The 3rd Dimension is non-profit with the sole intent of providing a zero-cost-to-consumer education on Surveying & Geospatial data capture and processing.
What do you think about CHCNAV RS10. It looks like a unique tool. In the UK dealer asking 25000-30000£ for it + processing software.
@ohary19 сағат бұрын
Wow, this is excellent. I fly nearly every job as almost a backup insurance plan. If I miss a manhole, I can grab it from my point cloud. But pretty impressed with the accuracy.
@The3rdDimensionSurveying9 сағат бұрын
We often do as well. It really doesn't add much time at all especially in you're flying with an RTK enabled drone.
@ohary110 сағат бұрын
I HAD to subscribe to your channel after watching this one video. Excellent job. Civil Engineer/Land Surveyor myself.
@humbertobatalha234513 сағат бұрын
This white paper was released by Leica who made a summary...biased? certainly. when they say "temperature and humididy were not considered" they definitively controlled it...humidity, the achiles heel of wooden tripods...I also remember reading the paper a while back and seing the tripods were tested fully extended. Who the heck uses the tripod like that? Also, using a torque wrench? Why not just tighten them firmly? With the torque wrench Ithey can tighten the leicas just enough and leave the others a bit loose... On the other end, your recommendations to minimize the error brought by the tripods are really good! Thank for your videos!
@The3rdDimensionSurveying11 сағат бұрын
Well the white paper was actually based on a study that was done years before. Absolutely temp and pressure were controlled, which makes sense to me to control external influences that would affect the results to make sure all testing done was fair. I actually don't believe the tripods were fully extended. It says in the study they were lengthened to ISO spec. ISO gives very specific specs to which the tripod should be setup at during testing which they complied to. Why use a torque wrench? Again, to make sure all test subjects were tightened equally. It's just good science. Now... did Leica cherry pick data from that study to make their tripods look better or did they have influence on what tripods were in the test? It is possible. If I could afford to replicate such testing with the controls they have in place and the instrumentation & access to equipment, nothing would make me happier to be able to provide unbiased test. But as far as testing parameter's I believe they were following ISO's standards for the most part. Hopefully I can revisit this topic again in the not so distant future when I have more resources available. Thanks for the comment!
@gr1ff1nj16 сағат бұрын
Looking forward to the RTX service review. As always you put out the most thorough vidoes. Excellent work!!
@marklevitski299321 сағат бұрын
I had issues with Emlid static for both post in processing UAV lidar and simple OPUS submission. That's an immediate deal breaker.
@The3rdDimensionSurveying19 сағат бұрын
What was the issue? Did you ever find a resolution?
@marklevitski299319 сағат бұрын
@@The3rdDimensionSurveying It was an Emild Reach RS2, which does not play nicely with OPUS to say the least. OPUS said the data was too noisy, but it was not that. With Emlid and their Ublox GNSS, the clock cycles are occasionally slightly offset from exact whole second intervals (i.e. observations at 46.991 seconds in GPS time vs 47.000 exactly) which opus doesn't like. While it is possible to manipulate the raw rinex files to work with OPUS, it is tricky and requires additional processing, either through Trimble Business Center, or an open source alternative like RTKLIB. I tried some remedies but apparently you need the original .ubx file, which I didn't have. The point cloud software, which includes applying the kinematic corrections for the trajectory, wouldn't work with it either. Shucks, even our inexpensive IGage static receiver integrates well with OPUS.
@The3rdDimensionSurveying18 сағат бұрын
@@marklevitski2993 Hmmm, interesting. That's definitely an issue.
@gregbenКүн бұрын
Clear as a bell -- very well presented -- from a non-surveyor who dabbles in surveying his own property.
@Rogun987Күн бұрын
Lower cost of entry is good IMO for the profession. There simply aren't enough surveyors to go around we need more reasons to get more people in the field.
@cancicek86Күн бұрын
Thank you for another compering video, you are the best!
@omega-thunder2957Күн бұрын
Good video, but i would have loved to see really cheap GNSS recievers into the mix. Like the Sparkfun RTK Facet and/or Torch or something like the Polaris GNSS S100 reciever (which i got for $150 on release) i'm still in a testphase myself, but for the price comparison i get pretty decent results from a sub $1000 dollar setup (RTK Facet + SurPAD android app). Measured some controls with a Trimble SPS986+TSC 7 (GPS/Galileo/Glonass enabled) and the Sparkfun Facet, and both measements were 0.005 - 0.015 mm apart on static (tripod) controls and 1-5cm on hand measurements (walking and taking points without tripod). That walking part has a high user error (sway) and most points were within 1-3cm difference. All measurements on the X/Y (have not calibrated Z)... This was just a single test, so i might just have gotten lucky. But if... IF this would be the general results over many more tests... The trimble hardware would be put to shame against a sub 1000 dollar reciever. To bad i got so little time to really commit to an extensive test :(. (Do note that the Sparkfun physical hardware (shell/case) is nothing compared to my Trimble SPS986, so 1 sprinkle of rain and it will probably be trashed, but on a 'results' level i am really impressed so far). 'most' surveyors put their nose up in the air for those 'chinese knockoffs', but i would love for someone to really put those devices to the test....
