I think it may have.
Skeeter1996, post: 456033, member: 9224 wrote: It's possible that the calibration routine screwed things up. I don't trust it anymore so I don't use it.
That would make sense if the calibration tilted the plane erroneously it might screw things up if you're not paying attention to elevations
Skeeter1996, post: 456037, member: 9224 wrote: That would make sense if the calibration tilted the plane erroneously it might screw things up if you're not paying attention to elevations
If the inverses are returning different results in the DC, CAD, and TBC there is something very wrong. That shouldn't happen. I wouldn't be surprised if it's the calibration.
