Skeeter1996, post: 455617, member: 9224 wrote: I feel I've begun to chase my tail now, Loyal. I've achieved my objective in surpassing the " Who'd like to go compare a R10 to a Javad" post replies.
I can see you're not going to share any of you system of correlating calculated to found corner positions. Can't say I learned much, but it's kept away from the dreary world of drafting.
So do we need to start posting more in the "who'd like to compare a R10 to a Javad" to get that thread to surpass this thread?
Scott Ellis, post: 455778, member: 7154 wrote: So do we need to start posting more in the "who'd like to compare a R10 to a Javad" to get that thread to surpass this thread?
Sure, why not?
:fever:
Loyal, post: 455600, member: 228 wrote: Well I do carry a Laptop in field (in the truck), and have since the mid-1980s (although the early ones I had didn't support CAD).
NAD83 Latitudes and Longitudes TIE all georeferenced Coordinate Systems TOGETHER, so that you can change from one to another without breaking a sweat. A formally defined LDP is no different in that regard than SPC or UTM.
Ellipsoid heights allow you to compute distances (horizontal) at whatever height you please, or mark-mark slope distances if you care about that (which sometimes comes in handy).
The METHOD that I have been describing works for BOTH RTK and Total Station field work (even handheld I suppose if that's your preference).
Loyal
Okay Loyal I'm not giving up. You've found your first corner. The bearing and distance to the next corner goes up and over a steep mountain. From plotting your previous survey on your topo map you know there is a road that goes right past your next corner. How do you navigate to that next corner?
Skeeter1996, post: 455817, member: 9224 wrote: Okay Loyal I'm not giving up. You've found your first corner. The bearing and distance to the next corner goes up and over a steep mountain. From plotting your previous survey on your topo map you know there is a road that goes right past your next corner. How do you navigate to that next corner?
Drive to it using my RTK.
😎
Loyal, post: 455579, member: 228 wrote: I use AutoCAD as a graphic database of sorts. Each Survey (usually a Mineral Survey or a particular PLSS "line" [Section Corner to Section Corner]) exists as a BLOCK in the Project .dwg. When I find [say] Corner No.1 of MS-xxxx, I grab that BLOCK and move Corner-1 Theo. over to Corner 1 Found. This moves the entire Survey (w/ Bearing Trees, Objects, Rocks, Shafts, Adits, and terrain calls) over to MY reality. Once I find [say] Corner No.2 of said MS, I'll rotate the entire Block to fit that particular Bearing, and usually move "up to Corner No.2." I DON'T (usually) do any scaling of the Block, but there are exceptions. Once I have found all of the Corners, the BLOCK has served its purpose, and is frozen.
Loyal
Oh my, there is another guy in 2017 that has found a use for a laptop.
Loyal, post: 455822, member: 228 wrote: Drive to it using my RTK.
😎
Okay good answer. How do you drive to it if you didnt localize or calibrate your GPS to the last and only corner you have found so far? If you haven't localized or calibrated your RTK is only able to navigate to your calculated position. If you're not calibrated to your last found corner. You're just navigating to your calculated point that hasn't been adjusted for reference to the found corner and you still have a difference in basis of bearing between your calculated survey and your GPS's bearing. You're lost because there are no fences or lines of occupation to go by. Just a big green grassy meadow. Where do you look?
BK9196, post: 455824, member: 12217 wrote: Oh my, there is another guy in 2017 that has found a use for a laptop.
I missed this post. I see what your doing. You're calibrating your graphic to the GPS location. I do the exact opposite. I calibrate the GPS to the graphic in my case calculated coordinates. What happens if you forget to turn off your laptop and when you get back to the truck. The battery is dead?
Skeeter1996, post: 455827, member: 9224 wrote: Okay good answer. How do you drive to it if you didnt localize or calibrate your GPS to the last and only corner you have found so far? If you haven't localized or calibrated your RTK is only able to navigate to your calculated position. If you're not calibrated to your last found corner. You're just navigating to your calculated point that hasn't been adjusted for reference to the found corner and you still have a difference in basis of bearing between your calculated survey and your GPS's bearing. You're lost because there are no fences or lines of occupation to go by. Just a big green grassy meadow. Where do you look?
