Interesting note about the rover being happy under a metal roof. I follow the guideline of "if it seems too good to be true, it probably is" When I see really good residuals in a situation that might cause quick shots to be false, I'll flip my rover over, which to my understanding dumps most of the sats. If I still see similar residuals after that, I'll run with it until I find a reason to not, or can cross check my work in another way. Typically this is in the process of staking out curb or utilities near a building or tree line. If it's near a building, I can measure with a tape to the building and when I'm really unsure if I should run with it, cross check with a laser for vert or simply do all the cut fill info with a laser after setting the stakes with GPS. Great video as always, Thanks!
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!
I really appreciated your content and your honesty (about wanting the Emlids to fail). I switched from Trimble to Emlid a few years back because I can get four Emlids for the price of one Trimble and because I can coax comparable results. The only downside is Emlid does not offer the same "ecosystem", so I had to learn how to iron out the kinks in each workflow. Hopefully videos like yours will prompt companies like Trimble to justify their high prices.
Excellent, excellent video! I've been selling and supporting Trimble equipment for 24 years and have never seen such a thorough and sound comparison. And we agree that 200 channels is more than adequate - and the rest is marketing. Additionally, we tested the Trimble R10-2 (same specifications as the R12) against the lower cost Trimble R2 and recorded more accurate results from the R2 around heavy tree canopy.
@@positioningsolutions1678 Really? That’s very interesting. Did you draw any conclusions as to why the much older unit performed better under tree canopy?
@@The3rdDimensionSurveying The Trimble R2 utilizes "Floodlight" technology which has a very long history on Trimble's mapping side. ProPoint came after Floodlight and had just been implemented in the R10 Model 2 at the time we compared them. I suspect the issues that we experienced with the R10-2 accuracy were due to a firmware version, but we never went back to retest.
Very thorough. It confirms the differences we have noticed between our Emlid and Topcon gear. The Topcon IS better, but honestly not by much. And an Emlid base will easily run all day long compared to Topcon's dismal half-day performance. We really only use Topcon gear for machine control now, and all of our layout and DIY machine indicate systems are Emlid.
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.
@@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.
Your vids are awesome. Keep them coming! I would love to see some accuracy comparisons at "x" feet from TS to prism given environment changes. Like simulating shots in heavy rain/mist or measurements across a hot parking lot etc. But maybe that's just me 😂
First of all, excellent video! Your methodology seems sound and I very much appreciated the thorough explanation. I do want to raise a couple of questions/quibbles, however. Apologies in advance if I've misunderstood anything. Full disclosure: I work at Trimble. 1. When comparing "residuals", are these the measurement residuals provided by the receiver, or deltas relative to optical truth? As you correctly point out, the reported residuals aren't the whole story. Apart from a false/bad fix, it's entirely possible for the positioning engine to provide overly-optimistic error estimates, particularly in poor conditions, so "worse" residuals would actually be a good thing, provided they're realistic. The reliability of error estimates can only really be gauged by comparing the _estimated_ errors to the _actual_ errors, so I would be curious to see those results. 2. You mention around the 6:40 mark that you would allow up to two minutes for the reported precision to stabilize before initiating a measurement. Speaking specifically for Trimble, the positioning engine will operate in "roving" mode until a measurement is initiated, at which point the engine will go into "static" mode. Once in static mode, the position solution will begin to converge and you'll likely meet your measurement precision thresholds much more quickly, so there's a very real potential productivity benefit. This is probably the least-well understood quirk of how Trimble's GNSS receivers work, so I don't fault you at all for your approach! Thanks again and great job!
Hello Andrew, thanks for the comment. Huge Trimble fan here! No the residuals were compared from the observed coordinates of the receivers vs the high precision control network I established. I didn't want to test precision as much as I wanted to test accuracy. That's a fantastic tip about static vs roving mode. Do you have any documentation on that I can dive into?
thank you for the informations.... i have a question if i get an emlid rs2 as a rover is it possible to connect with an other mark as a base station (chcnav maybe) !!!
If both receivers can operate with an identical broadcast format (RTCM 3.x for example) and radio frequency (or NTRIP connection) it shouldn't be an issue. I've combined brands plenty of times before and to that end, our local service provider has base stations made up of a few different brands.
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....
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.
Question: was Access used to connect to all 3 GNSS receivers? If yes, I presume the Emlid was connected as a generic NMEA device? Or does Access have a profile for ublox based antenna? Thanks. Side note to omega-thunder2957 - to my knowledge sparkfun uses the ublox chipset so it should be very similar. Polaris is another ublox option that is quite economical. Emlid's advantage is that they have an ecosystem that is fairly robust. Not as much as Trimble, Leica, etc., but they definitely "punch above their weight" so to speak.
