Share:
Notifications
Clear all

Which Trimble Data Collector what type of work and why is it your choice.

Page 3 / 4
OleManRiver
(@olemanriver)
200+ posts Member

@jitterboogie yes i am no IT guy at all but have worked on teams with programmers and those that study and understand all that very well.  My question is. From my own personal experience is why has no one developed a UNIX based platform.  When I was in the USMC and at the Agency. When it came to math and such and reliability UNIX always shined. Even doing GIS analysis same version of esri arc xxx. Was ran at the same exact time side by side on a windows and unix platform.  Same data same commands. UNEX always was more reliable never had to re boot. And was quicker.  Is it not able to be put on a small platform for a great data collector.   

ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : July 2, 2022 6:19 am
Jitterboogie
(@jitterboogie)
1,000+ posts Supporter

@olemanriver 

Droid is Linux kernel but it's all in data sweeping and collection for packing and sharing it to the hoard.  

Without all the crap should be awesome, we get what we are willing to accept unfortunately.

Unix is indeed the best OS, just takes slightly more effort to use and that in today's world is unacceptable to most.

C'est la vie 

ReplyQuote
Posted : July 2, 2022 6:46 am
OleManRiver
(@olemanriver)
200+ posts Member

@jitterboogie Yes we have become so use to everything being done for us not having to think just push this button and bam here is answer. No need to question it just know it is correct. Not me.  I am so worried and seen software glitches that even had simple inverses wrong. So I still grab the old calculator and spot check a few things like inverse and calc elevation by taking za and slope dist rod and instrument heights long hand even in TBC just as a ck.  I do a few random from the optical spreadsheet just to make sure I don’t have some gremlins in the software.  I can’t remember but Trimble Survey controller version 11.20 or 11.21 somewhere close to that version had a issue on a basic equation that was not caught by to many.  If I remember correctly when I reported it some others had as well and they had a fix almost overnight.  I think it was doing a 180 on the azimuth or bearing to the backsight.  So all the topo or side shots were out.  I was not even running a total station much as I was doing mostly gps.  But some company sent me a dc file because they were having issues. And they were on our vrs network. I thought great someone set control off network and has a multi-path issue .  I finally said its not the gps and brought it into Terramodell and started checking set ups. And it showed up. Sometimes I just want to grab a field book and a T-3 and to heck with all the computer stuff. But reading the vernier and such i can no longer do very well. 

those of you setting up base and rover. What are you using at the base. A survey tripod or the fixed height tripods for static type work. With 3 support legs and rod in the center.  The neatest thing i saw was a tripod with a regular rover rod and sometype of adapter that hung off the side of tripod to support rod on the point. Very snazzy and quick.  

ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : July 2, 2022 7:12 am

Dave Karoly
(@dave-karoly)
10,000+ posts Member

@olemanriver and @jitterboogie 

thanks for the tip on how to turn off the tilt function. I’ve been going into options and unchecking “check tilt tolerance” and increasing the tolerance to 0.5’ but TBC still finds out like Mom finding out I stole some of the chocolate cake.

Overall I still like Trimble a lot, when the equipment works it’s great. TBC is vastly better than it was 5 years ago, I stopped using StarNet just because TBC has great data review and editing capabilities.

It appears to me that since the R10s RTK is just as good or better than Faststatic. I can get more observations across different times of day rather than fewer Faststatic sessions.

ReplyQuote
Posted : July 2, 2022 8:24 am
OleManRiver
(@olemanriver)
200+ posts Member

@dave-karoly well rtk has become the go to for control for most every day surveying outfits vs static or fast static.  However, don’t lose site that many years ago the specs for static or fast static were depending by manufacturer between 5mm + 2 to 3ppm. So rtk is around 8mm +/-  on the technical side. But on practical side I have found that even with gps only like a 5800 if i observed multiple times on our network with a 4 hour gap I was doing very well in accuracy related to the harn of 1993 back in Georgia years ago. Where i am now with better equipment on our network not as good but the spacing and density of the base stations are not as good. I usually now get on datum with network and use the power of relative accuracy from a base and rover.  Much better relative accuracy than our network rtk can provide at this time.  I also log data at rover on a test and send to OPUS it takes me no more time and is a sanity check. One of the test i want to run is use two base stations switching between them and both logging data. Go through opus project manager and compare to post processing in TBC. But just for fun.  I have been trying my best to slow down my geodetic surveying brain some. As soon as I arrive on a new site to establish control my mind starts building a network and its not always needed on a smaller site. For what we need for Land Surveying work. I did an ALTA that we ran a traverse with traverse kit around 5 rounds force centering and double or triple shot all property corners from multiple control points. I performed a least squares in TBC and compared rtk positions at different times and did least squares on it as well. End results were so close that both could be correct. And this was on a site that rtk was not needed. One it was for my boss to see we could use rtk for alta and boundary surveys only at times. He is still old school compass rule guy. I also ran the alta relative precision report on both adjustments to compare. He is now getting somewhat comfortable with using rtk more and not just for setting a couple starting control points. 

