While this is only one day, it has been consistent throught the past month. The same applies to strictly kinematic data, such as doing line work with the MM where you only have a single reading every 1-5 seconds.
Many of these shots had less that 5 seconds (as fast as I could hit enter)..
These screen shots show the relationship, on that day, to the distance from the base (all were CORS).
All results are in US Survey feet (not meters) and based on my HARN point in the backyard.
The first is using our home OKLW base, about 2 miles or so away.
The next shot is from a CORS about 87 miles away (140 km)..
Stretching out a bit I also processed against a CORS 161 mile (259km distant).
I cannot speak for the Thales engineers, but I do have some experience with processing algorithms and here is my 2 cents worth (treat it as such)..It could be entirely wrong.
The ProMark was designed to be a survey instrument. Solutions was designed to produce survey quality results. It is designed to adhere to more rigid rules. The L1 signal is the most important aspect of the Solutions processing engine. It is a survey tool.
The MM was designed to be a GIS instrument. MM Office was designed to produce GIS quality results. The software (although probably pretty much the same internally) allows more variance in producing a position, and possible applies a stronger fix to the code position, but my results would indicate a pretty much solid use of L1 and just a release of some of the constraints that would cause a failure in the ProMark processing statistics.
A cyle slip will sometimes cause a failure to detemine the correct integer. Not a problem with a GIS instrument. Just process, average and go on down the road. It is still sub-meter.
After all, 0.3'-0.4' feet is not good enough to drive the pin, but it is certainly good enough for GIS and surely exceeds all the specs for most GIS work.Sub foot means that the position is basically a fixed solution. I've never seen any code only solutions that can rival sub-foot. Too much variance on doing the pseudo code internally in the receiver itself. It cannot find the exact start and end as well as the carrier wave receivers can. Am I saying the MM is a L1 survey receiver..
No, although it gathers the same information. The relaxed standards in the MM office are designed to get good reliable results in the sub-meter range for most applications. It isn't a dumming down, but an application of the correct methods to get sub-meter results.
I also have another theory. Many in the GIS industry will abuse (not really abuse, but not obey the canopy, amount of SV's and other rules), so they spec'ed it accordingly. Remember, my experiments are being done by an experienced user who follows the rules (mostly). The MM will go into many less experienced hands and will still provide good results.
Those of us that follow the rules and adhere to strict field procedures will get much better than stated results. This has been my experience in all the brands that have passed through my hands.
It is a fine tool and might be the one for your job at hand.
And one more shot..This is MM Office with the three base files loaded. You just select the one you want, process, then export. Mine have been using the CSV to go directly into Excel.
You can do as many as you want, although I only save the one with the shortest base. But you can expe
Modified By Deral_ Paulk on 8/23/2004 at 2:56 PM