SenseFly introduced the eBee Plus, its newest fixed-wing system for survey-grade photogrammetric mapping, at Intergeo 2016.
senseFly eBee Plus S.O.D.A. results
For photogrammetric-quality mapping, upgradeable RTK/PPK functionality and flight time of almost an hour, the UAV is designed for professionals working in fields such as surveying, construction and GIS who require efficient data collection with survey-grade accuracy.
The eBee Plus offers
built-in RTK/PPK functionality, activated immediately or later on demand, for survey-grade accuracy that the operator controls;
the new senseFly S.O.D.A. RGB camera developed specifically for drone photogrammetry work, featuring a 1-inch sensor and global shutter, capable of capturing images with a spatial resolution of 2.9 centimeters.
eMotion 3 flight and data management software, featuring a full 3D flight environment, mission block flight planning, cloud connectivity and free updates.
High Precision on Demand (HPoD) describes the drone’s built-in upgrade path to real-time and post-processing correction (RTK/PPK) functionality. Once activated by the user, this paid enhancement boosts the system’s achievable horizontal/vertical absolute accuracy to 3 centimeters/5 centimeters without the need for ground control points—dramatically reducing expensive, time-consuming field work.
Last year at InterGeo 2015, UAVs ruled, for at least the second year in a row, although some of its newest-thing gloss seemed to be wearing off. This year, sensor integration in both hardware and software is a dominant theme — and one with broader implications and applications.
GNSS positioning technology, aided in many cases by laser scanning, other imaging sensors, total stations, Lidar and camera systems, all collaborating as inputs to mobile mapping systems or machine-control systems, together form a durable platform for many present and future applications.
NavCom booth at InterGeo.
Among the GPS/GNSS companies exhibiting here: CHC Navigation, ComNav Technology, Eos Positioning Systems, Hemisphere GNSS, Navcom Technology, NovAtel, Septentrio, and Tallysman.
“I think it’s a must for every surveyor to participate and get updated with all the developments,” said Chryssy Potsiou, president of the International Federation of Surveyors (FIG), “to try to make the best combination of tools and software so that we can have the best output, in order to provide reliable services at affordable prices, in short time. The world needs solutions, cheap and fast.”
Smart Cities. Along with the roar of the four connected exhibition halls where many new products are being rolled out on this premier world stage, there is a lot of talk — a lot of talk — in the presentation auditoriums about vision, and smart cities, and connectedness in it many forms, electronic and otherwise.
The international trade fair for geodesy, geoinformation and land management, InterGeo can be overwhelming, with roughly 550 exhibits from 33 countries, and 16,000 visitors from 92 countries. It spans everything from surveying, geoinformation, remote sensing and photogrammetry to complementary solutions and technologies, processing, using and analyzing geodata over the Internet and exploring new applications and solutions — it’s all here. Themes include mobility, energy supply, climate protection, and liveable cities and rural areas. Citizen involvement, data protection, data security and e-government all play a key role in future developments. This year, the conference published a pre-show report on geodata and what it calls Business World 4.0.
Host city Hamburg, an economically strong, vibrant city and one of the top three shipping ports in Europe, embraced digital strategy at an early stage. Sustainable city planning, climate protection, an intelligent mobility concept and IT-controlled port management are all aspects of the city that could not work without geodata.
Making Connections. “Our [geospatial] industry is now more and more related, more and more embedded with many other disciplines,” said Nigel Clifford, CEO of Ordnance Survey UK, who gave one of the conference keynotes. “One of the key questions we are facing is: What skills will the workforce of the future need to have, in order to flourish in this interconnected world?
“Some of the more obvious ones are digital capability, looking at data sciences. Also we spoke about some of the softer skills: the ability to look across disciplines, the ability to work with different functions, and really importantly, the ability for our industry to explain its value and be part of the decision-making which is going on around us all the time.
“We’re beginning to see the first fruits of the Internet of Things. There may be some inflated expectations at this point. It’s our job to test that. I’m confident there are some brilliant use cases developing over the next five years in the fields of health, transport, and community engagement. Making a city more efficient, more livable, more secure, and more business-friendly, to draw tax dollars into the equation. What we’re able to do today is so much more data-rich, so much more connected, than we’ve ever been able to do before. ”
He cited pilot public-private partnership projects in Manchester and another unnamed UK city going forward in this regard, with involvement from Cisco, Siemens, and British Telecomm along with Ordnance Survey. “It’s a mixed economy coming together, because there isn’t one answer.”
Looking into the future, he said “Developing nations in particular require a fundamental geospatial fabric in order to boost themselves. I hope there will be a broadening of the focus from what we can do absolutely at the cutting edge of technology with reasonably affluent societies, to thinking about how we can take that into the less affluent societies, and raise all boats through the efforts of this great industry.”
Gorillas Enter Room. Intel has taken a stake in the commercial drone space with its new Falcon UAV. “Predominantly, we are looking at inspections, construction, agriculture, as well as 3D modeling.” The company was joined by Oracle and Autodesk as first-time exhibitors at the show, and they did not enter timidly; big stands.
UAV über Deutschland. In moves shadowing those in the United States, the German Minister for Transport spoke about introducing regulations to govern civil and commercial use of UAVs. The newly published draft foresees the introduction of mandatory registration for unmanned aerial systems. Pilots will need a valid license to fly drones above 100 meters.
Hexagon’s technologies span the geospatial information life cycle from data capture to information delivery. Its portfolio includes land and airborne sensors as well as GNSS receivers, complemented by software applications for data processing, interpretation and analysis. These tools not only display the world as it is, but model the world as it will be.
The company is making a range of presentations at Intergeo 2016, held Oct. 11-13 in Hamburg, Germany. Hexagon is focusing on delivery of geospatial information to facilitate mission- and business-critical decision making.
On the opening day of Intergeo 2016, Cathy Hayes — director of Building Information Modeling (BIM) technology for architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) at Intergraph — spoke on the company’s Smart Build program.
While construction companies have accelerated adoption of information technologies to help manage the complexity of multi-year planning efforts for million- and billion-dollar projects, many of these efforts have proven to be costly, complicated and more disruptive than helpful.
Smart Build is an application for the construction industry to improve profit margins and help complete projects safely, on time and on budget. Hayes presented background and case study material from some of the world’s largest and most challenging industrial projects.
432 Park Avenue, New York
Recent major construction projects involving Hexagon-owned Leica have included using GPS for high-accuracy monitoring and alignment of the 432 Park building in New York (tallest residential structure in the City), a similar project on the Lotte World Tower, a super-tall skyscraper in Korea, and using GPS to align the Gerald Desmond Bridge in Long Beach.
Other Hexagon presentations at Intergeo include:
GNSS and the Value of More Satellite Systems
The rapid evolution of the current and future state of GNSS and how it will affect the geospatial industry.
