Javad DPOS and Triumph 1/LS

[Jim Frame]

What do you see as the benefits of OPUS projects?

The key benefit to me is direct traceability to NGS control for adjusted network positions, removing much of the work in demonstrating their provenance.

That said, if the NGS antenna models (notably JAVTRIUMPH-2A) contain blunders, the benefit becomes questionable.

 

[John Evers]

Jim,

I agree 100% regarding the demonstration of provenance.

That being said, at the moment it would be best to subtract 0.0833 ft from your OPUS result, and carefully note that you have done so.

 

[Jim Frame]

I haven't followed this thread all the way back, so my question may be redundant, but is anyone communicating with NGS on this matter? I remember thinking that the adapter thing was going to cause trouble, and it seems to be working out that way. Would it help if I pester my contacts at the agency, or would that just muddy the waters?

 

[Alexey Razumovsky]

Follow John and Adam data DPOS deals for Triumph-2 heights 0.023-0.093 meters lower than OPUS. Follow Shawn data DPOS does not deal lower heights. To be continued..

 

[Matt Johnson]

Jim,

I agree 100% regarding the demonstration of provenance.

That being said, at the moment it would be best to subtract 0.0833 ft from your OPUS result, and carefully note that you have done so.

Jim and John, unfortunately I think the problem is more complex than a mistake in the antenna model. NGS is using the Geo++ calibration: http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/ANTCAL/LoadFile?file=JAVTRIUMPH_2A_NONE.atx

 

[Shawn Billings]

Alexey,
Here is a Triumph-1 file on the same mount. Because of the internal antenna connection in the Triumph-1, I was not able to screw the receiver all the way down. The ARP height is 6mm.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzRuWb4iNIVFbkE4Nnowal9rNWM/view?usp=sharing

 

[Alexey Razumovsky]

Jim and John, unfortunately I think the problem is more complex than a mistake in the antenna model. NGS is using the Geo++ calibration: http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/ANTCAL/LoadFile?file=JAVTRIUMPH_2A_NONE.atx

OPUS and DPOS use absolute antenna calibrations. DPOS uses calibrations in ANTINFO format. I guess OPUS uses ANTEX calibrations. Anyway it could not cause disrepancy more than 0.001-0.002 m in heights.

 

[Alexey Razumovsky]

Alexey,
Here is a Triumph-1 file on the same mount. Because of the internal antenna connection in the Triumph-1, I was not able to screw the receiver all the way down. The ARP height is 6mm.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzRuWb4iNIVFbkE4Nnowal9rNWM/view?usp=sharing


View attachment 3796

View attachment 3797

 

[Jim Frame]

I have 8 (I think) TR2 files from December of 2014, if you'd like to test them. They're all on the same station, and I think they're all around 3 hours duration.

 

[Alexey Razumovsky]

I have 8 (I think) TR2 files from December of 2014, if you'd like to test them. They're all on the same station, and I think they're all around 3 hours duration.

I would like to test them. Is control value for height known?

 

[Jim Frame]

I would like to test them. Is control value for height known?

If you mean the height of the antenna, yes: all sessions were conducted using a 2-meter fixed-height tripod, which requires the 25 mm adapter. Below are a couple of photos of the setup.

What's your preferred means of getting the observation files to you?

 

[Alexey Razumovsky]

If you mean the height of the antenna, yes: all sessions were conducted using a 2-meter fixed-height tripod, which requires the 25 mm adapter. Below are a couple of photos of the setup.
View attachment 3810 View attachment 3811
What's your preferred means of getting the observation files to you?

I like pictures like these. I meant known height of benchmark. Anyway files are welcome. Does it open for you?
http://storage.javad.com/
login: customer
password: obpiWmoLM6feqDqaI7iG

 

[Shawn Billings]

Alexey,
This is what I just got from the Triumph-1 file log0204.jps from DPOS. The results are phenomenal. The difference from my well known position horizontal and vertical is within millimeters.

Known State Plane and Ellipsoid Height (meters)
N 2083571.689m (previously I said this was 2083571.680 but this was not correct)
E 945090.933m
EL HGT 96.450m

REF FRAME: NAD83(2011)(EPOCH:2010.0000) IGS08 (EPOCH:2016.0945)
X: -454272.374(m) 0.002(m) -454273.176(m) 0.002(m)
Y: -5373356.044(m) 0.002(m) -5373354.596(m) 0.002(m)
Z: 3394830.295(m) 0.002(m) 3394830.127(m) 0.002(m)
LAT: N 32 21 57.50354 0.002(m) N 32 21 57.52284 0.002(m)
E LON:E 265 10 03.40090 0.001(m) E 265 10 03.36564 0.001(m)
W LON: W 94 49 56.59910 0.001(m) W 94 49 56.63436 0.001(m)
EL HGT: 96.451(m) 0.003(m) 95.200(m) 0.003(m)
ORTHO HGT: 122.824(m) 0.003(m) [NAVD88 (Computed using GEOID12A)]
UTM COORDINATES STATE PLANE COORDINATES
UTM (Zone 15) SPC (NAD83(2011) /4202 Texas North Central)
Northing (Y) [meters] 3582478.323 2083571.693
Easting (X) [meters] 327599.466 945090.933

