M-Local

[Nate The Surveyor]

Where is it?

I tried in the field, to use M-Local, but did not find it...


This first screen shot shows the inverse, between 2 points, 372 is a previous BASE, that was DPOS ed.

406 is a sideshot, from another DPOS ed base, and they are the same point.
However, when I use "Real Time Position Shift", this is what I get on the screen shot:

So, what is going on here?

Thanks!
N

 

[David M. Simolo]

I could be missing your point here Nate, have you reviewed p.62 of the new Quick Start manual?

 

[Nate The Surveyor]

no, I have not. I don't have it. I will look for it.
thanks
N

 

[David M. Simolo]

Shawn also has a video.

I haven't tried using it yet.

I will see if I can find you some links.

 

[David M. Simolo]

two pages from manual attached here:

 

[David M. Simolo]

here is the video link:

 

[Nate The Surveyor]

Thanks Dave... That I have not yet read! Page 62 of the manual.
I was looking for it to be called M-Local, and be located back where "Reverse Shift" used to be located.

N

 

[Nate The Surveyor]

This is the first time I have used "Reverse Shift" since it was first implemented.(I did use it, in it's first form)

I am doing it in the office... to make sure I have it all worked out. Figuring stuff out in the field is not so good.
I used DPOS at both base sites.
When tying between both base sites, and I inverse between the points, they are 0.06' apart. See below Pic:

When I look at it in 1-Local, it shows up as this:

Shouldn't that be showing the 0.06' difference, on the second shot? instead, it shows -0.221 in northings, and +0.136 in Eastings?
I mean, should this not at this point be showing identical numbers, (OF course it is showing northings and eastings, and that does not matter).

 

[Nate The Surveyor]

Any success, looking at this file? I got it to give me the right answer, on the pic above of point number 406, of 0.06' but it did not last long.

N

 

[Matt Johnson]

Nate, can you post the project archive?

 

[Nate The Surveyor]

I sent it to the development team... Not sure how to "post the archive".

 

[Matt Johnson]

Collect>Archive Current Project and choose the Full. You would probably not need to include the Raw Files for what I wanted to see. You should just be able to drag and drop the zip file into a post on here to attach it.

 

[Nate The Surveyor]

It's 53 MB

 

[Nate The Surveyor]

Kirby West Barrentine Rd-16061

 

[Matt Johnson]

Nate, Vladimir looked at it and found the problem. The second base (point 406) height was set to zero initially. The M-Local shifts in 3D Cartesian space so we would not recommend to use an artificial height 0 m instead the real 200m. The elevation factor is about 27 PPM. For a 3km base line it gives 3km*27PPM = 8cm error due to fact the Earth is round. We would suggest to use the standalone height instead zero.

 

[Nate The Surveyor]

More info, to help solve it:

There are a total of 3 base files in this project.
371 is very short, and was stopped, and used for nothing. I shut it down, and changed radio settings, and re started, with 372.

372 was then used as a base point.
I got heavily rained on, and posted pics else where, of the little ziplock bag held on the LS with flagging.


381 is the last base file, and it was set on a found nail, with approximate SPC coords. I then dposed this, and AFTER dposing it, and tying into the previous base, (372) with side shot number 406, I found that 406 fits 372 within 0.07' horiz, and about 0.13' vert. To make the job more cohesive, I told it to M-Local 406 on 372. AFTER using M-Local, I inversed from 406 to 372, and found them 0.30' apart.
I am not sure how Mr. Vladmir concluded that... 406 is not a base. It is a sideshot from base 381.

I suspect that my problems are RELATED to a crash dump that occurred, in sequence, and caused things to not sequence out properly.

So, I am now starting over... Re dposing first day, (372 base) and then I will re dpos

Mr. Vladmir's comment is not cohesive, with the project at hand. Because 406 was never a base. And, I double checked the height of rod, and it was at 5 ft on all control. That is "All the way down".

ALSO, I did a sideshot from 381 to 407. It was a short distance, and to a very clear area. I make shots like this to double check the compass, and to leave control, in case one gets destroyed.

407 RTK looks fine... but the PPK does not agree with the RTK, and it was in the open, and should have agreed.

So, I am starting over, and going to try re running all this.

But something is obviously wrong.

Nate

 

[Matt Johnson]

Still somehow you got a bad height for 406. See the screenshot you posted:

 

[Michael Stazhkov]

Nate, I don't know how it happens but the base point 381 which was used to collect the 406 point has wrong U coordinate:

 

[Matt Johnson]

Nate, I don't know how it happens but the base point 381 which was used to collect the 406 point has wrong U coordinate:
View attachment 5019

I assume the coordinates were typed in for design point 381 and 0 was used as the height.

 

[Nate The Surveyor]

OK, I get it. I copied those coords, from my cogo file, WITHOUT AN ELEV!!!