You haven't even been reading my posts have you.
The theoretical coordinates are UPDATED each time I find a Corner. If I'm not by my Laptop, my trusty HP-41X is all that I need to do that. You forget (or don't get the fact) that the LDP is already aligned with the RECORD Basis of Bearing, and Ground Distances in the area. Whatever rotation there may be between the Monument to Monument REALITY, can be handled with a pencil & paper (if the batteries are dead in the 41). The RTK Software can also make short work of this, if you just push a few buttons. There is no need to "calibrate" to anything!
Loyal
Loyal, post: 455833, member: 228 wrote: You haven't even been reading my posts have you.
The theoretical coordinates are UPDATED each time I find a Corner. If I'm not by my Laptop, my trusty HP-41X is all that I need to do that. You forget (or don't get the fact) that the LDP is already aligned with the RECORD Basis of Bearing, and Ground Distances in the area. Whatever rotation there may be between the Monument to Monument REALITY, can be handled with a pencil & paper (if the batteries are dead in the 41). The RTK Software can also make short work of this, if you just push a few buttons. There is no need to "calibrate" to anything!
Loyal
Trimble data collector uses coordinates. I'm not aware of any software application they have that would perform a mass adjustment of search positions. I guess you could use a cogo routine to recalculate a position. I once had 97 pins along an irrigation ditch to find. All the pins we're buried. By using a 3 point callibration I either found a pin or staked a replacement pin location out. I can't imagine doing that with a HP41. I use mine to add and subtract and that's about all.
Skeeter,
Obviously we work on entirely different kinds of projects, and therefore have different "needs."
My work is nearly 100% Retracement of PLSS (rectangular) or Mineral Surveys. Record North is (or is supposed to be) Astronomical North (which for retracement purposes is (pretty much) equal to Geodetic North). Record Distance is expressed on or about the Surface of the Earth (for all practical purposes).
By DEFINING the LDP in those terms to start with, I am already "calibrated" to the Record.
Obviously the reality on the ground is always somewhat different (bad solar, poor chaining, whatever). Trying to "calibrate" to an 1872 GLO Plat is at best an exercise in futility. Finding the FIRST Corner isn't usually all that difficult (although the contrary can be shown), Once you KNOW the Geodetic/Geographic/LDP coordinate of that point, it is simply a matter of following the RECORD around the "parcel" in question.
Are there non-trivial rotations and/or scaling issues? Sometimes.
But, by using a formally defined LDP, I can have all of the USGS Quads, Aerial Photos, etc. correctly inserted into my drawing file, and each survey or line of survey reasonably well aligned thereto, long before any boots hit the ground. Are updates required as the project progresses? You bet! But the underlying (LDP) Coordinate System is fixed in time and space (and referenced to the NSRS).
This type of "system" (modus operandi) is not well suited to small drive by projects, but I don't do those. In 32 years of private practice, I have never worked on a project that didn't span several weeks, and most run for months, years, or even decades.
You mileage may vary.
Loyal
Loyal, post: 455845, member: 228 wrote: Skeeter,
Obviously we work on entirely different kinds of projects, and therefore have different "needs."
My work is nearly 100% Retracement of PLSS (rectangular) or Mineral Surveys. Record North is (or is supposed to be) Astronomical North (which for retracement purposes is (pretty much) equal to Geodetic North). Record Distance is expressed on or about the Surface of the Earth (for all practical purposes).
By DEFINING the LDP in those terms to start with, I am already "calibrated" to the Record.
Obviously the reality on the ground is always somewhat different (bad solar, poor chaining, whatever). Trying to "calibrate" to an 1872 GLO Plat is at best an exercise in futility. Finding the FIRST Corner isn't usually all that difficult (although the contrary can be shown), Once you KNOW the Geodetic/Geographic/LDP coordinate of that point, it is simply a matter of following the RECORD around the "parcel" in question.
