Fixed false RS2

Hi Mauricio,

I’m fine, hope you’re well too :slightly_smiling_face:

It’d be better if you have a chance to record all the data during an additional test. Raw data is fine for understanding the conditions of the survey and satellite signal quality, but I’d like to check the RTK solution, too.

hello tatiana

I am also well!!!

OK,
We will record the data during a survey to be able to send you later for analysis.

Thank you for now!

1 Like

Hello

follows survey done over the weekend

Hi @mauricioranzan,

I downloaded the data, will check.

Thanks for the test!

15 posts were split to a new topic: Testing Reach RS2 on v2.22.4 firmware version

Hi @mauricioranzan,

I’ve looked into the data, and it seems you haven’t attached the base correction log. May I ask you to send it to me, too?

Also, the RTK position file is the 5-hours log of a single solution. Could you clarify whether Reach was getting corrections during the test?

1 Like

Tatiana,

But the only files recorded on my base are these.

UBX, LLH, RINEX,

has no option to record something else

Hi @mauricioranzan,

Can you share the files recorded on the rover, too?

good morning tatiana

All right?

Follows Rover LLH

solution_202004231411_LLH.zip (85.4 KB)

Hi @mauricioranzan,

Thanks! The UBX raw data file would be of much help, too. Could you share it as well?

raw_202003101242_UBX.zip (1.2 MB)

Hi @mauricioranzan,

Thank you! I checked the data and noticed that they all had been recorded during different surveys. The base raw data log (UBX) was collected on May 2, the rover’s raw data (UBX) is dated March 10 while the position rover’s data (LLH) was recorded on April 23.

Unfortunately, it’s quite hard to say anything certain regarding the issue you experienced without the full data set logged during one survey. Is there any chance you can check all the files you have once again and provide me with the following files recorded simultaneously?

  • UBX file from the base
  • UBX file from the rover
  • LLH file from the rover
  • RTCM3 file from the rover

I need rover’s LLH file to evaluate the RTK solution quality and scattering; base and rover UBX files to check how many good satellites with high SNR were tracked at the same time by both these devices; RTCM3 file to compare that the rover got all the data sent by the base unit.

Without this info, I’m afraid, it’s quite hard to conclude anything.

1 Like

Good night Tatiana!

I thought I could send any file for analysis, since the problem is not one-off, but recurring!

Hi @mauricioranzan,

I need a full dataset to say anything certain. Otherwise, if I have files from different surveys, I neither can see the whole picture of what’s going wrong nor provide the analysis of the issue.

That’s why it’d be nice if you can share all the data I asked above recorded during one survey.

Thank you!

1 Like

Hello Tatiana

All right?

Following are files from a survey of the same day for your analysis!

I know there are many factors that influence accuracy, ambiguity resolution, multi-routing …
But there must be some configuration or procedure for me to eliminate or reduce the incidence of false fixes.

I wish that when it is fixed, it is really fixed.

Especially because I am not getting favorable and reliable results with Post Processing of RS2 data, so I want to be able to trust the RTK solution.

Hi @mauricioranzan,

Sorry it took so long to get back to you!

We accomplished a set of tests trying to reproduce the issue you’d encountered, and, in the result, released a new dev firmware update v2.23.8. Would it be possible for you to test it? We have improved the RTK solution calculation, especially in somewhat challenging conditions. We believe this should help you achieve better results in RTK.

Please note that dev releases provide early access to the new features and are not intended for the real-filed use.

1 Like

@tatiana.andreeva
Would this also be reflected in RTKlib ?

Hi @wizprod,

We have plans on further RTKLIB improvement too.

Could you clarify your difficulties with it? If you share the logs, it will help us a lot.

2 Likes

No difficulties as such, would just be nice to have at least as good a PPK engine as the RTK engine is.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 100 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.