Successful Test (LS Base and T2 Base same job same time)

[Matthew D. Sibole]

I recently purchased a second LS and wanted to run a test on a small job.

I know there have been talks of running 2 bases but have not had the opportunity to test it.

So yesterday I had a small job to start and I set two nails with the VRS network. I set my T2 on one nail and set my LS base on the second nail. I started my T2 as normal with base rover setup. In my rover I did a copy as on my UHF profile and changed the frequency to match what I had set my LS base to transmit and called it UHF LS Base. I then started my LS base on the second nail by recalling the VRS coordinate of the nail. I went into the collect screen on the LS base and started recording a stand alone position (since it was in base mode) with raw data turned on. I then started locating property corners as normal. I would shoot the property corner 3 times with the T2 and then switch to my UHF Ls Base profile and then shoot the same point 3 times with the LS base. My typical distance to last when switching from one base to the other was only 0.02'.

Fast forward to this morning. In my rover I went into points and highlighted a point that I had shot using the LS base. I then clicked the additional action button at the top left and hit recover base point and renamed that point the same number that I had collected the static file in the LS base. I then went to my LS base and went to files, files collected with points and highlighted GNSS Raw Data and exported the raw data file to a flash drive. I inserted the flash drive into my rover and went to points. I highlighted the LS Base point and hit the additional action button and hit attach GNSS file. I then hit recover DPOS session and BAM!! I now have a base point that I can DPOS all of my second base shots from.

I know this is a long work around but it did work until things can be made easier by the development team. The reason I find this to be so important is in the difficult environments that we push these things into a second base with a second vector to all points just increases our confidence in the location of the property corners we are locating.

 

[Jim Frame]

The reason I find this to be so important is in the difficult environments that we push these things into a second base with a second vector to all points just increases our confidence in the location of the property corners we are locating.

I'm not seeing the advantage, as both vectors will be built on the same rover data. The only way this approach makes sense to me is if both bases are in compromised locations, and who does that?

 

[Matthew D. Sibole]

I have done that in the past and I am sure I will do it again in the future. There are times when a good base setup is not possible, at least where I work.

So you see no benefit from redundant measurements made from two independent bases that yield similar results within hundredths?

I should note that I took 3 shots from each base.

 

[Shawn Billings]

I'm not seeing the advantage, as both vectors will be built on the same rover data.

I once thought that way also, but I'm not so sure now. I hope to do more testing someday with simultaneous vectors to see if the same bad fix can be had from two base stations.

In any case, what Matt has done isn't using the same rover data for each base, it's sequential. Base1>Rover, then Base2>Rover, but not at the same time.

 

[Phillip Lancaster]

So you see no benefit from redundant measurements made from two independent bases that yield similar results within hundredths?

I see the benefit!

 

[Matthew D. Sibole]

Shawn is correct.

This test was just about building in redundancy. I also needed to test the LS as a base so in the future I could take advantage of my 35 watt radio as a repeater and have a receiver that tracked the other constellations.

 

[Jim Frame]

what Matt has done isn't using the same rover data for each base, it's sequential.

Understood, but the fact remains that the dicey data is at the rover. Unless one of the bases is in a bad spot, the only weak link is at the rover, and that's not improved by using a second base. I believe that the use of two bases involves a large investment of time and money with no perceptible return.

I'm not knocking Matt (or anyone else) for experimenting -- I've sunk lots of time into tests that provided no useful improvements, and some that have, and I've had fun doing it. Matt's proof-of-concept using the LS as a base and the UHF radio as a repeater certainly has value, if only because you can't be sure it'll work until you make it work. But the two-base thing has been tested many times before with both RTK and static, and I have yet to read of a demonstrated improvement in results. If Shawn (or anyone else) can show me otherwise, I'll be happy to eat my words.

 

[Sdrake14]

I definitely see a benefit Matt. I am interested in this development from a slightly different angle. I have long wanted the ability to run a base (T2) as a TCP internet output at the house, started upon departure, then carry my radio base (T2) with me and in the event I am working around and one or the other does not have connection potentially the 2nd will, and I then have the DPOS option from 2 sources.....

Does this make sense?

 

[Matthew D. Sibole]

I think it does make since and I have thought of doing that as well. I just don't have a suitable place to set my base at my office.

 

[Duane Frymire]

Shawn is correct.

This test was just about building in redundancy. I also needed to test the LS as a base so in the future I could take advantage of my 35 watt radio as a repeater and have a receiver that tracked the other constellations.

I always, always really like redundancy a lot and love it too Is there any downside to using the LS as a base rather than a T-1M?

 

[Matthew D. Sibole]

I am having some issues with DPOS. I can get it to work sometimes and not others. I have not pinned down the reason or procedure difference between the times it works vs the times it doesn't.

 

[Alexey Razumovsky]

Hi Matt, could you share a suspicious project.