Are there non-trivial rotations and/or scaling issues? Sometimes.
But, by using a formally defined LDP, I can have all of the USGS Quads, Aerial Photos, etc. correctly inserted into my drawing file, and each survey or line of survey reasonably well aligned thereto, long before any boots hit the ground. Are updates required as the project progresses? You bet! But the underlying (LDP) Coordinate System is fixed in time and space (and referenced to the NSRS).
This type of "system" (modus operandi) is not well suited to small drive by projects, but I don't do those. In 32 years of private practice, I have never worked on a project that didn't span several weeks, and most run for months, years, or even decades.
You mileage may vary.
Loyal
I think I get the picture now. You make alot of work for yourself, but obviously love it. I can accept your method, but I don't have the ambition to do it that way. That's why I calibrate.
Skeeter1996, post: 455851, member: 9224 wrote: I think I get the picture now. You make alot of work for yourself, but obviously love it. I can accept your method, but I don't have the ambition to do it that way. That's why I calibrate.
Oky Doky
:clink:
Loyal
That was like a bad ending to a bad movie that you only continue to watch because you can't sleep and there is nothing better on TV.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
BushAxe, post: 455860, member: 11897 wrote: That was like a bad ending to a bad movie that you only continue to watch because you can't sleep and there is nothing better on TV.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yeah, but I'm glad the discussion did not deteriorate to the point of sending someone to Banned Camp.
Skeeter1996, post: 455843, member: 9224 wrote: I once had 97 pins along an irrigation ditch to find. All the pins we're buried. By using a 3 point callibration I either found a pin or staked a replacement pin location
I usually proportion between the nearest found corners. I think calibrating to 3 points is good for recovery but not appropriate for setting corners.
Skeeter1996, post: 455843, member: 9224 wrote: Trimble data collector uses coordinates. I'm not aware of any software application they have that would perform a mass adjustment of search positions. I guess you could use a cogo routine to recalculate a position. I once had 97 pins along an irrigation ditch to find. All the pins we're buried. By using a 3 point callibration I either found a pin or staked a replacement pin location out. I can't imagine doing that with a HP41. I use mine to add and subtract and that's about all.
Why would I adjust the coordinates. You have that powerful system, you don't need to navigate to predetermined coordinates for each point with the Trimble DC. In fact that's been consistent since 1995 when I got my 4400's, it's one of the great things about using the GPS systems.
The last section I did I had a bit of info so before I went to the field I laid out the section using the GLO plat (the latest plat, all stones for this survey). I looked at photos and Google and put it on the ground the best I could. Then I did a batch coordinate calc on the end points of the lines and loaded those into the DC in my LDP projection (true northish very low PPMs).
Went to the field and set up the base on an auto point knowing it would be adjusted later.
The first and most important point I needed was the east 1/4 which I found (call it point #1) about 25 feet from the calc, not bad.
So I have a found stone and 7 coordinates for that section. I never even looked at any coordinate again.
I next went to the NE corner navigating to pt#1, zig-zaging through a ravine and along a ridge finally got me near the position of the NE corner and when the DC said go south 2640 to pt#1, I find the NE corner at almost due north 2620' from pt#1, then I put in a stakeout line between #I setting #1 as 0+00 and head south to the SE corner and at sta -2616 about 7' off line I find the SE corner, that is #3, then stake out to #3 and when my DC says to go almost due east 2619 I find the S1/4 (#4), stake out to #4 and when the DC says to go south 2630 and east 2630 on a grid stake out I find the W1/4 (#5), finally I stakeout to #2 and when it says to go east 2635 there is the N1/4 #6, that all is in moderately rough terrain, some ridges, some steep ravines, took all of 3 hours.
I didn't need the NW or SW corners, although a stock tank is over the NW corner I think.
I haven't used coordinates for this type of work in 20 years, I always stake to the found point, it's way faster and actually it's the way the figure was laid out on the ground. If I have a new plat for that section then forget coordinates, I just lay the plat on the ground real time. That is really easy, at least for me and my guys, they often go out with coordinates and bag them after one point is recovered.