The vector residuals were unbelievable (note RMS values above):
RESIDUALS OF POSITION
VECTOR dX dY dZ dN dE dU
TXC1 - log0204a. 0.003 0.007 -0.008 -0.002 0.002 -0.010
TXMA - log0204a. 0.000 0.006 -0.002 0.002 0.000 -0.006
TXNC - log0204a. 0.002 0.005 0.003 0.005 0.002 -0.002
TXRU - log0204a. -0.001 -0.010 0.006 -0.001 0.000 0.011
TXTY - log0204a. -0.002 -0.006 -0.001 -0.004 -0.001 0.005

 

[Jim Frame]

Uploading now. Note that the file names suggest 2 different points -- CS03 and CS03A -- but they're the same point. In setting up for RTK I had to rename it for some reason I no longer recall.

With regard to station heights, I have these values (in meters) from surveys on various dates:

Date EH Elevation
01/26/2015 -20.045 10.747
05/05/2015 -20.040 10.753
09/09/2015 -20.050 10.743

 

[Alexey Razumovsky]

Uploading now. Note that the file names suggest 2 different points -- CS03 and CS03A -- but they're the same point. In setting up for RTK I had to rename it for some reason I no longer recall.

With regard to station heights, I have these values (in meters) from surveys on various dates:

Date EH Elevation
01/26/2015 -20.045 10.747
05/05/2015 -20.040 10.753
09/09/2015 -20.050 10.743

Thanks, Jim. It's late Friday in Moscow now. I'll process data after weekend.

 

[Shawn Billings]

This is what I just got from OPUS for the same session log0204a.jps

REF FRAME: NAD_83(2011)(EPOCH:2010.0000) IGS08 (EPOCH:2016.0952)

X: -454272.379(m) 0.004(m) -454273.182(m) 0.004(m)
Y: -5373356.065(m) 0.016(m) -5373354.617(m) 0.016(m)
Z: 3394830.296(m) 0.009(m) 3394830.129(m) 0.009(m)
LAT: 32 21 57.50320 0.012(m) 32 21 57.52252 0.012(m)
E LON: 265 10 3.40076 0.004(m) 265 10 3.36549 0.004(m)
W LON: 94 49 56.59924 0.004(m) 94 49 56.63451 0.004(m)
EL HGT: 96.470(m) 0.013(m) 95.219(m) 0.013(m)
ORTHO HGT: 122.843(m) 0.025(m) [NAVD88 (Computed using GEOID12B)]
UTM COORDINATES STATE PLANE COORDINATES
UTM (Zone 15) SPC (4202 TXNC)
Northing (Y) [meters] 3582478.312 2083571.683
Easting (X) [meters] 327599.462 945090.930

Height is 2cm higher than DPOS/known height.

 

[Alexey Razumovsky]

This is what I just got from OPUS for the same session log0204a.jps

REF FRAME: NAD_83(2011)(EPOCH:2010.0000) IGS08 (EPOCH:2016.0952)

X: -454272.379(m) 0.004(m) -454273.182(m) 0.004(m)
Y: -5373356.065(m) 0.016(m) -5373354.617(m) 0.016(m)
Z: 3394830.296(m) 0.009(m) 3394830.129(m) 0.009(m)
LAT: 32 21 57.50320 0.012(m) 32 21 57.52252 0.012(m)
E LON: 265 10 3.40076 0.004(m) 265 10 3.36549 0.004(m)
W LON: 94 49 56.59924 0.004(m) 94 49 56.63451 0.004(m)
EL HGT: 96.470(m) 0.013(m) 95.219(m) 0.013(m)
ORTHO HGT: 122.843(m) 0.025(m) [NAVD88 (Computed using GEOID12B)]
UTM COORDINATES STATE PLANE COORDINATES
UTM (Zone 15) SPC (4202 TXNC)
Northing (Y) [meters] 3582478.312 2083571.683
Easting (X) [meters] 327599.462 945090.930

Height is 2cm higher than DPOS/known height.

I've got from OPUS 96.468 (see a table above).

 

[Shawn Billings]

I've got from OPUS 96.468 (see a table above).

Note that the DPOS result that I just got has the height at 96.451m for the Triumph-1 file log0204a.jps. Your chart has 96.464m. Probably because more data was available a moment ago when I processed than when you processed.

 

[Alexey Razumovsky]

Note that the DPOS result that I just got has the height at 96.451m for the Triumph-1 file log0204a.jps. Your chart has 96.464m. Probably because more data was available a moment ago when I processed than when you processed.

What happen if we send log0204.jps to process once more?

 

[Shawn Billings]

What happen if we send log0204.jps to process once more?

I apologize Alexey. Earlier I referred to a file named log0204.jps. It was actually log0204a.jps. This is the file that I submitted to DPOS later. It's the same file that you have from my DropBox.