Digital Realities for Infrastructures
Mobile mapping is supporting the reality capture of critical infrastructures above and below ground for better city management.
IGNITE Your M.App Experience
A new approach to solving business-critical problems. Harnessing the power of the cloud and a community of developers, we can create a better map (and M.App) experience.
Airborne Urban Mapping Made Easy
Best practices for 3D city modeling with the new Leica CityMapper.
Digital Reality Management
Updates on the latest point cloud software.
Centralizing All Monitoring Information to a Single Server for Fast Decisions
Leica’s GeoMoS platforms.
Eos Positioning Systems has announced its most advanced high-accuracy Bluetooth GNSS receiver, the Arrow Gold. The Arrow Gold is the first high-accuracy iOS, Android and Windows Bluetooth GNSS receiver to implement all four constellations (GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, BeiDou), three frequencies (L1, L2, L5) and satellite-assisted RTK.
The Arrow Gold provides 1-cm real-time accuracy in more places, and on all iOS, Android, and Windows devices. The palm-sized Arrow Gold works with any data-collection app designed for iOS, Android or Windows, which means that apps like Esri Collector, Esri ArcPad, Survey123 and others work with Arrow Gold right out of the box.
The Arrow Gold introduces an innovative RTK feature for poor cellphone coverage areas — SafeRTK. The SafeRTK feature uses satellite corrections to fill in when the user’s RTK network connection is lost. Even in populated urban areas, wireless connectivity has dead spots. For traditional RTK receivers, this is a deal-breaker. For the Arrow Gold, SafeRTK takes over when wireless coverage fails, allowing users to continue working with centimeter accuracy for up to 20 minutes, free of charge.
Another pioneering feature of the Arrow Gold is 8-cm real-time accuracy anywhere in the world, at a revolutionary price point. On all iOS, Android and Windows devices, the Arrow Gold Basic delivers 8-cm real-time accuracy anywhere in the world using all four satellite constellations and the Atlas satellite correction service.
The Arrow Gold is built for tough environments. It is palm-sized, waterproof, dust-proof and weighs under one pound. It works in the rain, dust, dirt and in rugged environments. The user can mount the Arrow Gold on a range pole or slide it in a vest pocket. The Arrow Gold’s long-range, rock-solid Bluetooth radio stays connected to your mobile device up to 1,000 meters away, and it’s field-replaceable rechargeable battery pack lasts all day.
Owing to its support of all global satellite constellations (GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, BeiDou) and all planned satellite signals, the Arrow Gold will provide cutting-edge, high accuracy for the next decade, providing a return on investment (ROI) that will serve its users for years to come, Eos Positioning said. It doesn’t matter if user decides to switch from iOS to Android to Windows during the same project or years from now, the Arrow Gold has universal Bluetooth compatibility that supports all mobile devices for the forseeable future.
The Arrow Gold is targeted at high-accuracy applications such as GIS, environmental, agriculture, electric/gas/water/telecom utilities, surveying, machine control, and federal/state/local government.
Geodata is key to the digital future and a 4.0 business world, according to a new report released at InterGeo in Hamburg, Germany. At the heart of this business vision is the networking of sensors that must have location data in order to fulfill their value.
The 116-page Intergeo Report, in parallel German and English, includes sections on smart cities, public participation, autonomous driving with live mapping, and surveying on the open seas. An eight-page GNSS Update section features CEOs answering questions market focus of their GNSS products, the role of geo-referencing in the Internet of Things, the coming-of-age of precise point positioning (PPP), and the opportunities for GNSS opened up by autonomous driving.
Access to company-specific geodata offers managers in the automotive industry a competitive ad- vantage. Apps show today’s motorists the way to the nearest electrical charging station. Soon, the same motorists will talk to their on-board computer to find a parking space. It will guide them instantly to the nearest free space. Geoinformation will then no longer just be found in the satnav but also in the integrated sensor in the road paving infrastructure and in the status reports of other road users.
Networking Everything. The Internet of Things is taking shape and permeating all areas of life. At its center are the tiny pieces of information that assign coordinates to a parking space, a loading berth for a container ship, a screw in the shelves of a supplier’s warehouse, or the alarm system of a family home. Degrees, minutes and seconds show people the way, answer a range of questions and help make informed decisions. Geoinformation is both an asset and an essential source of information.
Content Is King. Key companies in the geoinformation sector have naturally taken onboard the value of geoinformation. It forms the basis of their business activities. The use of geodata as added value for their products is still very new. Esri realized early in the sector that selling software is no longer sufficient on its own. Only data enables customers to harness the value of products. Cloud solutions store the mountains of data, while platforms deliver the answers.
Such new business leading lights as AirBnB, Uber, Facebook and Google could not survive without geoinformation. It is part of increasingly intelligent systems that make users’ lives a little easier and more comfortable, optimizing processes and enabling people to operate and participate in ways that were previously impractical or impossible.
The examples are myriad. Consider just a few. Digitally aided planning and construction in building information modeling not only streamlines processes and reduces costs, it enables public participation in planning procedures, using digital models of planned reality. Aerial surveys and data gathering by UAV, not only for traditional survey needs but for growing requirements in natural resource planning and management, infrastructure inspection and maintenance, surveillance and security, and more. Guidance systems for the blind.
All require location data. GNSS (satnav) is the core supplier of this data, but must be augmented by other technologies in special environments.
Releasing Geodata Pays Dividends. Managers of geodata realize they need to release it in order for it to lead them to “more” – more value, more benefits, more transparency, more importance. Geoinformation and digitization are inextricably interlinked, and this is just the beginning.
SBG Systems displays their full range of MEMS-based inertial sensors at InterGeo 2016, with a major firmware update for its Ekinox and Apogee product lines. The key improvements in the update include a 15% improvement on orientation and navigation data and better robustness under harsh environments. This firmware is a complete rework of existing functionalities with the addition of new features and improved configuration interface to ease device configuration.
Performance. Up to 15% inertial navigation system (INS) performance improvement from a reworked data fusion algorithms; and improved performance using NMEA GNSS aiding.
Ease of use. Alignment and new status flags have been added to ensure the unit reaches optimal accuracy. The unit can now compute and output on each port a full deported navigation and ship motion data. A completely reworked web interface with 3D views eases mechanical installation. Stability and reliability improvements are reported, especially while using two GNSS at the same time
Various input and output protocols have been added. See SBG Systems website for further information.
GPS World staff is reporting from Intergeo Oct. 11-13 in Hamburg, Germany. The massive trade show is considered the world’s leading conference trade fair for geodesy, geoinformation and land management. With more than 16,000 visitors from 80 countries, it is one of the key platforms for industry dialogue.
Swift Navigation has announced its newest product, Piksi Multi, a multi-band, multi-constellation high-precision GNSS receiver for the mass market.
A San Francisco-based startup, Swift Navigation introduced the first Piksi GNSS receiver in January.
