Trimble TBC and Static Baseline Processing

There was a discussion about this on LinkedIn a month or so ago. I read it as it progressed and didn't know what to make of it. Called my dealer and he was aware of the discussion and wasn't quite sure what to make of it either.

So, at any rate, are there problems - I'm not sure, but I would be cautious.

I also had a feeling that there were a bunch of people that were spouting off that may have known just enough to be real dangerous.

I'd check with your Trimble service person and see what he (or she) had to say.

I have had no problems with baseline processing with TBC. However, the beta testing I did was taking in CORS sites and processing them. I don't run multiple rovers to test one against another, so I may get a bad one, but so far, I haven't found it yet.

I've had no issues either.

I've never seen bad baselines.
I've check results agaisnt OPUS and they all have worked.

I also have checked everything in the field and have had no issues.

I can say that I'm upgraded to version 2.7. Don't know if 2.6 had a problem, but, I didn't see it.

Considering the source

> I was recently asked by one of our USACE Districts ...
I have worked several projects with and for the Corps and they never have much expertise about survey matters, to say the least. They must have somebody somewhere that has a clue, but I haven't seen any evidence. It's not a real tight organization generally.

Considering the source

Norman,

That somebody is the author of the original query. Mark Huber is the best there is. He keeps trying to educate the various Districts, what they do know is likely due to him. Not enough of them have the background to understand and implement what he teaches, but he keeps trying.

No issues with TBC here. I can tell you that when using TGO, I would get float solutions on a about 1% of my baselines having good residuals, loop closures, etc. No particular reason to float. The same data in TBC would solve fixed.

Considering the source

> That somebody is the author of the original query. Mark Huber is the best there is.
Well, I seem to have stepped in it, haven't I? Now I'm even more glad I edited what I originally wrote before clicking [OK-Submit]. I'm sorry if I offended you, Mr. Huber.

Hi Mark

I am a geomatics engineer and land surveyor who has been working with TBC, TGO and its predecessor for about twenty years. Can the software yield questionable solutions? Absolutely.

However, in my experience, baseline processing issues have always been due to operator error.

Not enough simultaneous data collected on the receivers, poor station locations (under tree canopy, near reflective surfaces), observing baselines longer than 20km with single frequency equipment, etc. Poor practices yield poor results.

My opinion is that TBC does an excellent job processing static files. The problem is that it will do whatever the user tells it to do, even it isn't a good idea.

Like any piece of sophisticated software and hardware, proper training and support is everything. In addition, nothing will give warmer and fuzzier feelings than proven success and experience.

My $0.02 CDN

Scott

Considering the source

Norman,

Cliff (my good friend) is too kind! I struggle as do many of the folks I work with that do not have the chance to get out into the field as much as many of you do. I realize that experience is the most important contributor in the production of quality results with any reasonable amount of confidence. After planning, surveying, processing vectors for, and adjusting numerous networks around the globe for over 20 years, I am still mindful of what goes on behind the GUI. Now that I no longer work on the front line, I have fallen behind when it comes to the new software and that is why I was inquiring about TBC.

No offense taken. I do agree that we do have a need to tighten up in some areas and I have been working towards that goal. As with most organizations, we have those that struggle, mainly due to lack of proper training, but we also have in my opinion some of the brightest folks on the planet. It is unfortunate that you haven’t run across them.

And I can’t tell you how many times that I have deleted some response to make it kinder, gentler… don’t worry about it. I have thick skin… been with the USACE now for almost 25 years.

I appreciate all of the responses and will pass along the general opinion that TBC has been working for you guys. I have always considered private contractors as our partners. The USACE could not accomplish its mission with you guys. And I have for the most part, been very impressed with the professionalism and integrity that our partners have shown over the years.

Later,
Mark

I tried to add my thoughts on this yesterday, but I was at a hotel in DC trying to use my wife's ipad, and it didn't post...

I have had no trouble at all obtaining high quality solutions using TBC, basically all versions since 2.0.

But, remember there is such a thing as bad data! You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. I have seen too often where a user will load in poor data, or insufficient amount of data, and think the processor can perform magic. It can't.

I trust TGO and now TBC because they rarely if ever give false positives, assuming you have enough decent data. A false negative may pop up every once in a while, but to me that is acceptable. But, it is up to the user to assure that the data is clean enough and of sufficient duration for the baseline being processed.

If you have say 10 minutes of data, and a 100 km line, that may not be enough for the processor to determine that the solution is poor, and you might get a false positive (moreso with TGO). But, of course, one should know that isn't enough data. So, having enough data (time and number of satellites) is critical to obtaining good results that you can be confident of.

As for the USACE, some of the survey people are very competent, others so-so. Many have been turned into sort-of contracting officers, and do not have the opportunity to keep up with the latest hardware and software. The various districts are very much different in how they are structured, how many survey people they have, and what and how they do things.