does anyone know the accuracy of a surface scan at long range? i have a part of a plot that has a clear 200x200 area that is all clear and flat concrete. I would like to know if its a good idea to run the grid using the scan instead of walking back and forth with a rod.
anyone have any tops for using surface scan in survey pro with an s6?
I have no experience with the Trimble S6, but I started last year using a Leica C10 for runway asphalt rehab/asbuilt grids with excellent results. 200x200 doesn't sound like very much surface to walk, though, unless the required spacing is, say, five feet, which I know it often is for FAA/airport work. (No one deserves that kind of tedium.) The C10 claims a range of some 200m (300m with the right surface), but, obviously depending upon the application, those distances seem either grossly inflated or aiming at a perfectly colored wall. I keep my hard surface scans with the C10 to 150ft or less and therefore try to keep my setups under 300ft (much more and my vertical starts to drift). Obviously there is also to be considered the function of setup height and laser angle (mount that joker up high and you might can shoot a little further). And while the individual scan setups are surprisingly fast, and airport runways--with all their access issues and tight tolerances--are about the only thing I use that box for, the rest of time I think marketing uses it to make cool point cloud fly thrus or rock music videos or something.
The accuracy is the same as direct reflex, because that's what it its...
Its material dependent but usually +/- .02'. The problem with scanning with the S6 on the ground is that the grid is defined by vertical and horizontal angle increments. Therefore the points close to the S6 will be dense and the points far away will be sparse.
Dan - I think you can avoid, or at least minimize, the changing point density by using the Line and Offset method for defining the scan area.
> The accuracy is the same as direct reflex, because that's what it its...
> Its material dependent but usually +/- .02'. The problem with scanning with the S6 on the ground is that the grid is defined by vertical and horizontal angle increments. Therefore the points close to the S6 will be dense and the points far away will be sparse.
Sounds good. I never used it before. It seems a hell of a lot easier.
I've done it and it will work fine. Of course a 200x200 area is easier to just walk. As for the grid. There is no dense non dense areas period. You set the "square" distance like every 1' by 1' or every 0.1' by 0.1' and you will have the exact grid. Only the last line of the scan will be off if the boundary isn't a exact measurement compared to your grid distance.