@The3rdDimensionSurveyingКүн бұрын
@@omega-thunder2957 very intriguing, I will have to look into this setup. Thanks for the info!
@flyingsurveyorКүн бұрын
Great video Shea, I appreciate the amount of the time that you invested in the research. I had the same preconceived idea (that they are pretty bad) before buying my Emlid Reach RS3, but I changed my mind in a couple of weeks. The biggest difference between the GNSS Systems is the software. In my opinion Trimble Access is the best field software on the market, but not everybody needs all the advance features.
@The3rdDimensionSurveying23 сағат бұрын
I've noticed preference to field software can be subjective for sure. Once someone gets comfortable with one, it may be difficult to fully accept another. I've be guilty of this myself.
@flyingsurveyor13 сағат бұрын
@@The3rdDimensionSurveying I agree, why changing something that works? Also I think that it depends of what type of projects you have, some field software do some things better than others.
@BG_LidarКүн бұрын
outstanding video
@studio-mq4zpКүн бұрын
Would have liked the comparison with the rs3
@The3rdDimensionSurveyingКүн бұрын
The RS3 actually has the same accuracy specs as the RS2+, same channels, same signals, ect. It just has an IMU and different radio but neither of which should have affected accuracy in this test.
@lztonioloКүн бұрын
From 3.000 channels I'm subscribed, your's is the most wanted and expected of all them. You're not only making videos, you're making science, collecting and analysing real world scenario data, what 99,9% of other teoric channels or even famous brands don't do. They need to learn the home lesson frm you great man! Thanks for being awesome!
@ls2005019227Күн бұрын
Very interesting. I'd love to see this same test with Topcon, Javad, Carlson, Stonex, etc. Thanks!
@The3rdDimensionSurveyingКүн бұрын
@@ls2005019227 Me too! If any manufacturers happen to read this and would like to see how your units fair in this control network, I would be more than happy to provide fair and impartial testing.
@nikouerКүн бұрын
Great video as always. But in the same price range as rs3 exist many others Chinese competitors which are truly full consolation triple frequency. Rs3 is not capable of tracking all frequencies. It should be interesting to check in your extremely precise network the performance of these receivers. I have in mind cncnav, alpha geo, hemisphere etc. The truth is that Trimble receivers, which I use myself, seem overpriced without any obvious advantage. Even the access software is not so attractive compared to the old survey controller.
@The3rdDimensionSurveyingКүн бұрын
Thank you! Great point about testing out some of the other offshore brands. Absolutely something I can return to in the future once I get my hands on some other units. You're not a fan of Access? That is one of the main selling points of Trimble for myself but to be fair I'm only especially familiar with Survey Pro, Captivate, Access and to s lesser extent, Magnet.
@lztonioloКүн бұрын
100% agree. I have been using CHCNav i73+ for quite long now. They are freaking awesome and with SUPER fair price and super softwares Landstar 8. Can't regret about it. EVERYTHING is from China nowdays anyways...
@RandiG94Күн бұрын
Excellent as always!
@gmeineroКүн бұрын
great video
@Alfred2695Күн бұрын
Another fantastic video!
@Rafalord1006 күн бұрын
How much did the laser scanner cost?
@The3rdDimensionSurveying6 күн бұрын
@@Rafalord100 it’s in the six figures
@awolffromamongus8757 күн бұрын
Thank you for incredibly increasing my knowledge today.
@PJLogue9 күн бұрын
100% agree. Excellent, honest, in depth summary of the subject. Thanks mate!
@mrcupcakeman3213 күн бұрын
how far can i be from total station to do a topo accurately?
@AbideChurchofChico15 күн бұрын
Would you be able to provide an unlocked spreadsheet? I would like to be able to change all the units to feet and also add a few more prism specs to the list.
@The3rdDimensionSurveying15 күн бұрын
Sure I can do that, if you have LinkedIn do you mind messaging me on there? Shea Gleadle. If not, do you have an email address I can reach you at?
@markmayer578817 күн бұрын
Great video. Still, I'd have liked to see at least one of the cheaper but heavy weight tripods (eg/Topcon/Sokkia) included in your testing. The Leica white paper on tripods skipped that also.
@The3rdDimensionSurveying17 күн бұрын
The Leica White paper did skip other tripods, the study the white paper was based off of actually did include a cheaper Chinese Fiberglass tripod. I didn't include it in my review because I could only find an abbreviated version of the original study and didn't have all the graphs of the actual measurements. It performed similar to the Trimax except the horizontal drift was almost 3x worse than the Trimax and obviously magnitudes worse than the Leica's. I wish I had access to a larger variety of equipment for my own testing. If any equipment suppliers happen to read this and want to team up together for future videos, please reach out!
@Richard-66617 күн бұрын
Amazing and wonderful job!
@user-fj9hf4bu9f18 күн бұрын
hysteresis is pronounced he-stir-esus not hi-stir-sus
@The3rdDimensionSurveying18 күн бұрын
Right you are, thanks for the heads up!
@aidanburfield267019 күн бұрын
I've been surveying for about 18 years, and I've used both Leica GST 120-9 Tripods, Crain Trimax Tripods, and Dutch Hill Tripods.. I wasn't really a fan of the trimax tripods, I liked the large top plate, they felt very solid, but we had a lot of issues with the foot pegs splitting over time and use. I liked the Dutch hills they seemed to be decent, but for some reason I always came back to the Leica Tripods Sounds weird but I'm a fan of the twist clamps.. a lot of the guys I worked with didn't like the Leica legs even though they came with the instruments... they said they looked cheap. I never understood why, they always felt solid to me. They may not look very complex but they seemed to be of great quality and well thought out. My favorite feature being the interlocking foot pegs for easy transport and storage, no additional straps to corral the legs together, just a simple but very effective tripod in my opinion.
@The3rdDimensionSurveying19 күн бұрын
@@aidanburfield2670 +1 for the interlocking foot design. So simple yet so effective. I’m actually surprised in all this time another company hasn’t “borrowed” that idea.
@mitchmackenzie329319 күн бұрын
You’re on fire with these high quality investigations 🔥
@petern409319 күн бұрын
Great study on tripods...you see so many tripods poorly set up, cheap tripod legs, poor quality tribrachs and can only imagine the consequential error especially with robotic measurement so thank you for such an in depth and well documented study.
@johnwetzel524819 күн бұрын
Most of the setups I see now are too narrow at the base, because of the methodology most people now use to set up. Most people now, at some point in their process, look thru the optical plummet when the tripod is only approximately level, and while holding two legs not touching the ground. Correct setup process should instead involve looking through the optical plummet ONLY after all three legs are at their final location and planted. With all three legs planted and the tripod head roughly eyeball level, a plumb bob (or just a good eye) can be used to get the tripod head within 30mm (0.10') by lengthening or shortening one or two legs. The instrument is then leveled perfectly, and slid over the point. The optical plummet is NOT (or rather should not be) utilized until the legs are all planted, and the instrument is completely level. This process does require using a plumb bob (or just a good eyeball) to get the instrument within 30mm in the first place. Why is this important? Because first, the method most people use nowadays involves a "dance" where you place one leg, level the tripod head roughly, and then, with the other two legs held off the ground, and while looking through the not really plumb yet optical plummet, you attempt to get the tripod head roughly over the point using the plummet. You then lower the two free legs, plant all three legs, and then again look thru the still not plumb plummet to figure out which tripod legs to lengthen or shorten. This "dance" results in "narrow" setups that can easily be blown over, and I have seen that happen. The "dance" also causes instrument setups to take way too long, although that is rarely important. I can set up my instrument in sixty seconds, with a wide stable stance, 19 times out of 20. The main reason I don't like the "dance" method most folks use now is not because it is slow, but because the setups don't look stable to me at all. In my opinion, those narrow stance setups contribute a lot to the torque, settlement and other problems mentioned in this video. They are possibly the greatest contributor to such problems, with the exception of folks who try to use the truly lightweight tripods for the heaviest robots. If you don't do anything else, use a heavy wood tripod, and lengthen those legs about a half foot on every setup. There is NO advantage to those narrow setups, and no good reason to use them.
@cancicek8619 күн бұрын
You are the best. Thank you for other valuable information for surveyors.
@jeffthompson138219 күн бұрын
Awesome work! Keep it up
@lztoniolo19 күн бұрын
I simply CAN't wait for the next video! Your content is out of this world!
@erickruse461019 күн бұрын
Another awesome video with so much great information and in depth explanations! Great work once again! Thank you for your work!
@cmennenger19 күн бұрын
Your videos are great. Keep them coming!
@gonzalezpij28 күн бұрын
i dont know what else to add to the actual comments, great video and great explanations.
@The3rdDimensionSurveying28 күн бұрын
Thank you!
@gonzalezpij28 күн бұрын
@@The3rdDimensionSurveying I have noticed now that the link isn’t working
@nikouerАй бұрын
do you work in meters?
@The3rdDimensionSurveyingАй бұрын
Sometimes, others in feet. It depends on the project.
@nikouer29 күн бұрын
@@The3rdDimensionSurveying I mean in this video. To understand what 0.1 is.
@The3rdDimensionSurveying29 күн бұрын
This dataset was in meters.
@erickruse4610Ай бұрын
Awesome video! It's so nice seeing content publicly available that deep dives into different scanning platforms like this. From both the hardware and software side, it's refreshing to see deep dives that are more than just a 1-2 minute marketing video. Great work! Did you rent this Riegl or did they just hook you up for all these videos you do? I'd love to do some comparisons to our RTC's, Faro Premiums, and X9's and see just how superior the VZ 600i is, lol. Last I heard when I reached out to a rep was that it wasn't (rentals) something they offered in the US. 😢 Side note, with Leica software, unless I misunderstood your statement, you can share licenses by setting them up as network licenses. We've been doing that with all our ~20 Reg360, 3DR, and Cloudworx licenses. They're shared between about 50 users and as long as one is available, anyone can pull the license. Works well so long as your license server/Internet doesn't go down 😆.
@The3rdDimensionSurveyingАй бұрын
Thank you! No it wasn’t a rental or a freebie unfortunately, that would have been nice. We do have an RTC as well so expect a comparison in the not too distant future. There are pros and cons to each. Yes you can check out and check in licences for register360 but one licence cannot be used by two users simultaneously. With RiSCAN, that is not the case. There is no checking in and out and multiple users can work in RiSCAN at the same time. Considering the amount we pay for a scanner it’s an odd business tactic to sell a tool that is useless without paying a yearly fee and that yearly fee being stuck to one user at a time makes it worse. I can see it from a solely software based company that needs continual income to fuel R and D but I’m not a fan of the pay to play approach that hardware manufacturers take with their processing software that makes the scanner useless without it. Coming from a customer, this 100% affects where I’m willing to spend my money. But at least it’s better than the pay to process approach that other manufacturers take, that we also own hardware of, which is many times worse than a floating license. Haha yes, the check in/check out process can be frustrating for sure.
@erickruse4610Ай бұрын
Ah, that is an interesting and much better approach to licensing with RiScan Pro. Thanks for the clarification. I look forward to any comparisons you have planned for the future! It's always one thing to see the white paper comparisons Leica does behind the scenes to compare their systems to competitors like Riegl, but for end users like ourselves, understanding the whole process start to finish for real world projects and scenarios is far more valuable than something done in an almost laboratory controlled environment, haha.
@lztonioloАй бұрын
My dream is to watch an 1hour video of you just working in the field and showing your procedures to make such great science and piece of art called surveying.
@RobPearlmanАй бұрын
I love this! Riegl is so pricey but it seems like maybe its worth it!
@BG_LidarАй бұрын
Once again, another great video. How does a Canadian surveyor get a gig down in florida?😅
@user-sd2xg4lc9bАй бұрын
Amazing video once again! This channel is an absolute gem, and I'm so grateful that someone is putting information like this out there. I did schooling in Geomatics, but as I've entered the industry I've realized I have been woefully under prepared on real world best practices and procedures. I would love to see more videos like this if you ever have the time, just showing how you go from an initial request to final deliverables. Thank you once again, also would love to support this channel if you ever create a patreon or something.
@The3rdDimensionSurveyingАй бұрын
Thank you very much! Absolutely, I will try to work in real world jobs into future videos more.
@joshmckenzie1359Ай бұрын
I am always amazed with the speed and amount of data that can be gathered with a scanner ten minutes from out of case for a single scan to putting it back is about the same as we get from our Faros but we don't have the built in rtk. I can't think of a reason we would use it besides to help with registration. the accuracy we would want to be using a traditional scanner versus a mobile scanner would make it kind of hard not to use a total station to establish control just to maximize the accuracy of the scan. We are now using the RS systeam due to your video and we have done an entire waste water treatment plant with it and are getting phenomenal results from so thanks for your videos
@The3rdDimensionSurveyingАй бұрын
I agree, given the accuracy spec of the point cloud "controlled" by the RTK antenna, there really would be few use cases for us as well. And I really haven't struggled with registration when I haven't used the RTK antenna either. I could see some outfits having niche use cases for the optional RTK antenna but I would imagine they are the exception, not the rule. Perhaps if a company only needed less accurate point cloud data and didn't have SLAM, Mobile or Aerial LiDAR available to them and only had this I could see it but the main reason we opt for terrestrial scanning over those other options is accuracy. Thanks fantastic to hear about your experience with the RS system. It's a hidden gem, but hopefully not hidden for too much longer.
@landmeterbeuckx4779Ай бұрын
I use the rtk only for registration. I always tie in with control points. Seperately. But great scanner for sure. I use a vz400i. Filtering should be done in Riscan while you have it. not in cloudcompare. Also tie in with control is very easy with Riscan. I do all upon exports in Riscan
@The3rdDimensionSurveyingАй бұрын
Absolutely, and we do too if the necessary accuracy spec of that job dictates we should. That was really the main point of running the scan this way, to test the claims of 1-2cm in absolute accuracy from RTK alone. Yes, the method of aligning data to control really is quick and easy in RiSCAN. I'll respectfully disagree with your statement "Filtering should be done in Riscan while you have it. not in cloudcompare." Cleaning the point cloud can and should be done wherever it is done the best. If you can do a better job in RiSCAN than CloudCompare, by all means, that is the right tool for you. If someone else has different tools available to them that do a better job, then that is the right tool for them.
@landmeterbeuckx4779Ай бұрын
@@The3rdDimensionSurveying didn't mean you shouldn't use another software but Riscan uses all the parameters from the measured data the best. My 2cts of course.
@The3rdDimensionSurveyingАй бұрын
Ahhh I see. To be honest I need to put more effort into learning all the filtering tools of RiSCAN. Like I said in the video, it really is an impressive piece of software.