I own a Topcon Hiper VR and an Emlid RS3 and RS2+. The Hiper is much easier to work with giving better results overall and better presentation on the FC-6000 data collector. The RS3 with its tilt capability of near 60° is nice at times. I would like to see a face off between the Hiper VR and the Trimble and Spectra if you could do one. Also the difference between Pine Trees and Oak Trees is significant. My motto "Pine Trees suck". If I'm near pines I move somewhere else to get the shot if I have to traverse in with the Robot so be it. Don't trust Pines.
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.
The real barrier to entry is the licensing requirements. No matter how much equipment or how expensive it is, it all comes down to that government paper.
@@freedomhillbilly348 for some sectors of surveying, 100%. And unfortunately for the public, there are fewer and fewer registered professionals every year as they retire out faster than they are replaced.
Hy try to compare trimble r12i with some models that have Motherboard Unicore um980 with 1408 channels like hi target v500 or satlab sl7 or stonex ... this Motherboard and new genration of IMU I think that will surprise you
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...
@@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 Both RTKlib (free) and Emlid Studio (free) have a simple checkbox function that will correct the non-integer timestamps so you can upload to OPUS or OPUS Beta. Also, in your Emlid GNSS Settings, you can check the box for automatically saving a UBX-formatted backup file. 9 times out of 10, I never have to use the UBX file, but it's there when I do.
@@The3rdDimensionSurveying Not really, it's a simple check box to make it a whole second and it will run fine and you just log with a ubx file if you're worried about the rinex file having issues
![Megan Thee Stallion - Roc Steady (feat. Flo Milli) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HozPPyqW0dY/mqdefault.jpg)
Interesting note about the rover being happy under a metal roof. I follow the guideline of "if it seems too good to be true, it probably is" When I see really good residuals in a situation that might cause quick shots to be false, I'll flip my rover over, which to my understanding dumps most of the sats. If I still see similar residuals after that, I'll run with it until I find a reason to not, or can cross check my work in another way. Typically this is in the process of staking out curb or utilities near a building or tree line. If it's near a building, I can measure with a tape to the building and when I'm really unsure if I should run with it, cross check with a laser for vert or simply do all the cut fill info with a laser after setting the stakes with GPS. Great video as always, Thanks!
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!
I HAD to subscribe to your channel after watching this one video. Excellent job. Civil Engineer/Land Surveyor myself.
Love it
I really appreciated your content and your honesty (about wanting the Emlids to fail). I switched from Trimble to Emlid a few years back because I can get four Emlids for the price of one Trimble and because I can coax comparable results. The only downside is Emlid does not offer the same "ecosystem", so I had to learn how to iron out the kinks in each workflow. Hopefully videos like yours will prompt companies like Trimble to justify their high prices.
I hope so too. If they want to remain competitive I believe they will have to adapt to the competition coming into the market.
Excellent, excellent video! I've been selling and supporting Trimble equipment for 24 years and have never seen such a thorough and sound comparison. And we agree that 200 channels is more than adequate - and the rest is marketing. Additionally, we tested the Trimble R10-2 (same specifications as the R12) against the lower cost Trimble R2 and recorded more accurate results from the R2 around heavy tree canopy.
@@positioningsolutions1678 Really? That’s very interesting. Did you draw any conclusions as to why the much older unit performed better under tree canopy?
@@The3rdDimensionSurveying The Trimble R2 utilizes "Floodlight" technology which has a very long history on Trimble's mapping side. ProPoint came after Floodlight and had just been implemented in the R10 Model 2 at the time we compared them. I suspect the issues that we experienced with the R10-2 accuracy were due to a firmware version, but we never went back to retest.
Very thorough. It confirms the differences we have noticed between our Emlid and Topcon gear. The Topcon IS better, but honestly not by much. And an Emlid base will easily run all day long compared to Topcon's dismal half-day performance. We really only use Topcon gear for machine control now, and all of our layout and DIY machine indicate systems are Emlid.
I will say I wasn't a huge fan of the idea of integrated batteries in the Emlid at first but after I saw how long they lasted it won me over.
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.
Clear as a bell -- very well presented -- from a non-surveyor who dabbles in surveying his own property.
Looking forward to the RTX service review. As always you put out the most thorough videos. Excellent work!!
This is a great video. Thanks for taking the time to compare. Looking forward to the next video.
Excellent as always!
Awesome video. Very informative. I agree. I been doing test about equipment, but nothing beats knowledge of the craft….
Thank you for another compering video, you are the best!
Great in-depth review. Thank you
Dudes wearing his Survey Vest at home... A True Surveyor
Another fantastic video!
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.
I'd like to see how Tersus gps fare in a similar test
Your vids are awesome. Keep them coming!
I would love to see some accuracy comparisons at "x" feet from TS to prism given environment changes. Like simulating shots in heavy rain/mist or measurements across a hot parking lot etc. But maybe that's just me 😂
@@TechWizeGuy that’s a great idea. Thanks, I’ll be adding that one to the list!
outstanding video
great video
Great video. Looking at getting an emlid RS3 as a dedicated base station for my Mavic 3E.
The M3E is one of my favorite drones!
First of all, excellent video! Your methodology seems sound and I very much appreciated the thorough explanation. I do want to raise a couple of questions/quibbles, however. Apologies in advance if I've misunderstood anything. Full disclosure: I work at Trimble. 1. When comparing "residuals", are these the measurement residuals provided by the receiver, or deltas relative to optical truth? As you correctly point out, the reported residuals aren't the whole story. Apart from a false/bad fix, it's entirely possible for the positioning engine to provide overly-optimistic error estimates, particularly in poor conditions, so "worse" residuals would actually be a good thing, provided they're realistic. The reliability of error estimates can only really be gauged by comparing the _estimated_ errors to the _actual_ errors, so I would be curious to see those results. 2. You mention around the 6:40 mark that you would allow up to two minutes for the reported precision to stabilize before initiating a measurement. Speaking specifically for Trimble, the positioning engine will operate in "roving" mode until a measurement is initiated, at which point the engine will go into "static" mode. Once in static mode, the position solution will begin to converge and you'll likely meet your measurement precision thresholds much more quickly, so there's a very real potential productivity benefit. This is probably the least-well understood quirk of how Trimble's GNSS receivers work, so I don't fault you at all for your approach! Thanks again and great job!
Hello Andrew, thanks for the comment. Huge Trimble fan here! No the residuals were compared from the observed coordinates of the receivers vs the high precision control network I established. I didn't want to test precision as much as I wanted to test accuracy.
That's a fantastic tip about static vs roving mode. Do you have any documentation on that I can dive into?
Thank you!
thank you for the informations.... i have a question if i get an emlid rs2 as a rover is it possible to connect with an other mark as a base station (chcnav maybe) !!!
If both receivers can operate with an identical broadcast format (RTCM 3.x for example) and radio frequency (or NTRIP connection) it shouldn't be an issue. I've combined brands plenty of times before and to that end, our local service provider has base stations made up of a few different brands.
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!
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.
Question: was Access used to connect to all 3 GNSS receivers? If yes, I presume the Emlid was connected as a generic NMEA device? Or does Access have a profile for ublox based antenna? Thanks.
Side note to omega-thunder2957 - to my knowledge sparkfun uses the ublox chipset so it should be very similar. Polaris is another ublox option that is quite economical. Emlid's advantage is that they have an ecosystem that is fairly robust. Not as much as Trimble, Leica, etc., but they definitely "punch above their weight" so to speak.
@@jaccen4096 no, Emlid Flow was used with the Emlid but Access was used for the other two.
I own a Topcon Hiper VR and an Emlid RS3 and RS2+. The Hiper is much easier to work with giving better results overall and better presentation on the FC-6000 data collector. The RS3 with its tilt capability of near 60° is nice at times. I would like to see a face off between the Hiper VR and the Trimble and Spectra if you could do one. Also the difference between Pine Trees and Oak Trees is significant. My motto "Pine Trees suck". If I'm near pines I move somewhere else to get the shot if I have to traverse in with the Robot so be it. Don't trust Pines.
What do you think about CHCNAV RS10. It looks like a unique tool. In the UK dealer asking 25000-30000£ for it + processing software.
That's great. I want a comparison video china based GNSS south inno 7 , CHCnav i93, Leica GS 18t, Trimble r12i
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.
The real barrier to entry is the licensing requirements. No matter how much equipment or how expensive it is, it all comes down to that government paper.
@@freedomhillbilly348 for some sectors of surveying, 100%. And unfortunately for the public, there are fewer and fewer registered professionals every year as they retire out faster than they are replaced.
Hy try to compare trimble r12i with some models that have Motherboard Unicore um980 with 1408 channels like hi target v500 or satlab sl7 or stonex ... this Motherboard and new genration of IMU I think that will surprise you
Thanks for the tip, I'll see what I can do about getting my hands on one.
@@The3rdDimensionSurveying you are doing a great job for suveyers comunity
Hit me up. Would love to discuss.
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...
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.
@@marklevitski2993 Both RTKlib (free) and Emlid Studio (free) have a simple checkbox function that will correct the non-integer timestamps so you can upload to OPUS or OPUS Beta. Also, in your Emlid GNSS Settings, you can check the box for automatically saving a UBX-formatted backup file. 9 times out of 10, I never have to use the UBX file, but it's there when I do.
@@The3rdDimensionSurveying Not really, it's a simple check box to make it a whole second and it will run fine and you just log with a ubx file if you're worried about the rinex file having issues