what we have to do is educate the crews to think when using gps and what all to pay attention to. So good results are capable. And when they are not. Like what to do when you have a couple corners 20 feet apart. And need to me alta specs. So i been testing a few methods. Used a steel tape between a couple fixed that distance in TBC and such. I am still learning TBC and have had no formal training yet. So we are doing the work twice as i learn how to properly use the software.  I am still trying to figure out the beat weighting when we have rover pole prism pole and traverse kits all in the solution with rtk multiple shots and measuring rounds. In starnet you could really apply individual weights on observations. In tbc its more e of an overall approach to gps vs terrestrial. I have not figured out how to allow individual observations i know need a little more room to flex because of field conditions etc.  

ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : July 2, 2022 8:47 am
lukenz
(@lukenz)
200+ posts Member

@olemanriver 

Standard tripod here for RTK base, those fixed rod style tripods I've never seen down this end of the world; given RTK base sits for a long time always wondered about thermal expansion with them.

 

I do use a rotating plummet under the base though as can confirm on the spot if tribrach/plummet in adjustment and if not easy to slide half way between in the field and then sort out adjustment when back on office vs fixed plummet in tribrach which you don't know if it's pointing off without doing the adjustment checks.

ReplyQuote
Posted : July 2, 2022 2:14 pm

Rover83
(@rover83)
1,000+ posts Member
Posted by: @olemanriver

In starnet you could really apply individual weights on observations. In tbc its more e of an overall approach to gps vs terrestrial. I have not figured out how to allow individual observations i know need a little more room to flex because of field conditions etc.

We have both TBC and StarNet.

One of my fellow tech nerds in the firm has a saying: The latter is great in two instances: one does not know how to use TBC at all, and when one needs to perform brain surgery with raw observations - when you really, really need to weight those observations individually.

Deformation monitoring might require it every now and then, but that's a highly specialized niche...just like brain surgery. Very few people NEED to do brain surgery, just like very few people NEED to free-form weights on every adjustment.

The question I always ask folks who are looking to free-form observation weights is: should you? Is there an overriding reason to do so, or are you really just looking to whip an outlier observation back into line i.e., force its standardized residual to fall within tolerance?

If you don't know the difference between the two, Starnet is not a necessity and you probably shouldn't be doing adjustments period.

ReplyQuote
Posted : July 4, 2022 5:49 pm
Mark Mayer
(@mark-mayer)
1,000+ posts Member
Posted by: @rover83

We have both TBC and StarNet....  The latter is great in two instances:

Your nerd is forgetting a third: when any part of the raw data is not in Trimble format. One of the major strengths of StarNet is it's ability to combine data from various makers.

 As for the second, I rarely apply custom weightings to individual observations in StarNet.  

ReplyQuote
Posted : July 4, 2022 7:00 pm
OleManRiver
(@olemanriver)
200+ posts Member

@rover83 i agree. Its when i have those instances where i know a certain observation by knowledge and experience due to terrain or obstruction or other things going on I want to allow it to float not make it look better than what it was.  For instance if i chain/ measure from a couple points with steel tape or 25’ pocket tape to position a corner from say a robot position points or even rtk position points i have not yet convinced myself that TBC is doing that as well. I may be wrong it might be handling it fine . But since I cannot so far with my limited experience with TBC make sure i am getting the true relative precision tolerance as per ALTA requirements.

now i am not sweating it a whole lot but from years ago with starnet I remember chaining in corners from using a plumb bob string and setting a few nails on that line to locate and my old boss saying sometimes you need to go check that see how the residuals look you may have busted a measurement etc.  TBC is almost to easy it kinda scares me lol. I used adjust and other similar programs at the agency and USMC that i had to really dive into every thing. Where TBC kinda just click and go. My brain is not wired to click a button and just go. And if i can chain in a few points quicker than moving a robot and setting another point i would rather do that. Now most of the people i work with would just keep setting fly points as they call them and call it good. Me i like to close things out right or wrong. Not necessarily a traverse closure on fly points but atleast tied back to another point or close the horizon. Unfortunately my TBC time is limited and usually rushed. Because know one cares to learn it and they just want the alta report and no matter if its right or wrong as long as it sais its good. I spent a few days hand calculating the rpp and allowable to see what TBC was doing. Then I know i can play with centering error height error angle tolerance etc. and change the semi major very easily which changes the rpp report. I am probably overkill on it i know. I am still fighting sub mm type work from my geodetic days and especially metrology time. I hope i will get a good balance soon.  I need and have requested a TBC training class. I have watched and read all I can find on it but have that itch on the back of my kneck that sais your missing something.  I have not used starnet since early 2000’s and mid 90’s. So I could absolutely be wrong in my remembering what all i was doing with it back then. Plus I was a green horn or greener than i am now. I just want to make it right and to be able to give the licensure person the confidence he needs if something comes up is all. 

funny about brain surgery as i am reading this my wife is doctoring my head from surgery last week. Lol. I probably need brain surgery.  Its always great reading your topics. You have a wealth of knowledge. Hopefully I will be able to get there at some point. This forum is great for learning and sharing for sure. 

ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : July 4, 2022 7:14 pm
dms330 liked

MightyMoe
(@mightymoe)
5,000+ posts Supporter

@rover83 

I jumped on Starnet when I was first made aware of it. Not sure when it was but had to be sometime between 1993-1995. I used and tested it against my older compass rule adjustments and it was clearly an upgrade and now you could use it to mesh together networks.

WOW!!!

Such an upgrade!!!

Then I got Trimble.

I'm not sure how long I kept starnet around but there were no more long traverses, no more complicated networks to adjust from instrument surveys. The new levels were imported into Trimble and adjustments are done with those programs.

Starnet faded away. With the newer era of GPS receivers and Geoid Models even the vertical has become usable. 

I simply don't have any data to use with Starnet. There really isn't any point to add an adjustment on-top of adjusted data. 

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : July 5, 2022 4:50 am
Rover83
(@rover83)
1,000+ posts Member
Posted by: @mark-mayer

Your nerd is forgetting a third: when any part of the raw data is not in Trimble format. One of the major strengths of StarNet is it's ability to combine data from various makers.

Oh, we're not forgetting it, I was speaking mainly about its actual adjustment capabilities. It's been many years since I worked for a firm that mixed manufacturers for total station and GNSS, and most of the time we ran data through a single-manufacturer collector. I can count on one hand the number of times that I have really needed to convert.

I wouldn't pick StarNet over TBC based solely on that ability, though. Having a seamless field-to-finish package is a higher priority than adjustment software. TBC wins on the QC and analysis side too, especially when comparing the visual modelling and selection interfaces.

StarNet is still a great program. I'm generally going to use the processing software that was designed for the gear and datasets that I have.

ReplyQuote
Posted : July 5, 2022 6:15 am
Dave Karoly
(@dave-karoly)
10,000+ posts Member

I use TBC exclusively now for the reasons given by Mighty Moe.  All of our field equipment is Trimble except the Leica scanners (processed in Leica software) and UAS (Pix4D).

I have a use for StarNet.  In locating the US97 "C" line in Siskiyou County I have 1952 field notes with triangulation ties from certain stated stations on the "C" line, 2 per monument or object tied.  Objects that we tied into our survey include a 1-1/2" iron pipe at a Section Corner (I think it is probably stable because it is down one foot in a gravel road), our SW corner which is a 3/4" iron pipe at the surface in silty sand (could've moved over the decades), our NW corner which is a 3/4" iron pipe found but badly disturbed, our SW corner now gone, and a triangulation station with azimuth mark (both found).  We have station/offset to other marks found but they are nearest foot or worse.  So I'm going to try to feed the measured data from 1952 into StarNet holding my coordinates fixed and see what kind of answer I get for the "C" line.

If I do no adjusting the bearing from the section corner to the triangulation station is the same and my distance is about 3 tenths longer (about 3 miles). 

What is the standard error of an angle wound up six times on a 20" transit?

ReplyQuote
Posted : July 5, 2022 9:59 am

Bill93
(@bill93)
5,000+ posts Member
Posted by: @dave-karoly

What is the standard error of an angle wound up six times on a 20" transit?

Theoretical value is 20/sqrt(6) = 8.2

ReplyQuote
Posted : July 5, 2022 11:29 am
Rover83
(@rover83)
1,000+ posts Member
Posted by: @bill93
Posted by: @dave-karoly

What is the standard error of an angle wound up six times on a 20" transit?

Theoretical value is 20/sqrt(6) = 8.2

That's what I get (assuming "wound up" means a single set 2D/2R to both FS and BS).

ReplyQuote
Posted : July 5, 2022 12:32 pm
Dave Karoly
(@dave-karoly)
10,000+ posts Member

@rover83 It means they accumulated 6 angles on the plate.

for example,

1 - 20°

2 - 40°

3 - 60°

4 - 80°

5 - 100°

6 - 120°

It was a method to achieve more precision.  Only the last angle was used to obtain the answer, in this case by dividing by 6.  

typically 1x D, 2x R, 3x D, 4x R, 5x D, 6x R

ReplyQuote
Posted : July 5, 2022 12:42 pm

Page 3 / 4
Share: