Tag: geospatial

Intergeo 2016 preview event focuses on smart cities

Photo: Intergeo 2015

Intergeo 2016 host DVW German Society for Geodesy, Geoinformation and Land Management gathered together experts from the worlds of business, public authorities and science to talk about this year’s key topic of the show: the “smart city.” Held in April at Hamburg’s Agency for Geoinformation and Surveying, the event focused on what an intelligent, digital city might look like and what role geoinformation would play as cities and metropolitan regions become “smart.”

Intergeo 2016, the leading international event for the geospatial community, will be held Oct. 11-13 in Hamburg, Germany, and also will focus on smart cities as a multi-faceted issue to shape the future.

During the preview, attendees agreed that cities must, and will, become more intelligent because of the benefits it has to society, Intergeo officials say in a May news release.

Preview event attendees included Jörg Amend, Trimble Germany GmbH; Chirine Etezadzadeh, Ph.D., SmartCity.institute; Rolf-Werner Welzel, managing director, Hamburg’s Agency for Geoinformation and Surveying; Sebastian Hetzel, Hamburg Traffic and Road Network Authority; and Prof. Thomas Kersten, HafenCity University Hamburg.

“They all agreed that the increasing penetration of digital technologies into cities is not an end in itself.” Intergeo says in the news release. “First and foremost is the common good of society and the advantages that digitalization offers inhabitants. This will ensure that cities can be run on a more intelligent basis and thus become a sustainable living space. The preview participants felt that smart geodata was an essential prerequisite in this regard.”

The host city for Intergeo 2016, Hamburg has been quick to position itself with “Hamburg’s Strategy for the Digital City,” which aims to develop a standardized smart city strategy. Key areas include mobility, energy, business and work, accommodation and city life. The city’s residents also will be involved in the strategy.

The roll-out of intelligent solutions for individual segments of the city is done in dialogue with residents, politicians, administrators, business people and scientists. Taking traffic as an example, smart mobility concepts are designed to improve the flow of traffic so as to minimize the delays caused by congestion while also lowering CO2 emissions, Intergeo says. Measures of a smart city include intelligent transport systems, semi-automated vehicle guidance, sharing concepts, intelligent parking facility management, apps for inhabitant participation and city planning processes that help to avoid traffic in the best-case scenario.

Everyone at the preview agreed that a standardized language must be developed and understood if forward-looking, complex processes such as the development of an intelligent digital city are to be successfully rolled out, according to Intergeo.

May 19, 2016
European Navigation Conference to focus on innovation

Helsinki Cathedral.

The 24th edition of the European Navigation Conference (ENC 2016) will be held May 30 to June 2 at the Finlandia Hall in Helsinki, Finland.

ENC 2016 is co-sponsored by EUGIN, Nordic Institute of Navigation, IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems Society.

The conference focus will be on innovations in positioning, navigation and timing technologies and applications for land, sea and air.

Topic areas include GNSS positioning, indoor and urban navigation and position-based applications. Special topics include navigation challenges in the Arctic and positioning solutions using geospatial big data and in intelligent transportation. Furthermore, it promises to be a unique networking event for all participants from academia, the public sector, and industry.

Welcome keynotes will be presented by Anne Berner, Finland’s minister of Transport and Communications, Matthias Petschke, director for European Satellite Navigation Programmes, European Commission, and Tiina Tuurnala, deputy director general, Finnish Transport Agency.

Technical keynotes will be given by Jari Syrjärinne, HERE Ltd., and Gérard Lachapelle, University of Calgary. The closing keynote by Prof. John Raquet, Air Force Institute of Technology. The conference will feature also technical presentations, panels, posters and an industry exhibition.

The social program of ENC 2016 will showcase unique sights that Helsinki has to offer, including the ice-breaker evening onboard the actual ice-breaker vessel Urho and performances by a traditional Finnish Kantele musician.

The preliminary program is now available, and registration is open. Registration options include fees for the whole conference as well as for individual days.

April 25, 2016
What really matters to GIS professionals

Last week I attended a workshop sponsored by the Oregon GPS User’s Group (soon to be Oregon GNSS User’s Group). OGUG invited Michael Dennis, RLS, PE, current Ph.D. geomatics student, former full-time National Geodetic Survey (NGS) employee, all-around smart guy and entertaining speaker to present an all-day workshop entitled “Space Time and Datum Forensics – A Geodetic Workshop.” Let me tell you, its 260 slides of stuff that matters in GIS, surveying and GNSS if you’re working with data at the sub-meter level and better.

