Community Forum

Stakeout position with v2.17.0 differs from v2.16.2

(Erro Alfaro88) #7

Pudiste comprobar que versión (2.16 ó 2.17) tiene mayor precisión al hacer replanteo?.

Mencionaste 5mm?, esa es la diferencia en el punto replanteado o la diferencia al hacer el levantamiento entre las versiones 2.16 y 2.17?.

Could you verify which version (2.16 or 2.17) has more precision when setting out?
Did you mention 5mm? Is that the difference in the staked out point or the difference in doing the survey between versions 2.16 and 2.17 ?.

(Luis Galina) #8

Para replanteo no funciona la 2.17 es inestable, en momentos da bien volves a revisar el mismo mojon y da 28 cm de diferencia, note ese valor constante en todos los mojones. No sé si tendré que hacer un reflashing porque en la base tengo 24 satelites y en el Rover 10, estando al lado de la base. Esto me trae desconfianza y aparte no es práctica la forma de replanteo

(Luis Galina) #9

2.17 is not working for stakeout. It is unstable, at times when you go back to revise the same step and it is 28 cm apart, note that constant value in all the landmarks. I do not know if I will have to do a reflashing because at the base I have 24 satellites and in Rover 10, being next to the base. This brings me distrust and apart it is not practical how to stake out

The amount of satellites is reduced after updating to v2.16.2
(Erro Alfaro88) #10

Ok, gracias Luis.

Por el momento me quedo en la versión 2.16.1. Prefiero esperar para ver si hay alguna solución de parte del equipo Emlid.

No han revisado si la máscara de elevación en la antena que capta pocos satélites está muy arriba?, puede ser que este muy elevada y por lo mismo este excluyendo satélites, también podrían revisar si tienen activadas los mismos satélites en las dos antenas (Gps, glonass, galilleo, sbas…).

At the moment I stay in version 2.16.1. I prefer to wait to see if there is a solution from the Emlid team.

They have not checked if the mask of elevation in the antenna that captures few satellites is very high ?, It may be that this very high and therefore it is excluding satellites, they could also check if they have activated the same satellites in the two antennas (Gps, glonass, galilleo, sbas …).

(Luis Galina) #11

How do I go back to an earlier version?

(Dmitriy Ershov) split this topic #12

A post was merged into an existing topic: ReachView v2.17.0 dev update - Improved heading

(Luis Galina) #13

El problema es el replanteo no en la medición !!! No hay diferencias de medición entre 2.16 y 2.17 pero en el replanteo si !!! Hay que apagar y prender el gps para que la versión 2.17 de 5 mm en el replanteo

(Angel Isaac Vázquez Flores) #14

Yo también noté pocos satélites en la base y bastantes en el rover. En RTK la vista SNR de los satélites del rover aparecían y desaparecían intermitentemente. Además que en la versión 2.16.2 ya no puedo transmitir coordenadas de salida por Bluetooth, ya puedo conectar.
Creo el reinicio de fábrica es la solución.

The amount of satellites is reduced after updating to v2.16.2
(Luis Galina) #15

Al revés que a mi, habría que hacer un reflashing pero tengo miedo que no vuelva a andar ja

(Luis Galina) #16

Unlike me, it would be necessary to do a reflashing but I am afraid that it will not start again

(Luis Galina) #17

Está todo bien configurado , el Rover igual que la base yo no uso sbas , sácalo y verás que funciona mejor

(Erro Alfaro88) #18

Para mí sbas funciona bien, debe de ser por la region en la que estoy, México. Aún así agradezco el dato.


(Luis Galina) #19

Amo me funcionan bien en los promark 3 rtk pero en el EMLID es como si tuviera muchos datos

(Michael Lambert) #20

Please provide a translation when you are posting.

(Tatiana Andreeva) #22

Hi Luis,

Thank you for sharing your v2.17.0 test results with us!
May I ask you to provide a more detailed description of the issue you’ve experienced? It’ll help a lot.

(Luis Galina) #25

Hello Tatiana! when I go to stakeout points that half a week ago I find differences of approximately 20 cm, I check the coordinates of the base and are correct, then I return to the same points and the difference is 5 mm? I do not understand that variation. I’m going to try switching to continuous instead of fix and hold on the Rover and see what happens. There is no accuracy in the staking and if in the lifting of points

(Timd1971) #26

Seems you need to stick with the initial settings you first measured with? So when you went back to check (even with a new version of ReachView), should be very close?

i.e. if you first measured with FIX & HOLD, then go back and use FIX & HOLD again? Same if you used CONTINUOUS? Stick with CONTINUOUS when you went back? Not FIX&HOLD first then go back and switch using CONTINUOUS?

maybe keep them consistent on BOTH the BASE & ROVER also?

Is your pole/antenna height remaining the same and you didn’t change it between first measuring and going back to check later?

What sucks about things like this, you’ll rack your brain over and over, and then later find out it was a simple setting or discrepancy that caused inconsistency maybe? The language barrier probably isn’t making it any easier also… so feel your pain Luis. ; )

(Luis Galina) #27

If Tim the language is a problem. Always use fix and hold with version 2.17 the antenna heights were entered into the base and the Rover exactly. I have confusion between fix and hold and continuous but they must be the same coordinates. The value of AR is low in continuous. I’ll do some experiences and I’ll tell you

(Timd1971) #28

I hope you get it resolved! ; )

(Timd1971) #29

Also, would anyone know if being off by 20-28cm (7.874-11.024") would FIX&HOLD and CONTINUOUS even really be off that much between using either one? Seems some other problem?