Swift Navigation will be showing Piksi Multi at InterGeo Oct. 11-13 in Hamburg, Germany. The company’s booth is located in Hall A1, in the US Pavilion, booth #B1.061.
Autonomous devices require precision navigation, especially those that perform critical functions. Swift Navigation solutions use real-time kinematics (RTK) technology, providing location solutions that are 100 times more accurate than traditional GPS.
Piksi Multi supports GPS L1/L2 and is hardware-ready for GLONASS G1/G2, BeiDou B1/B2, Galileo E1/E5b, QZSS L1/L2 and SBAS. Multiple signal bands enable convergence times measured in seconds, not minutes. Multiple satellite constellations enhance availability in new environments.
The Piksi Multi with an evaluation board.
The Piksi Multi Evaluation Kit also has been upgraded with all-new components. The new kit contains two Piksi Multi GNSS modules, two integrator-friendly evaluation boards, two GNSS survey-grade antennas, two high-performance radios, so that it can deliver best-in-class reliability and range — well over 10 kilometers — and all of the accessories required for rapid prototyping and integration.
Swift Navigation expects Piksi Multi to ship in early in the first quarter of 2017. The company is accepting pre-orders in its online store at www.swiftnav.com.
Piksi Multi is an open platform. It enables customers to run Linux OS on its second core, allowing them to quickly prototype and adopt their own applications in a well-known and widely used environment.
Industries standing to benefit most from the new product include: autonomous vehicles, UAV, precision agriculture, robotics, space, survey and control and R&D applications requiring precise positioning.
Swift Navigation was built on the notion that highly-precise RTK solutions should be offered at an affordable price. Benefits of Piksi Multi for customers include:
Centimeter-level accuracy using RTK
Fast convergence times using multi-band
Robust positioning using onboard MEMS hardware
Open platform with onboard Linux
Rapid prototyping with a complete evaluation kit
Future-proof hardware with in-field software upgrades
“With the launch of Piksi Multi, Swift is taking another huge step forward in delivering affordable and highly-precise GNSS technology,” said Swift Navigation CEO, Timothy Harris. “Piksi Multi will continue to revolutionize the autonomous devices category, which is growing at an unbelievable rate.”
These columns have focused on procedures and routines for establishing GNSS-derived orthometric heights. There are many ways to analyze and investigate GNSS data and adjustment results. I have provided some basic concepts that I believe are important for users to understand.
The selection of constraints is a very important part of establishing accurate and consistent NAVD 88 GNSS-derived orthometric heights. All of the analysis and recommendations have been based on using the National Geodetic Survey‘s latest scientific geoid model.
I recommend first performing the analysis using the scientific geoid model because the hybrid geoid model has been warped to be consistent with the published NAVD 88 values. However, as mentioned in Part 7 (June 2016), in practice, GNSS-derived orthometric heights are incorporated into the NAVD 88 using the latest hybrid geoid model GEOID12B. This column will focus on the NGS “GPS on BMS (GPSBM)” dataset that was used to create the hybrid geoid model.
As mentioned in Part 3 (October 2015), the hybrid geoid model is designed to fit the published NAVD 88 leveling-derived orthometric heights. Saying that, the GPSBM dataset can be used to identify potential issues in the NAVD 88 published orthometric heights. GNSS users should be familiar with this dataset and how it can be used in their analysis. This column will provide tools and routines that can be used to identify potential issues in NAVD 88 heights and/or NAD83 (2011) published ellipsoid heights.
Each of the below regions uses variants of the NAD 83 reference frame and a local vertical datum. Several versions of NAD 83 exist conforming to significant plates: Pacific, Mariana, and North America. Likewise, each region has its own vertical datum. It is not possible to level across water, so islands will have selected a tide gauge to serve as the local datum point and all leveling is tied to that site. The only exception to this is Hawaii. No tide gauge was selected in the Hawaiian Islands and no vertical datum has been established as of yet. Hence, GEOID12B in Hawaii transforms between NAD 83 (PA11) and the same geopotential (geoid) surface as the USGG2012 model ( W0 = 62636856.00 m**2/s**2).
Items that are listed in the below table include the final GPSBM files for each region as both Excel spreadsheets and text files as well as thumbnail images linked to larger images showing the distribution of the GPSBM’s. Alaska and the island regions are more consistent, so not many points were dropped and each is provided in its own spreadsheet/text file and identified with the appropriate ellipsoidal reference frame and level datum (see below).
The most significant work occurred in the COnterminous United States (CONUS). For CONUS, there were 24,782 points with 911 rejected leaving 23,961. These were supplemented from the OPUS-database with 737 points of which 238 were rejected leaving 499. There were also 579 points in Canada with 5 rejected leaving 574. In Mexico, there 744 of which 497 were clipped since they were too far south and another 70 were rejected leaving 177. This brings a total of 26,932 points of which 1,721 were rejected or clipped and 25,211 retained for modeling GEOID12B. The data in Canada and Mexico provide continuity up to and across the U.S. borders but do not make the GEOID12B model valid in those countries.
Points were rejected either because the State Advisor recommended it be dropped (e.g., known subsidence region), the residual ellipsoid height errors (from the NA2011 project) indicated a point was too noisy in comparison to other points in a state/region, the orthometric height was suspect, or the residual errors during geoid modeling were too high. The corresponding error flags are ‘S’, ‘h’, ‘H’, and ‘N’ as seen on the spreadsheet and text files. These points then represent the control data that were used to define the transformation between NAD 83 and NAVD 88 for CONUS.
The control data were much simpler in other regions due to the lack of quantity (more than two orders of magnitude less). Data in these regions follows a similar pattern where some data are rejected based on the codes given above for CONUS. The columns on the right side give the respective datums realized by GEOID12B for each region.
Table 1 is an excerpt of the excel spreadsheet for the GPSBM dataset and provides a sample of the contents. The headings of the columns are fairly self-explanatory. What’s important here is that the excel spreadsheet provides the name, latitude, longitude, NGS’ PID, the ellipsoid height and orthometric height of the stations used in making GEOID12B.
Table 1
Excerpt of the Excel spreadsheet for GPS on benchmarks (GPSBM) used to make GEOID12B.
The “GPS On Bench Marks (GPSBM) Used To Make GEOID12B” write up states that 1,721 stations were rejected and were not used in developing the hybrid geoid model. It also states that for the conterminous United States (CONUS), there were 24,782 stations with 911 rejected leaving 23,961. This column is going to focus on CONUS but the analysis can be performed everywhere.
As the write up states, stations were rejected for four different reasons:
Code h – The residual ellipsoid height errors from the NAD 83 (2011) project indicated that the point was too noisy,
Code H – The orthometric height was suspect,
Code N – The residual errors during geoid modeling were too high.
These rejected stations were not used to make the hybrid geoid model but since the hybrid geoid model is distorted to fit the NAVD 88, these rejected stations as well as stations nearby the rejected stations should be re-evaluated using the latest scientific geoid model, e.g. xGeoid16b.