The audience was largely surveyors, and that’s a problem. I’d go as far as saying that it’s significantly more important for GIS professionals to understand this topic than surveyors. The reason is because surveyors are project-oriented. For example, Joe Surveyor is hired to complete a boundary and topo survey for a new commercial real estate development project. He does the research, does the field work, completes the deliverables, issues an invoice, and places the project file into storage. Joe might look at the file again in six months when construction begins and may never look at it again after that.

Surveyors are short-term, project-based data generators. On the other hand, GIS professionals are long-term data managers. Therefore, for surveyors, their data doesn’t require accuracy, it requires precision. On the other hand, GIS professionals value accuracy much more, or at least they should.

The reason is because all the data layers in their GIS need to play together. GIS layers need to be spatially consistent. Managing a spatial and tabular-robust GIS database is a substantially more complex task than the typical surveyor encounters. Perhaps that complexity is one of the reasons that the spatial geodesy of a GIS database largely falls below the noise floor. In other words, there are much larger problems to tackle in a substantial GIS database other than geodesy.

How many surveyors have ever had to deal with SAP databases? How about an SDE (how many of you had to Google the acronym)? How about writing a script that queries a MySQL database to extract features with particular attributes? That’s just the beginning.

Before a surveyor criticizes a GIS for its accuracy, or lack thereof, that person should spend some time dealing with some of the data-management issues encountered by a GIS professional. There are entire conferences focused on only this subject. That’s what GIS is all about: data management, long-term data management.

A GIS doesn’t get filed after every project is completed; it gets added to the last project, and with each project, the database grows larger, more unwieldy, and likely more difficult to manage. And then, someone or some company throws a curveball at them, a new schema, a new operating system, or a new enterprise GIS software version that impacts the entire database. The IT department gets involved, and then procurement gets involved. Before you know it, it’s meetings after meetings. You get the picture.

Among all of the complex GIS database management issues, the geodesy of GIS has stayed below the noise floor. In other words, it’s been largely ignored. But as I’ve written in the past for GPS World magazine and this publication, GNSS, remote sensing and other sensors are becoming cheaper, faster and more precise. Therefore, data being appended to GIS databases are becoming more precise.

This creates challenges by highlighting the legacy inaccurate or imprecise data in the GIS database, which in turn creates the necessity for another decision to be made: what should we do about it? The answer to that question is for another article, or three.

With that, there are a few slides from Michael’s total of 260 slides in the workshop that I would like to highlight.

His second slide is one my favorites. It’s a bit rhetorical in that there is no answer, but succinctly states the problem. The value of a GIS database is the relationship of spatial data amongst its elements. How close is the gas pipeline to the nearest home? Where’s the shut-off valve for main water line on First Street? Which homes will be at risk of flooding during a storm surge in Galveston, Texas? How fast will the latest virus likely spread if the first case is discovered in Atlanta vs. Nowhere, USA? GIS can answer these questions, but its answers are only as good as the data in the GIS. Good ol’ garbage-in, garbage-out.

Before we get into the weeds, this is another setup slide that succinctly frames the challenge.

To be clear, a coordinate system always includes a datum (a.k.a. geographic coordinate system, geometric reference system/frame), and it may or may not also include a map projection. Examples of projected coordinate systems include UTM (Universal Transverse Mercator), US SPC (State Plane Coordinates), Web Mercator (think Google Earth), Lambert Conformal Conic, and Gauss-Kruger for my European brethren. These systems must always include a specific datum. Common geodetic datums are ITRF08, IGS08, NAD83, NAD27, ED50, and WGS-84. You may have different map projections for each datum. For example, UTM or SPC can be referenced to NAD83. It’s a straight-forward mathematical operation to change the projection if the underlying datum is the same. However, UTM coordinates referenced to NAD83 or WGS-84 is a different subject altogether. Going to/from UTM/NAD83 to UTM/WGS-84 is far from being a straight-forward mathematical operation.

The next feature slide gets into the weeds a bit. This is a subject I’ve written about for a few years and was somewhat highlighted in two articles I wrote (and a webinar I moderated) called “Nightmare on GIS Street.” How many of you think you use data referenced to WGS-84?

WGS-84 referenced data is probably the most widely mis-used. As you can see from the above slide, the definition of WGS-84 has changed over time. You’ll never find a survey mark on the ground with coordinates referenced to WGS-84. If you do, it’s wrong. This is because it’s a military thing. WGS-84 is managed by the US Department of Defense. More specifically, the US National Geospatial Intelligence Agency (formerly NIMA, formerly DMA). Fortunately, in recent years, the Department of Defense has aligned WGS-84 with ITRF (International Terrestrial Reference Frame) — most recently to ITRF08 — and ITRF/IGS coordinates are publically available. For example, IGS08 (International GNSS Service of 2008) coordinates are published for NGS CORS and available in NGS OPUS solutions (for the purpose of this discussion we can consider ITRF and IGS the same). However, there is a caveat: ITRF08/IGS08/WGS-84 coordinates are referenced to specific dates (epochs).