You want to be pointed with the arrow I suppose to lead you to the point, usually I'm using a quad sheet to get close, going on a cardinal line is nice, but rare, generally there are ridges, streams, ect to get around, not really looking much at the DC as I move, get close then refine. Looking backward is second nature now.
I don't see how it's making a lot of work, it's way faster than going through a calibration.
MightyMoe, post: 455902, member: 700 wrote: Why would I adjust the coordinates. You have that powerful system, you don't need to navigate to predetermined coordinates for each point with the Trimble DC. In fact that's been consistent since 1995 when I got my 4400's, it's one of the great things about using the GPS systems.
The last section I did I had a bit of info so before I went to the field I laid out the section using the GLO plat (the latest plat, all stones for this survey). I looked at photos and Google and put it on the ground the best I could. Then I did a batch coordinate calc on the end points of the lines and loaded those into the DC in my LDP projection (true northish very low PPMs).
Went to the field and set up the base on an auto point knowing it would be adjusted later.
The first and most important point I needed was the east 1/4 which I found (call it point #1) about 25 feet from the calc, not bad.
So I have a found stone and 7 coordinates for that section. I never even looked at any coordinate again.
I next went to the NE corner navigating to pt#1, zig-zaging through a ravine and along a ridge finally got me near the position of the NE corner and when the DC said go south 2640 to pt#1, I find the NE corner at almost due north 2620' from pt#1, then I put in a stakeout line between #I setting #1 as 0+00 and head south to the SE corner and at sta -2616 about 7' off line I find the SE corner, that is #3, then stake out to #3 and when my DC says to go almost due east 2619 I find the S1/4 (#4), stake out to #4 and when the DC says to go south 2630 and east 2630 on a grid stake out I find the W1/4 (#5), finally I stakeout to #2 and when it says to go east 2635 there is the N1/4 #6, that all is in moderately rough terrain, some ridges, some steep ravines, took all of 3 hours.
I didn't need the NW or SW corners, although a stock tank is over the NW corner I think.
I haven't used coordinates for this type of work in 20 years, I always stake to the found point, it's way faster and actually it's the way the figure was laid out on the ground. If I have a new plat for that section then forget coordinates, I just lay the plat on the ground real time. That is really easy, at least for me and my guys, they often go out with coordinates and bag them after one point is recovered.
You want to be pointed with the arrow I suppose to lead you to the point, usually I'm using a quad sheet to get close, going on a cardinal line is nice, but rare, generally there are ridges, streams, ect to get around, not really looking much at the DC as I move, get close then refine. Looking backward is second nature now.
I don't see how it's making a lot of work, it's way faster than going through a calibration.
I do that alot when I've only got one corner to go from. It's another tool in the box.
billvhill, post: 455899, member: 8398 wrote: I usually proportion between the nearest found corners. I think calibrating to 3 points is good for recovery but not appropriate for setting corners.
I wonder about that. It seems to usually come up with the same point as porportioning does. I don't like to calculate corner positions in the field. It's hard to check them. A point between to corners on a line maybe, but not something any more complicated.
Have you ever noticed the cogo routine in a DC will give you a different inverse, than your 41C, or even your CAD program? I've gone back as far as a using a book of tables and the 41C is the best match.
Skeeter1996, post: 455909, member: 9224 wrote: I wonder about that. It seems to usually come up with the same point as porportioning does. I don't like to calculate corner positions in the field. It's hard to check them. A point between to corners on a line maybe, but not something any more complicated.
Have you ever noticed the cogo routine in a DC will give you a different inverse, than your 41C, or even your CAD program? I've gone back as far as a using a book of tables and the 41C is the best match.
I haven't seen that, there would have to be an issue with a set-up for that to happen.
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.
The Trimble Cogo Inverse. I've noticed it s couple of times. It's not a big difference, but an inverse should be the same no matter what system your calculating with. AutoCad LDD also computes different inverses. Usually not much to worry about, but if you're publishing you distances to a hundredth and you bearings to second. I'd sure be checking it out.