Test parameters for comparing TLS+ to TLS

oajioka

New Member
Hi all,

We recently received our upgraded Triumph-LS+ and we have set up a quick comparison between the upgraded unit and our un-upgraded TLS.

We set up our Triumph-1M base station on our office roof with the following settings:
Protocol: simrx
Format: MSM3.2
Ch. Bandwidth: 12.5 kHz
Modulation: D8PSK

Both units were set up side-by-side under a tree by our office. The TLS+ is using the action profile suggested to us by Michael Glutting named "TLS+ Min2Eng Medium" except it is set up to auto-restart 1000 times. The TLS is using the standard "Boundary" action profile again set up to auto-restart 1000 times.

The idea is to see how many epochs both units record in the same amount of time, and what the horizontal spread looks like.

I will post in this thread again when we have the results of the test, but in the mean-time we're looking for suggestions as to other ways to compare the new and old units.
 

oajioka

New Member
I'm back with the results of our test.

The test took place between ~1:15pm and 4:00pm. Checked up on them at ~3:00pm.

Un-upgraded TLS using standard "Boundary" action profile with the following settings.
9993


9994


Three shots were taken with this unit:
#101.1
When we checked on it at 3:00pm it had not stored any shots. This shot didn't verify or validate, and was manually accepted.
9990


#201.1
This shot verified and validated and was auto-accepted.
9991


#201.2
When we came back at 4:00pm it was working on this shot. It verified but did not validate and was manually accepted.
9992


Scatter plot shows all shots landing within ~0.13'
9995
 

Adam

Well-Known Member
5PLS
Looks like you are using the standard GPS and GLO rtk firmware with this one. I must say it's not a fair test if you are comparing gps/glo to multiconstellation regardless of the chip.
 

oajioka

New Member
TLS+ using the "TLS+ Min2Eng Medium" with the following settings:
9996


9997


Between 1:15pm and 3:00pm it stored 12 shots.
The first 10 shots were taken quickly, all completing within the first few minutes. The last two shots took much longer, with #100.11 completing around 1:30pm and #100.12 was manually accepted when we came out to check on it at 3:00pm.

At 3:00pm we decided to alter the action profile. Settings were changed to the following:
9999


10000


#200.1
When we returned at 4:00pm to take it down, it had not stored a shot. This didn't verify or validate, and was manually accepted.
10001


Scatter-plot showing all shots landing within ~7'
10002


Scatter-plot throwing out #'s 100.11, 100.12 and 200.1, shows all shots landing within ~0.25'. However, these shots were all taken in the first 5 minutes from the beginning of the test.
10003
 

Attachments

oajioka

New Member
Hi Adam, thanks for the reply.

Just talked to Michael Glutting, he also said it looks like GPS and GLO only and he is helping us figure out our settings.
 

oajioka

New Member
Michael Glutting helped us sort out our base station issues and we are now receiving corrections from GAL and BDS. I will post in this thread again when we have a chance to set up a new test (possibly as soon as tomorrow). Thank you Michael for your excellent support!

Adam: You said it would not be a fair test to compare multi-constellation with GPS+GLO, which is a fair point. Next time we will set up the un-upgraded unit with the 2 or 6-engine multi-constellation firmware.
 
Last edited:

Duane Frymire

Active Member
Michael Glutting helped us sort out our base station issues and we are now receiving corrections from GAL and BDS. I will post in this thread again when we have a chance to set up a new test (possibly as soon as tomorrow). Thank you Michael for your excellent support!

Adam: You said it would not be a fair test to compare multi-constellation with GPS+GLO, which is a fair point. Next time we will set up the un-upgraded unit with the 2 or 6-engine multi-constellation firmware.
What did you have to do with the base?
 
Top