So, what should the user do with the GPSBM table? I recommend that users perform the following steps when analyzing the stations in the GPSBM table.
Step 1: Compare the modeled GEOID12B (N12B) value to the computed GPS/Leveling (h minus H) value using the following formula: Published N12B from the NGS data sheet minus (ellipsoid height from the GPSBM table minus orthometric height from the GPSBM table). We discussed this procedure a year ago in Part 3 (October 2015). It should be noted that the orthometric height in the GPSBM table may be different than the published NAVD 88 height on the NGS data sheet if the station has been readjusted since the GPSBM table was created.
Step 2: Repeat the procedure in Step 1 using the latest NGS experimental geoid model, e.g. xGeoid16b. At this time, NGS only provides the experimental geoid models referenced to IGS08 so the user will have to use NGS’ xGeoid16 web tool to obtain the station’s IGS08 ellipsoid height and xGeoid16b value. The input to the tool is the station’s NAD 83 (2011) coordinates (latitude, Longitude, and ellipsoid height). [An example of using the xGeoid16 web tool is provided in the box titled “Example of Using NGS xGeoid16 Web Tool.”] As discussed in Part 3 (October 2015), the user will have to remove a bias and trend based on the differences in the region.
The user could also transform xGeoid16b/IGS08 geoid values to xGeoid16b/NAD 83 (2011) geoid values using their own tools, and then remove a bias and trend based on the differences. Michael Dennis, a PhD candidate at Oregon State University, created an ArcGIS raster of the xGeoid16b model, where his model has been referenced to NAD 83 (Michael L. Dennis, RLS, PE, MS Civil Eng., Geodetic Analysis, LLC, 55 Creek Rock Road, Sedona, AZ 86351). He removed a trend using the GPS/Leveling data set as input; therefore, this raster file is a form of a hybrid geoid model distorted only to remove the tilt assumed to be in the NAVD 88. I will refer to this model as Geoid16B_NAD83 to avoid confusion with NGS’ xGeoid16b model.
*Orthometric height difference between xGEOID16B to model shown
Step 3: Use the station’s data sheet to identify how the station’s orthometric height was determined; for example, was it rigorously adjusted into the NAVD 88 (published height attribute – Adjusted). We discussed the attributes of the NGS data sheet in Part 5 (February 2016). A summary of the attributes from the NGS data sheet DSDATA.TXT file is provided in the box titled “Extracted from NGS’ DSDATA.TXT.” I have highlighted the most common attributes of the stations involved in making GEOID12B.
Extracted from NGS’ DSDATA.TXT
***************************************************************************
* dsdata.txt *
***************************************************************************
There are various Vertical Control sources, as specified below:ADJUSTED = Direct Digital Output from Least Squares Adjustment of Precise Leveling.
(Rounded to 3 decimal places.)ADJ UNCH = Manually Entered (and NOT verified) Output of Least Squares Adjustment of Precise Leveling.
(Rounded to 3 decimal places.)
POSTED = Pre-1991 Precise Leveling Adjusted to the NAVD 88 Network After Completion of the NAVD 88 General Adjustment of 1991.
(Rounded to 3 decimal places.)
READJUST = Precise Leveling Readjusted as Required by Crustal Motion or Other Cause.
(Rounded to 2 decimal places.)
N HEIGHT = Computed from Precise Leveling Connected at Only One Published Bench Mark.
(Rounded to 2 decimal places.)
RESET = Reset Computation of Precise Leveling.
(Rounded to 2 decimal places.)
COMPUTED = Computed from Precise Leveling Using Non-rigorous Adjustment Technique.
(Rounded to 2 decimal places.)
GPSCONLV = Leveled Orthometric Height tied to GPS HT_MOD Orthometric Height.
(Rounded to 2 decimal places.)
LEVELING = Precise Leveling Performed by Horizontal Field Party.
(Rounded to 2 decimal places.)
H LEVEL = Level between control points not connected to bench mark.
(Rounded to 1 decimal places.)
GPS OBS = Computed from GPS Observations.
(Rounded to 1 decimal places.)
VERT ANG = Computed from Vertical Angle Observations.
(Rounded to 1 decimal place; If No Check, to 0 decimal places.)
SCALED = Scaled from a Topographic Map.
(Rounded to 0 decimal places.)
U HEIGHT = Unvalidated height from precise leveling connected at only one NSRS point.
(Rounded to 2 decimal places.)
VERTCON = The NAVD 88 height was computed by applying the VERTCON shift value to the NGVD 29 height.
(Rounded to 0 decimal places.)
Step 4: Use the station’s NGS data sheet to determine the adjustment date of the station’s published NAVD 88 orthometric height. We discussed this in Part 7 (June 2016). As mentioned in Part 7, if the station has a different adjustment date than other stations nearby, there could be inconsistencies due to adjustment distribution corrections and/or movement.
Step 1 was demonstrated in Part 3 (October 2015) so we don’t need to describe the process in this column. Comparing published GEOID12B values with computed values is the first step; the difference is an indication of how well the data fit the model and can be useful for identifying large outliers. It can be helpful in prioritizing where additional observation should be obtained when there are limited resources. Provided below is an example of where to obtain the information for comparing the modeled GEOID12B (N12B) value to the computed GPS/Leveling (h minus H) value using the following formula: Published N12B from the NGS data sheet minus (ellipsoid height from the GPSBM table minus orthometric height from the GPSBM table). The user can obtain the GEOID12B value from the NGS data sheet [see box titled “Excerpt from NGS Data Sheet For Station L 275 (HW2088)”]; for this example, the GEOID12B value for station L 275 is -30.813 m. Table 2 is an excerpt from the GPSBM file that contains the ellipsoid height (599.253 m) and the orthometric height (630.016 m) for station L 275. It should be noted that the ellipsoid and orthometric heights in the GPSBM table are given in millimeters. The first row of table 3 provides the results of the computation: [-30814 mm – (599253 mm – 630016m m) = 51 mm], or 5.1 cm.
Table 2
Excerpt of the Excel spreadsheet for GPS on benchmarks (GPSBM) used to make GEOID12B – Stations on plots in this column.
Excerpt from NGS Data Sheet For Station L 275 (HW2088)
PROGRAM = datasheet95, VERSION = 8.9.1
1 National Geodetic Survey, Retrieval Date = OCTOBER 1, 2016
HW2088 ***********************************************************************
HW2088 CBN – This is a Cooperative Base Network Control Station.