@Shine-bm6nmАй бұрын
This channel is pure gold! Thanks for your effort!
@aidanburfield2670Ай бұрын
Thank you for sharing this!! I always appreciate your content, honest opinions, and how thoroughly you test and demonstrate new products on the survey market! I always like to hear what you have to say and learn some new tips and tricks of the trade!
@MeleagruАй бұрын
Two things: Most building sites I work on wouldn't benefit from this because of sighting issues. More often than not, there is something in the way. Second, why don't you glue a small bubble to the thing yourself? You can buy one pretty cheaply.
@The3rdDimensionSurveyingАй бұрын
1. Of course, you’ll need line of site. If you couldn’t use the RS150M you couldn’t use a mini or RL and if you’re using a full size rod then you’re only working on the ground and much less accurately mind you. That is but a fraction of where one would use the RS150M. It’s up to the surveyor to decide when to make the extra effort of setting a new setup point to maintain line of site or accept the degradation in accuracy by adjusting methods to be more efficient. 2. The minor benefit of having a spirit level bubble providing a flat BM line is far outweighed by me trying to glue a cheap little bubble vial on it and hope it’s level. I’d hate to Frankenstein a beautiful piece of equipment that way. That being said, RS actually reached out and informed me they are currently working on a bubble adapter for the reason I mentioned in the video.
@humbertobatalha2345Ай бұрын
Great videos! For the examples of utilisation you showed it's unbeatable. If you ever forget it at the office try "free-handing" the peanut prism against the wall or floor or use the little "C" shaped piece of metal that comes with the peanut prism.
@landmeterbeuckx4779Ай бұрын
i spoke with Georg at Geobusiness and he did have a prototype with a bubble vail. I asked him a few weeks ago to implement that for vertical ines. He will work on it for future release.
Пікірлер
What do you think about CHCNAV RS10. It looks like a unique tool. In the UK dealer asking 25000-30000£ for it + processing software.
Wow, this is excellent. I fly nearly every job as almost a backup insurance plan. If I miss a manhole, I can grab it from my point cloud. But pretty impressed with the accuracy.
We often do as well. It really doesn't add much time at all especially in you're flying with an RTK enabled drone.
I HAD to subscribe to your channel after watching this one video. Excellent job. Civil Engineer/Land Surveyor myself.
This white paper was released by Leica who made a summary...biased? certainly. when they say "temperature and humididy were not considered" they definitively controlled it...humidity, the achiles heel of wooden tripods...I also remember reading the paper a while back and seing the tripods were tested fully extended. Who the heck uses the tripod like that? Also, using a torque wrench? Why not just tighten them firmly? With the torque wrench Ithey can tighten the leicas just enough and leave the others a bit loose... On the other end, your recommendations to minimize the error brought by the tripods are really good! Thank for your videos!
Well the white paper was actually based on a study that was done years before. Absolutely temp and pressure were controlled, which makes sense to me to control external influences that would affect the results to make sure all testing done was fair. I actually don't believe the tripods were fully extended. It says in the study they were lengthened to ISO spec. ISO gives very specific specs to which the tripod should be setup at during testing which they complied to. Why use a torque wrench? Again, to make sure all test subjects were tightened equally. It's just good science. Now... did Leica cherry pick data from that study to make their tripods look better or did they have influence on what tripods were in the test? It is possible. If I could afford to replicate such testing with the controls they have in place and the instrumentation & access to equipment, nothing would make me happier to be able to provide unbiased test. But as far as testing parameter's I believe they were following ISO's standards for the most part. Hopefully I can revisit this topic again in the not so distant future when I have more resources available. Thanks for the comment!
Looking forward to the RTX service review. As always you put out the most thorough vidoes. Excellent work!!
I had issues with Emlid static for both post in processing UAV lidar and simple OPUS submission. That's an immediate deal breaker.
What was the issue? Did you ever find a resolution?
@@The3rdDimensionSurveying It was an Emild Reach RS2, which does not play nicely with OPUS to say the least. OPUS said the data was too noisy, but it was not that. With Emlid and their Ublox GNSS, the clock cycles are occasionally slightly offset from exact whole second intervals (i.e. observations at 46.991 seconds in GPS time vs 47.000 exactly) which opus doesn't like. While it is possible to manipulate the raw rinex files to work with OPUS, it is tricky and requires additional processing, either through Trimble Business Center, or an open source alternative like RTKLIB. I tried some remedies but apparently you need the original .ubx file, which I didn't have. The point cloud software, which includes applying the kinematic corrections for the trajectory, wouldn't work with it either. Shucks, even our inexpensive IGage static receiver integrates well with OPUS.
@@marklevitski2993 Hmmm, interesting. That's definitely an issue.
Clear as a bell -- very well presented -- from a non-surveyor who dabbles in surveying his own property.
Lower cost of entry is good IMO for the profession. There simply aren't enough surveyors to go around we need more reasons to get more people in the field.
Thank you for another compering video, you are the best!
Good video, but i would have loved to see really cheap GNSS recievers into the mix. Like the Sparkfun RTK Facet and/or Torch or something like the Polaris GNSS S100 reciever (which i got for $150 on release) i'm still in a testphase myself, but for the price comparison i get pretty decent results from a sub $1000 dollar setup (RTK Facet + SurPAD android app). Measured some controls with a Trimble SPS986+TSC 7 (GPS/Galileo/Glonass enabled) and the Sparkfun Facet, and both measements were 0.005 - 0.015 mm apart on static (tripod) controls and 1-5cm on hand measurements (walking and taking points without tripod). That walking part has a high user error (sway) and most points were within 1-3cm difference. All measurements on the X/Y (have not calibrated Z)... This was just a single test, so i might just have gotten lucky. But if... IF this would be the general results over many more tests... The trimble hardware would be put to shame against a sub 1000 dollar reciever. To bad i got so little time to really commit to an extensive test :(. (Do note that the Sparkfun physical hardware (shell/case) is nothing compared to my Trimble SPS986, so 1 sprinkle of rain and it will probably be trashed, but on a 'results' level i am really impressed so far). 'most' surveyors put their nose up in the air for those 'chinese knockoffs', but i would love for someone to really put those devices to the test....
@@omega-thunder2957 very intriguing, I will have to look into this setup. Thanks for the info!
Great video Shea, I appreciate the amount of the time that you invested in the research. I had the same preconceived idea (that they are pretty bad) before buying my Emlid Reach RS3, but I changed my mind in a couple of weeks. The biggest difference between the GNSS Systems is the software. In my opinion Trimble Access is the best field software on the market, but not everybody needs all the advance features.
I've noticed preference to field software can be subjective for sure. Once someone gets comfortable with one, it may be difficult to fully accept another. I've be guilty of this myself.
@@The3rdDimensionSurveying I agree, why changing something that works? Also I think that it depends of what type of projects you have, some field software do some things better than others.
outstanding video
Would have liked the comparison with the rs3
The RS3 actually has the same accuracy specs as the RS2+, same channels, same signals, ect. It just has an IMU and different radio but neither of which should have affected accuracy in this test.
From 3.000 channels I'm subscribed, your's is the most wanted and expected of all them. You're not only making videos, you're making science, collecting and analysing real world scenario data, what 99,9% of other teoric channels or even famous brands don't do. They need to learn the home lesson frm you great man! Thanks for being awesome!
Very interesting. I'd love to see this same test with Topcon, Javad, Carlson, Stonex, etc. Thanks!
@@ls2005019227 Me too! If any manufacturers happen to read this and would like to see how your units fair in this control network, I would be more than happy to provide fair and impartial testing.
Great video as always. But in the same price range as rs3 exist many others Chinese competitors which are truly full consolation triple frequency. Rs3 is not capable of tracking all frequencies. It should be interesting to check in your extremely precise network the performance of these receivers. I have in mind cncnav, alpha geo, hemisphere etc. The truth is that Trimble receivers, which I use myself, seem overpriced without any obvious advantage. Even the access software is not so attractive compared to the old survey controller.
Thank you! Great point about testing out some of the other offshore brands. Absolutely something I can return to in the future once I get my hands on some other units. You're not a fan of Access? That is one of the main selling points of Trimble for myself but to be fair I'm only especially familiar with Survey Pro, Captivate, Access and to s lesser extent, Magnet.
100% agree. I have been using CHCNav i73+ for quite long now. They are freaking awesome and with SUPER fair price and super softwares Landstar 8. Can't regret about it. EVERYTHING is from China nowdays anyways...
Excellent as always!
great video
Another fantastic video!
How much did the laser scanner cost?
@@Rafalord100 it’s in the six figures
Thank you for incredibly increasing my knowledge today.
100% agree. Excellent, honest, in depth summary of the subject. Thanks mate!
how far can i be from total station to do a topo accurately?
Would you be able to provide an unlocked spreadsheet? I would like to be able to change all the units to feet and also add a few more prism specs to the list.
Sure I can do that, if you have LinkedIn do you mind messaging me on there? Shea Gleadle. If not, do you have an email address I can reach you at?
Great video. Still, I'd have liked to see at least one of the cheaper but heavy weight tripods (eg/Topcon/Sokkia) included in your testing. The Leica white paper on tripods skipped that also.
The Leica White paper did skip other tripods, the study the white paper was based off of actually did include a cheaper Chinese Fiberglass tripod. I didn't include it in my review because I could only find an abbreviated version of the original study and didn't have all the graphs of the actual measurements. It performed similar to the Trimax except the horizontal drift was almost 3x worse than the Trimax and obviously magnitudes worse than the Leica's. I wish I had access to a larger variety of equipment for my own testing. If any equipment suppliers happen to read this and want to team up together for future videos, please reach out!
Amazing and wonderful job!
hysteresis is pronounced he-stir-esus not hi-stir-sus
Right you are, thanks for the heads up!
I've been surveying for about 18 years, and I've used both Leica GST 120-9 Tripods, Crain Trimax Tripods, and Dutch Hill Tripods.. I wasn't really a fan of the trimax tripods, I liked the large top plate, they felt very solid, but we had a lot of issues with the foot pegs splitting over time and use. I liked the Dutch hills they seemed to be decent, but for some reason I always came back to the Leica Tripods Sounds weird but I'm a fan of the twist clamps.. a lot of the guys I worked with didn't like the Leica legs even though they came with the instruments... they said they looked cheap. I never understood why, they always felt solid to me. They may not look very complex but they seemed to be of great quality and well thought out. My favorite feature being the interlocking foot pegs for easy transport and storage, no additional straps to corral the legs together, just a simple but very effective tripod in my opinion.
@@aidanburfield2670 +1 for the interlocking foot design. So simple yet so effective. I’m actually surprised in all this time another company hasn’t “borrowed” that idea.
You’re on fire with these high quality investigations 🔥
Great study on tripods...you see so many tripods poorly set up, cheap tripod legs, poor quality tribrachs and can only imagine the consequential error especially with robotic measurement so thank you for such an in depth and well documented study.
Most of the setups I see now are too narrow at the base, because of the methodology most people now use to set up. Most people now, at some point in their process, look thru the optical plummet when the tripod is only approximately level, and while holding two legs not touching the ground. Correct setup process should instead involve looking through the optical plummet ONLY after all three legs are at their final location and planted. With all three legs planted and the tripod head roughly eyeball level, a plumb bob (or just a good eye) can be used to get the tripod head within 30mm (0.10') by lengthening or shortening one or two legs. The instrument is then leveled perfectly, and slid over the point. The optical plummet is NOT (or rather should not be) utilized until the legs are all planted, and the instrument is completely level. This process does require using a plumb bob (or just a good eyeball) to get the instrument within 30mm in the first place. Why is this important? Because first, the method most people use nowadays involves a "dance" where you place one leg, level the tripod head roughly, and then, with the other two legs held off the ground, and while looking through the not really plumb yet optical plummet, you attempt to get the tripod head roughly over the point using the plummet. You then lower the two free legs, plant all three legs, and then again look thru the still not plumb plummet to figure out which tripod legs to lengthen or shorten. This "dance" results in "narrow" setups that can easily be blown over, and I have seen that happen. The "dance" also causes instrument setups to take way too long, although that is rarely important. I can set up my instrument in sixty seconds, with a wide stable stance, 19 times out of 20. The main reason I don't like the "dance" method most folks use now is not because it is slow, but because the setups don't look stable to me at all. In my opinion, those narrow stance setups contribute a lot to the torque, settlement and other problems mentioned in this video. They are possibly the greatest contributor to such problems, with the exception of folks who try to use the truly lightweight tripods for the heaviest robots. If you don't do anything else, use a heavy wood tripod, and lengthen those legs about a half foot on every setup. There is NO advantage to those narrow setups, and no good reason to use them.
You are the best. Thank you for other valuable information for surveyors.
Awesome work! Keep it up
I simply CAN't wait for the next video! Your content is out of this world!
Another awesome video with so much great information and in depth explanations! Great work once again! Thank you for your work!
Your videos are great. Keep them coming!
i dont know what else to add to the actual comments, great video and great explanations.
Thank you!
@@The3rdDimensionSurveying I have noticed now that the link isn’t working
do you work in meters?
Sometimes, others in feet. It depends on the project.
@@The3rdDimensionSurveying I mean in this video. To understand what 0.1 is.
This dataset was in meters.
Awesome video! It's so nice seeing content publicly available that deep dives into different scanning platforms like this. From both the hardware and software side, it's refreshing to see deep dives that are more than just a 1-2 minute marketing video. Great work! Did you rent this Riegl or did they just hook you up for all these videos you do? I'd love to do some comparisons to our RTC's, Faro Premiums, and X9's and see just how superior the VZ 600i is, lol. Last I heard when I reached out to a rep was that it wasn't (rentals) something they offered in the US. 😢 Side note, with Leica software, unless I misunderstood your statement, you can share licenses by setting them up as network licenses. We've been doing that with all our ~20 Reg360, 3DR, and Cloudworx licenses. They're shared between about 50 users and as long as one is available, anyone can pull the license. Works well so long as your license server/Internet doesn't go down 😆.
Thank you! No it wasn’t a rental or a freebie unfortunately, that would have been nice. We do have an RTC as well so expect a comparison in the not too distant future. There are pros and cons to each. Yes you can check out and check in licences for register360 but one licence cannot be used by two users simultaneously. With RiSCAN, that is not the case. There is no checking in and out and multiple users can work in RiSCAN at the same time. Considering the amount we pay for a scanner it’s an odd business tactic to sell a tool that is useless without paying a yearly fee and that yearly fee being stuck to one user at a time makes it worse. I can see it from a solely software based company that needs continual income to fuel R and D but I’m not a fan of the pay to play approach that hardware manufacturers take with their processing software that makes the scanner useless without it. Coming from a customer, this 100% affects where I’m willing to spend my money. But at least it’s better than the pay to process approach that other manufacturers take, that we also own hardware of, which is many times worse than a floating license. Haha yes, the check in/check out process can be frustrating for sure.
Ah, that is an interesting and much better approach to licensing with RiScan Pro. Thanks for the clarification. I look forward to any comparisons you have planned for the future! It's always one thing to see the white paper comparisons Leica does behind the scenes to compare their systems to competitors like Riegl, but for end users like ourselves, understanding the whole process start to finish for real world projects and scenarios is far more valuable than something done in an almost laboratory controlled environment, haha.
My dream is to watch an 1hour video of you just working in the field and showing your procedures to make such great science and piece of art called surveying.
I love this! Riegl is so pricey but it seems like maybe its worth it!
Once again, another great video. How does a Canadian surveyor get a gig down in florida?😅
Amazing video once again! This channel is an absolute gem, and I'm so grateful that someone is putting information like this out there. I did schooling in Geomatics, but as I've entered the industry I've realized I have been woefully under prepared on real world best practices and procedures. I would love to see more videos like this if you ever have the time, just showing how you go from an initial request to final deliverables. Thank you once again, also would love to support this channel if you ever create a patreon or something.
Thank you very much! Absolutely, I will try to work in real world jobs into future videos more.
I am always amazed with the speed and amount of data that can be gathered with a scanner ten minutes from out of case for a single scan to putting it back is about the same as we get from our Faros but we don't have the built in rtk. I can't think of a reason we would use it besides to help with registration. the accuracy we would want to be using a traditional scanner versus a mobile scanner would make it kind of hard not to use a total station to establish control just to maximize the accuracy of the scan. We are now using the RS systeam due to your video and we have done an entire waste water treatment plant with it and are getting phenomenal results from so thanks for your videos
I agree, given the accuracy spec of the point cloud "controlled" by the RTK antenna, there really would be few use cases for us as well. And I really haven't struggled with registration when I haven't used the RTK antenna either. I could see some outfits having niche use cases for the optional RTK antenna but I would imagine they are the exception, not the rule. Perhaps if a company only needed less accurate point cloud data and didn't have SLAM, Mobile or Aerial LiDAR available to them and only had this I could see it but the main reason we opt for terrestrial scanning over those other options is accuracy. Thanks fantastic to hear about your experience with the RS system. It's a hidden gem, but hopefully not hidden for too much longer.
I use the rtk only for registration. I always tie in with control points. Seperately. But great scanner for sure. I use a vz400i. Filtering should be done in Riscan while you have it. not in cloudcompare. Also tie in with control is very easy with Riscan. I do all upon exports in Riscan
Absolutely, and we do too if the necessary accuracy spec of that job dictates we should. That was really the main point of running the scan this way, to test the claims of 1-2cm in absolute accuracy from RTK alone. Yes, the method of aligning data to control really is quick and easy in RiSCAN. I'll respectfully disagree with your statement "Filtering should be done in Riscan while you have it. not in cloudcompare." Cleaning the point cloud can and should be done wherever it is done the best. If you can do a better job in RiSCAN than CloudCompare, by all means, that is the right tool for you. If someone else has different tools available to them that do a better job, then that is the right tool for them.
@@The3rdDimensionSurveying didn't mean you shouldn't use another software but Riscan uses all the parameters from the measured data the best. My 2cts of course.
Ahhh I see. To be honest I need to put more effort into learning all the filtering tools of RiSCAN. Like I said in the video, it really is an impressive piece of software.
This channel is pure gold! Thanks for your effort!
Thank you for sharing this!! I always appreciate your content, honest opinions, and how thoroughly you test and demonstrate new products on the survey market! I always like to hear what you have to say and learn some new tips and tricks of the trade!
Two things: Most building sites I work on wouldn't benefit from this because of sighting issues. More often than not, there is something in the way. Second, why don't you glue a small bubble to the thing yourself? You can buy one pretty cheaply.
1. Of course, you’ll need line of site. If you couldn’t use the RS150M you couldn’t use a mini or RL and if you’re using a full size rod then you’re only working on the ground and much less accurately mind you. That is but a fraction of where one would use the RS150M. It’s up to the surveyor to decide when to make the extra effort of setting a new setup point to maintain line of site or accept the degradation in accuracy by adjusting methods to be more efficient. 2. The minor benefit of having a spirit level bubble providing a flat BM line is far outweighed by me trying to glue a cheap little bubble vial on it and hope it’s level. I’d hate to Frankenstein a beautiful piece of equipment that way. That being said, RS actually reached out and informed me they are currently working on a bubble adapter for the reason I mentioned in the video.
Great videos! For the examples of utilisation you showed it's unbeatable. If you ever forget it at the office try "free-handing" the peanut prism against the wall or floor or use the little "C" shaped piece of metal that comes with the peanut prism.
i spoke with Georg at Geobusiness and he did have a prototype with a bubble vail. I asked him a few weeks ago to implement that for vertical ines. He will work on it for future release.