HW2088 DESIGNATION – L 275
HW2088 PID – HW2088
HW2088 STATE/COUNTY- WV/RANDOLPH
HW2088 COUNTRY – US
HW2088 USGS QUAD – MILL CREEK (1995)
HW2088
HW2088 *CURRENT SURVEY CONTROL
HW2088 ______________________________________________________________________
HW2088* NAD 83(2011) POSITION- 38 43 54.95105(N) 079 58 19.75931(W) ADJUSTED
HW2088* NAD 83(2011) ELLIP HT- 599.253 (meters) (06/27/12) ADJUSTED
HW2088* NAD 83(2011) EPOCH – 2010.00
HW2088* NAVD 88 ORTHO HEIGHT – 630.016 (meters) 2066.98 (feet) ADJUSTED
HW2088 ______________________________________________________________________
HW2088 NAD 83(2011) X – 867,581.099 (meters) COMP
HW2088 NAD 83(2011) Y – -4,906,352.726 (meters) COMP
HW2088 NAD 83(2011) Z – 3,969,521.039 (meters) COMP
HW2088 LAPLACE CORR – 0.13 (seconds) DEFLEC12B
HW2088 GEOID HEIGHT – -30.814 (meters) GEOID12B
HW2088 DYNAMIC HEIGHT – 629.553 (meters) 2065.46 (feet) COMP
HW2088 MODELED GRAVITY – 979,873.5 (mgal) NAVD 88
HW2088
HW2088 VERT ORDER – FIRST CLASS II
HW2088
HW2088 Network accuracy estimates per FGDC Geospatial Positioning Accuracy
HW2088 Standards:
HW2088 FGDC (95% conf, cm) Standard deviation (cm) CorrNE
HW2088 Horiz Ellip SD_N SD_E SD_h (unitless)
HW2088 ——————————————————————-
HW2088 NETWORK 1.00 1.94 0.45 0.36 0.99 -0.05669181
Table 3 contains the comparisons between modeled geoid values and their computed geoid values for five station pairs that have large relative differences. Looking at table 3 one can see that there are several large relative differences between the published GEOID12B model and computed geoid model (see column titled “N12B minus (h-H)” in table 3). This doesn’t mean that the model is incorrect, it only means that there were large relative differences that the model had to account for. As previously mentioned, GEOID12B was created to be consistent with the NAVD 88.
Since the experimental geoid model xGeoid16b_NAD is not distorted to conform to the NAVD 88 everywhere, it should provide better information for identifying outliers and determining which stations appear to be inconsistent with its neighbors.
Figure 1 – All GPS on BMS Residuals Using Geoid16b_NAD model (note: rejections by geoid team have been removed).
Table 3
Table of selected stations involving large relative differences depicted in plots in this column.
(Results are provided for GEOID12B and Geoid16B_NAD Models*) *Michael Dennis, a Ph.D. candidate at Oregon State University, created the xGEOID16B ArcGIS raster, where the model has been referenced to NAD 83 with a trend and bias added to account for the apparent tilt in the NAVD 88. This model is denoted as Geoid16B_NAD (N16b) in this column.
Figure 1 is a plot of all of the GPSBM residuals using the Geoid16B_NAD83 model. This plot indicates that there are a lot of large residuals. First, let’s define what I’m calling residuals. The residuals on my plots are the differences between the modeled geoid height value and the computed geoid height value using the ellipsoid height (h) and orthometric height (H) from the GPSBM data set; that is, residual = modeled gravity value – (h minus H). The largest negative residual is -37.3 cm and the largest positive residual is 33.8 cm.
Figure 2 – Positive GPS on BMS Residuals Using Geoid16b_NAD model (note: rejections by geoid team have been removed).
Figure 2 is a plot of the positive GPS on BMS residuals using Geoid16b_NAD geoid model. There are 5957 residuals greater than 5 cm (not including the stations rejected by the NGS geoid team). As you can see, it appears that most of the positive residuals are on the eastern half of the United States.
Figure 3 – Negative GPS on BMS Residuals Using Geoid16b_NAD model (note: rejections by geoid team have been removed).
Figure 3 is a plot of the negative GPS on BMS residuals using Geoid16b_NAD geoid model. There are 4113 residuals less than -5 cm (not including the stations rejected by the NGS geoid team). As you can see from the plot, the negative residuals appear to be more evenly distributed across the United States than the positive residuals. It does, however, appear that there are more negative residuals greater than -5 cm along the Gulf Coast, Atlantic Coast, and the Great Lakes than there are positive residuals greater than 5 cm. In addition, there appears to be a lot of negative residuals in the northeastern United States.
Figure 4 – GPS on BMS Residuals Using Geoid16b_NAD model in North Carolina and South Carolina (note: rejections by geoid team have been removed).
Figure 4 is a plot of the GPS on BMS residuals using the Geoid16b_NAD geoid model in the North Carolina and South Carolina border region. What’s interesting about this plot is that South Carolina doesn’t seem to have many negative residuals where North Carolina has both negative and positive residuals. We will look at this in more detail later in this column.
Figure 5 – GPS on BMS Residuals Using Geoid16b_NAD model in Washington and Oregon Region (note: rejections by geoid team have been removed).
Figure 5 is a plot of the GPS on BMS residuals using Geoid16b_NAD model in the Washington and Oregon Region. This graphic shows some large grouping of negative and positive residuals, especially along the Pacific Coast in Northwestern Washington State.
Now, let’s look at some large relative differences in residuals between stations that are spatially close together. Figure 6 is a plot of large relative differences between groups of GPS on BMS residuals (using Geoid16b_NAD model) at the North Carolina/South Carolina border. In figure 6, two stations (FA1337 and FA1560) are about 20 km apart and the difference in residuals is -18.6 cm (-12.4 cm minus 6.2 cm). This is a large difference for only 20 km. What is even more significant is that the group of stations near FA1337 are all negative residuals (around -10 cm) and the group of stations near FA1560 are all positive residuals (around 6 cm), this could be an indication of a large distribution correction due to the NAVD 88 design. We discussed the distribution correction in Part 7 (June 2016). These stations definitely needs to be investigated.
The next step in my process is to look at the NGS data sheets for these stations to determine how the stations were adjusted.
Step 3: Look at the station’s data sheet to identify how the station’s orthometric height was determined; for example, was it rigorously adjusted into the NAVD 88 (published height attribute is “Adjusted”) or was it determined by precise leveling performed by horizontal field party (published height attribute is “Leveling”).
The data sheet for station FA1337 states that the NAVD 88 attribute code is “GPS OBS.” [See box titled “Excerpt from NGS Data Sheet for PID FA1337.”] The data sheet for FA1560 states that the NAVD 88 attribute code is “Adjusted.” The orthometric height on the GPSBM file is different than the current published NAVD 88 orthometric height for station FA1337 (See table 3). This station’s leveling-derived orthometric height was superseded by a GNSS-derived orthometric height. Saying that, the GPSBM file only uses leveling-derived orthometric heights; therefore, stations that have been superseded by GNSS surveys are still included in the GPSBM file but their original published leveling-derived height is used for the analysis. Table 3 provides the orthometric height for FA1337 that was used in making GEOID12B. As previously mentioned, stations may be rejected by the geoid team based on the criteria outlined in the beginning of this column. Saying that, neither of the two stations were rejected by the NGS geoid team. This implies that the stations were consistent with their neighbors as far as the geoid model was concerned. Figure 6 confirms that all the stations around FA1337 and FA1560 are consistent with each other based on the Geoid16b_NAD geoid model. The fact that the two groups differ by 18 6 cm needs to be investigated.
Excerpt from NGS Data Sheet for PID FA1337
PROGRAM = datasheet95, VERSION = 8.9.1
1 National Geodetic Survey, Retrieval Date = OCTOBER 3, 2016
FA1337 ***********************************************************************
FA1337 HT_MOD – This is a Height Modernization Survey Station.
FA1337 DESIGNATION – RU 36
FA1337 PID – FA1337
FA1337 STATE/COUNTY- NC/RUTHERFORD
FA1337 COUNTRY – US
FA1337 USGS QUAD – FOREST CITY (1993)
FA1337
FA1337 *CURRENT SURVEY CONTROL
FA1337 ______________________________________________________________________
FA1337* NAD 83(2011) POSITION- 35 18 08.14237(N) 081 51 17.93516(W) ADJUSTED
FA1337* NAD 83(2011) ELLIP HT- 249.869 (meters) (06/27/12) ADJUSTED
FA1337* NAD 83(2011) EPOCH – 2010.00
FA1337* NAVD 88 ORTHO HEIGHT – 281.79 (meters) 924.5 (feet) GPS OBS
FA1337 ______________________________________________________________________
Figure 6 – GPS on BMS Residuals: Large Relative Differences Between a Group of Stations at the North Carolina/South Carolina Border (note: rejections by geoid team have been removed)
Figure 7 is a plot of the GPS on BMS residuals using Geoid16b_NAD that depicts a large difference between two stations only 20 km apart near the Maryland/West Virginia border. I will use this station pair to demonstrate the next step in my process.
Step 4 is to use the station’s NGS data sheet to determine the adjustment date the of station’s published NAVD 88 orthometric height.
The NAVD 88 attribute on the NGS data sheet states that both of these stations are coded as “Adjusted” but station JW0639 adjustment date is April 1995 (see box titled “excerpt from NGS Data Sheet for PID JW0639”) and JW1296 adjustment date was in June 1991 (the General Adjustment of NAVD 88). These large relative differences could be due to inconsistencies between adjusted heights due to the adjustment distribution corrections and/or constraints imposed in the April 1995 adjustment. Bench marks near the stations should be observed to determine if the same large relative difference exists, and the 1995 NAVD 88 adjustment project report should be reviewed to determine if a large distribution correction was applied.
Excerpt from NGS Data Sheet for PID JW0639
1 National Geodetic Survey, Retrieval Date = OCTOBER 3, 2016
JW0639 ***********************************************************************
JW0639 CBN – This is a Cooperative Base Network Control Station.
JW0639 DESIGNATION – J 17 RESET
JW0639 PID – JW0639
JW0639 STATE/COUNTY- MD/GARRETT
JW0639 COUNTRY – US
JW0639 USGS QUAD – ACCIDENT (1994)
JW0639
JW0639 *CURRENT SURVEY CONTROL
JW0639 ______________________________________________________________________
JW0639* NAD 83(2011) POSITION- 39 37 53.59739(N) 079 18 57.44776(W) ADJUSTED
JW0639* NAD 83(2011) ELLIP HT- 701.266 (meters) (06/27/12) ADJUSTED
JW0639* NAD 83(2011) EPOCH – 2010.00
JW0639* NAVD 88 ORTHO HEIGHT – 732.713 (meters) 2403.91 (feet) ADJUSTED
JW0639 ______________________________________________________________________
*
*
*
JW0639
JW0639.The orthometric height was determined by differential leveling and
JW0639.adjusted by the NATIONAL GEODETIC SURVEY
JW0639.in April 1995.
JW0639
Figure 7 – GPS on BMS Residuals Using Geoid16b_NAD: Large Relative Difference Between Stations About 20 km Apart Along MD/WV Border (note: rejections by geoid team have been removed).Figure 8 – GPS on BMS Residuals Using Geoid16b_NAD: Large relative Difference Between Stations 15 km Apart in Randolph County, West Virginia (note: rejections by geoid team have been removed).
Figure 8 is a plot of GPS on BMS residuals using Geoid16b_NAD that depicts a large relative difference between stations 15 km apart in Randolph County, West Virginia. This plot involves station HW3677 which has a published NAVD 88 attribute of “Leveling.” (See box titled “Excerpt from NGS Data Sheet for PID HW3677.”) The excerpt from the data sheet has the following statement: “The orthometric height was determined by differential leveling. The vertical network tie was performed by a horz. field party for horz. obs reductions. Reset procedures were used to establish the elevation.”
It would be useful if stations near this station were observed by GNSS surveys to determine what is occurring in this region.
Excerpt from NGS Data Sheet for PID HW3677
1 National Geodetic Survey, Retrieval Date = OCTOBER 2, 2016
HW3677 ***********************************************************************
HW3677 DESIGNATION – GPS 1
HW3677 PID – HW3677
HW3677 STATE/COUNTY- WV/RANDOLPH
HW3677 COUNTRY – US
HW3677 USGS QUAD – MILL CREEK (1995)
HW3677
HW3677 *CURRENT SURVEY CONTROL
HW3677 ______________________________________________________________________
HW3677* NAD 83(2011) POSITION- 38 37 50.21531(N) 079 55 29.64175(W) ADJUSTED
HW3677* NAD 83(2011) ELLIP HT- 1129.355 (meters) (06/27/12) ADJUSTED
HW3677* NAD 83(2011) EPOCH – 2010.00
HW3677* NAVD 88 ORTHO HEIGHT – 1159.91 (meters) 3805.5 (feet) LEVELING
HW3677 ______________________________________________________________________
*
*
*
*
HW3677 HW3677.The orthometric height was determined by differential leveling.
HW3677.The vertical network tie was performed by a horz. field party for horz.
HW3677.obs reductions. Reset procedures were used to establish the elevation.
HW3677
Figure 9 is a GPS on BMS residual plot of large relative stations about 30 km apart in Wasco County, Oregon. This plot has two stations with large differences and both stations have the NAVD 88 attribute of “Adjusted.” Their NGS data sheet states that they were both established in the general adjustment of NAVD 88 in June 1991. In this particular case, the leveling in this region is very old. As described in Part 7 (June 2016), you can retrieve all project identifiers for those projects with observations to or from a station using the station’s PID. The output from the NGS Data Sheet Mark Source Routine for PID RC1228 is shown in the box titled “Output from NGS Data Sheet Mark Source Routine.”
Output from NGS Data Sheet Mark Source Routine
Program: mark_sources Version: 3.0 Date: May 1, 2013RC1228OR/065 J 108
———————————————————-
GPS_OBS
———–
GPS_OBS FORE_POINT in GPS1655
DIR_OBS
———–
DIST_OBS
———–
VERT_OBS
———–
LEV_OBS
———–
LEVEL_OBS
———–
LEVEL_OBS STAND_POINT in L3410
LEVEL_OBS FORE_POINT in L3410***********************************************************
Figure 9 – GPS on BMS Residuals Using Geoid16b_NAD: Large relative stations about 30 km apart in Wasco County, Oregon (note: rejections by geoid team have been removed).
Figure 9 is a GPS on BMS residual plot of large relative stations about 30 km apart in Wasco County, Oregon. This plot has two stations with large differences and both stations have the NAVD 88 attribute of “Adjusted.” Their NGS data sheet states that they were both established in the general adjustment of NAVD 88 in June 1991. In this particular case, the leveling in this region is very old. As described in Part 7 (June 2016), you can retrieve all project identifiers for those projects with observations to or from a station using the station’s PID. The output from the NGS Data Sheet Mark Source Routine for PID RC1228 is shown in the box titled “Output from NGS Data Sheet Mark Source Routine.”
Excerpt from NGS Data Sheet for PID RC1228
PROGRAM = datasheet95, VERSION = 8.9.1
1 National Geodetic Survey, Retrieval Date = OCTOBER 2, 2016
RC1228 ***********************************************************************
RC1228 DESIGNATION – J 108
RC1228 PID – RC1228
RC1228 STATE/COUNTY- OR/WASCO
RC1228 COUNTRY – US
RC1228 USGS QUAD – WAPINITIA (1996)
RC1228
RC1228 *CURRENT SURVEY CONTROL
RC1228 ______________________________________________________________________
RC1228* NAD 83(2011) POSITION- 45 06 49.69715(N) 121 19 19.81396(W) ADJUSTED
RC1228* NAD 83(2011) ELLIP HT- 624.596 (meters) (06/27/12) ADJUSTED
RC1228* NAD 83(2011) EPOCH – 2010.00
RC1228* NAVD 88 ORTHO HEIGHT – 646.140 (meters) 2119.88 (feet) ADJUSTED
RC1228 ______________________________________________________________________
*
*
*
RC1228
RC1228 HISTORY – Date Condition Report By
RC1228 HISTORY – 1934 MONUMENTED CGS
RC1228 HISTORY – 1985 MARK NOT FOUND USPSQD
RC1228 HISTORY – 1985 MARK NOT FOUND USPSQD
RC1228 HISTORY – 20001010 GOOD OR-065
Figure 10 – GPS on BMS Residuals Using Geoid16b_NAD: Large relative Differences between Stations along the Oregon/Washington Border (note: rejections by geoid team have been removed).
Figure 10 is a plot of GPS on BMS residuals using Geoid16b_NAD depicting large relative differences between stations along the Oregon/Washington State border. It is the near Puget Island along the Columbia River. Station SC0330 and SC1086 are only 7 km apart and the relative difference is -20 cm (-11.4 cm minus 8.6 cm). This could be an issue with the NAVD 88 network design because there doesn’t appear to be many river crossing along the river between border stations. The fact that the residuals on the Washington State side are negative and the Oregon State side are positive is an indication that the stations need to be investigated.
Figure 11 – GPS on BMS Residuals Using Geoid16b_NAD: Large Negative Residuals North of Border between Oregon and Washington and Positive (or Small Negative) Residuals South of Border (note: rejections by geoid team have been removed).
The last figure, figure 11, is a plot of the GPS on BMS residuals using Geoid16b_NAD model that depicts large negative residuals north of the border between Oregon and Washington and positive (or small negative) residuals south of the border. This plot shows that the northern side of the river has large negative residuals all the way to the Pacific Coast. Once again, this is an indication that this portion of the NAVD 88 network should be investigated.
This column has focused on analyzing NGS’ GPS on BM data set that is used to make NGS’ hybrid geoid models. It provided procedures that users could employ when analyzing the differences between the modeled geoid values and the computed geoid values using GPS/Leveling data. This GPSBM data set or one similar will be used to make the next hybrid geoid model, as well as provide input to the transformation model between NAVD 88 and the new 2022 Vertical Reference System. All geospatial users should help develop this GPS on BMS data set to help improve the National Spatial Reference System and future hybrid geoid models. This column provided several examples of large relative differences in residuals between neighboring stations. Each example represents stations that should investigated based on different reasons, such as a weak NAVD 88 leveling network design in the region, the station’s published height attribute code implies that the station was not rigorously adjusted into the NAVD 88, and station pairs have different adjustment dates indicating a possible adjustment distribution correction issue or movement.
NGS has a program called “GPS on Bench Mark” to support users that occupy bench marks with GNSS equipment. This web site contains a lot of good information and provides the users with methods to recover, observe, and report information about stations in NGS’ database. The write up from the webpage is given below. I have highlighted a few sentences that the reader may find useful.
Improve the National Spatial Reference System (NSRS):
Recover: Look up the description of an existing bench mark and visit the bench mark of your choice. Observe: Record field notes, take digital photos, and collect GPS observations or coordinates for the bench mark you visit. Report: Use online tools to send the information to NGS.
Where?
Currently there are over 400,000 bench marks across the Conterminous United States (CONUS), Alaska, Hawaii and all U.S. territories. Tidal marks and bench marks are used for determining heights. Use the maps to prioritize which bench marks to observe.
Who can participate?
Anyone with Global Positioning System (GPS) enabled phones, hand held devices or survey-grade GPS receivers can participate. Recommended procedures vary depending on the type of equipment used.
When should I start?
You can collect and share information any time. Join volunteer efforts across the United States in celebration of National Surveyors Week beginning March 20, 2016. Contact the local National Society of Professional Surveyors chapter or your NGS geodetic advisor to learn about projects being planned in your local area.
By providing GPS on benchmarks today you can help NGS improve the next hybrid geoid model, increasing access to NAVD 88, and enabling conversions to the new vertical datum in 2022.
You can also help the local surveying community know about nearby marks by improving scaled horizontal positions and updating the mark condition or description by submitting a mark recovery.
What happens next?
NGS will use your data to update its databases and improve future models and tools. If you still have questions, contact the GPS on BM Team.
In addition to participating in the NGS’ GPS on Bench Mark program, all geospatial users should participate in NGS’ 2017 geospatial summit, which will be held in April in Silver Spring, Maryland.
This summit is an opportunity for all users of the National Spatial Reference System (NSRS) to obtain a better understanding of NGS’ plans to modernize the NSRS. Users will be able to provide feedback directly to NGS leadership. My next column will address NGS plans to replace the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 in 2022.
The GEO-FOG 3D inertial navigation system (INS) uses sensor fusion to deliver reliable, high-accuracy navigation and control to a wide variety of unmanned, autonomous and manned aerial, ground, marine and subsurface marine applications and platforms. Other applications include navigation and control, positioning and imaging, georeferencing, land surveying, robotics, underground navigation, stabilization and orientation.
Designed for demanding navigation and control applications, the GEO-FOG 3D has performance monitoring and instability protections to ensure stable and reliable data. Using an innovative artificial intelligence algorithm, its intelligent high-performance filter is capable of extracting significantly more information from the 1750 IMU core processor than a typical Kalman filter.
The GEO-FOG 3D is built upon the high-performance fiber-optic gyro (FOG)-based 1750 inertial measurement unit (IMU). It contains three DSP-1750 fiber optic gyros integrated with three very low noise micro-electro-mechanical systems (MEMS) accelerometers as well as a pressure sensor, a three-axis magnetometer, and a triple-frequency GNSS receiver.
The triple frequency receiver provides 8 millimeters of positioning accuracy and supports all GNSS systems. It also offers data rates up to 1000 Hz; data can be output over a high-speed RS-422 interface or optional RS-232 interface. The rugged GEO-FOG 3D INS is protected from reverse polarity, overvoltage, surges, static and short circuits on all external surfaces.
Key Features
Core processor: KVH 1750 IMU
6 degrees of freedom (DoF) IMU consisting of integrated FOGs and accelerometers
Triple-frequency Trimble GNSS receiver
Sensor fusion algorithm delivers accurate, reliable data for navigation, orientation, and control
A new study based on GPS measurements of the Earth’s crust suggests the Greenland ice sheet is melting 7 percent faster than previously believed and may contribute more to future sea level rise than predicted, reports the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.
“We’ve underestimated the rate of ice loss by about 7.6 percent,” says Michael Bevis of The Ohio State University, one of the study’s co-authors.
The research found that Greenland lost close to 2,700 gigatons of ice from 2003–2013, rather than the 2,500 gigatons figure that scientists previously believed. The study, published in the journal Science Advances, is an international effort that started in 2007, with contributions from the U.S., Denmark and Luxembourg.
Over the past two decades the Greenland ice sheet has been shrinking — partly due to accelerated glacier flow and partly because of surface melt. However, scientists have not been able to pinpoint exactly how much the melting ice sheet is contributing to global sea level rise — information key to making predictions about future sea rise levels. Part of the challenge has been a lack of on-site data.
For this study teams of scientists spent years installing GPS devices around the perimeter of the Greenland ice sheet to collect new data. The team discovered that the hotspot in the Earth’s mantle that feeds Iceland’s active volcanoes has been distorting data.
DT Research has released the DT395CR and DT395GS rugged tablets. While designed for field professionals, the tablets cost less than consumer-grade tablets over the lifetime of the product, DT Research said.
The DT395GS rugged tablet by DT Research.
Both DT395 tablets are highly durable to withstand extreme environments, designed with fully integrated options to eliminate easily broken attachments in mission-critical scenarios, and include security, privacy and productivity settings.
The DT395GS tablet is designed for field applications with a high-accuracy GNSS module that is compatible with existing GIS software for mapping applications and brings together the advanced workflow for GIS data capture, accurate positioning and data transmission. The u-blox M8 GNSS module is capable of concurrent reception of GPS and GLONASS for up to 2-meter accuracy.
“Many businesses have adopted mobile tablets with the goal of increasing productivity by leveraging the versatile tablet form-factor,” said Daw Tsai, president of DT Research. “But companies within construction, field service, logistics, manufacturing and warehousing have found that consumer-grade tablets are too fragile for their environment — requiring costly repairs and replacements that introduce expensive downtime. Our new DT395 rugged tablets give vertical industries exactly what they need with high reliability and lower TCO (total cost of ownership) over the lifetime of the product.”
According to a VDC Research study, the average annual TCO of a ruggedized tablet is 22 percent lower than the average annual TCO of a non-rugged tablet. The study found average failure rates for non-rugged tablets is 15.2 percent compared to 6.9 percent for rugged tablets. Lost productivity, as a result of mobile device failure, was a leading contributor to higher TCO for non-rugged tablets. Mobile workers lost an average of 52-80 minutes of productivity when their mobile device failed. (Source: VDC Research, “Total Cost of Ownership Models for Mobile Computing and Wireless Platforms,” Third Edition.)
Unlike consumer-grade tablets, the DT395CR and DT395GS ruggedized tablets are designed to be used in a variety of indoor and outdoor environments with full HD anti-reflection outdoor viewable displays. The tablets are IP65 and MIL-STD-810G rated to withstand 4-foot drops and extreme temperatures (-4° F to 140° F), and resist water, dust and humidity.
“We tried iPads, but they were not suited for our environment,” said Marty Phillips, director of engineering at Murray Equipment, Inc. “Our customers do millions of dollars of fertilizer loading within an eight-week window in a broad range of weather conditions. If a remote control tablet is down for even an hour, it’s a significant revenue loss. We have used DT Research rugged tablets in our automated liquid-handling facilities across the U.S. for more than three years with no downtime or repair/replacement costs. The reliability of DT Research’s rugged tablets is unmatched.”
Both the DT395CR and DT395GS have an 8.9-inch display with 1920 x 1200 resolution and capacitive touch, and weigh 2.87 pounds. The tablets run on an Intel Atom Quad Core CPU with 4GB RAM running Microsoft Windows 10 IoT Enterprise OS.
Security, privacy and productivity settings
“Security, privacy and productivity are a growing concern in many organizations,” Helen Fanucci, GM of Americas Device IoT Experience, Microsoft. “We are pleased to see DT Research utilize the Windows 10 IoT Enterprise-grade security to support mission-critical rugged tablets for customers and deliver a safer device experience, which enhances productivity for a variety of mobile scenarios in manufacturing, field service, logistics and other industries.”
The DT395 tablets leverage advanced Windows 10 IoT Enterprise OS security including Device Guard, combining hardware and software security to lock down a device so that it can only run trusted applications. The DT395 also includes lock-down features to protect against malicious users while providing a custom-defined user experience.
Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, and RFID can pose a security issue when using consumer-grade tablets within a business environment. DT Research DT395 rugged tablets can be purpose-built with a camera privacy mode and
preconfigured with Bluetooth, RFID and Wi-Fi disable functions. The DT395 rugged tablets can also eliminate access to internet or social media applications to address productivity challenges.
Customizable options
DT Research offers customizable options for the DT395CR and DT395GS including an optimized OS and BIOS. Customers can choose to have the options below fully-integrated.
3G WWAN or 4G LTE
2D Barcode Scanner
Class 1 Bluetooth (1000 feet)
Camera (5 Megapixel back camera)
GNSS Module (u-blox M8)
HF/RFID 13.56MHz reader
HDMI-in and Ethernet port
Six-pin push/pull connector for EIA/RS-232/485/422, USB port and Ethernet port