WGS-84 was aligned with ITRF08 at epoch 2005.00, meaning that the WGS-84 coordinates were defined for the date of January 1, 2005. NGS publishes IGS08 coordinates at epoch 2005.00 for CORS. But OPUS solutions give IGS08 coordinates at the date of the GPS data file, and both autonomous and WAAS-corrected GPS gives positions at the mid-year epoch of the current year (i.e., positions are now at epoch 2016.5). This matters because stuff moves, including the ground you are standing on. Some places move more than others. California moves more than Missouri. Chile moves more than Germany. January 1, 2005 is 11+ years ago. If the ground is moving 3cm/yr, that’s 33cm over 11+ years. If you’re counting centimeters, that’s quite a few of them.

Software vendors have a hard time keeping up with modern datum transformations, and this next slide is a perfect example of that. It’s not just one vendor. Nearly all software vendors “aren’t doing it right.” In this slide, this software vendor displays 10 different transformations from “WGS84” to “NAD83”. Which one do you use? None of them get it right.

The most accurate one is still 20 cm in error. The worst is more than a meter in error. It makes you wonder why you spent $8,000 on that sub-foot GPS handheld when your GIS software may be introducing three feet of error.

Finally, should you be concerned about this stuff?

If you expect some of your data layers to be accurate to less than three meters, the answer is “yes.”

I’ll likely continue this discussion next month or in the coming months,and also provide a link to Michael’s 260-page slideshow.

Thanks, and see you next month.

Follow me on Twitter at GPSGIS_Eric

March 17, 2016
Trimble adds scalable GNSS receiver to geospatial portfolio

Trimble has added a new scalable GNSS receiver to its geospatial portfolio. The Trimble R9s GNSS receiver is scalable and flexible. Built on a sleek, modular GNSS platform, geospatial professionals can add functionality according to their workflow demands, such as being deployed as an RTK base station or an RTK rover mounted on a rod, in a backpack or on a vehicle.

The Trimble R9s GNSS receiver provides access to multiple GNSS constellations, wide-band 450 MHz internal radio, Ethernet connectivity and is easily configurable via the front panel. The solution also offers scalability from an entry-level receiver for post-processing, to a full-featured triple-frequency GNSS base and rover.

The R9s also supports corrections services, including Trimble CenterPoint RTX (better than 4 centimeters delivered via L-band satellite) and enhanced xFill technology, which allows surveyors to continue collecting data with centimeter-level accuracy indefinitely when RTK or VRS connectivity is lost.

Options such as Trimble Access field software, Trimble DL Android app and Web user interface or front panel allow the receiver to be configured for optimal performance to support a broad range of survey workflows.

February 19, 2016
Field Technology Conference: The forest and the fish

PORTLAND, Ore. — Two weeks ago, I attended (and hosted) the Field Technology Conference here in Portland, Oregon. This is the fifth year of the conference. In years past, it’s had a forestry emphasis primary because the Western Forestry and Conservation Association has been a major partner in organizing it.

This year, the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission and Pacific Northwest Aquatic Monitoring Partnership joined the organizing committee. The result was a 50-percent increase in attendance and a more diverse audience.

Another newcomer to the conference was a Civil GPS Service Interface Committee (CGSIC) U.S. State and Local Government Subcommittee meeting, which was co-located with the Field Technology Conference, offering a direct connection between civil GPS users and U.S. government representatives who are involved in GPS.

The conference was a two-day event comprised of three technology tracks: a track for general field technology and two tracks for industry-specific (forestry and fisheries) subjects, hands-on technology demonstrations and a field trip. Although forestry and fisheries professionals were the featured user groups, nearly all of the subject matters — GPS, UAVs, smartphones, tablets, laser rangefinders, lidar, photogrammetry, and field data-collection software — is applicable for a wide range of natural resource users involved with GIS (geographic information systems) technology.

As one of the hosts of the conference, I started out moderating the general session with all of the attendees in one room. This year, my general session topics include geospatial awareness and growth, GPS/GNSS technology, mobile devices (smartphones and tablets) and UAVs.

Something new I tried this year, which worked out really well, was using audience response “clickers.” These small handheld devices were given to each audience member and allowed them to answer multiple choice questions that I posed in my Powerpoint presentation. I’ve always been a fan of audience input, and started polling the audience during webinars I conducted many years ago. For this conference, I used an audience polling system from Turning Technologies. I’d like to share with you the questions I asked the audience and the responses that I received.

Question #1: Are you here?

Comment: This was a test question to see if the audience response system was working properly. I’m still not sure if the audience just had a great sense of humor or a technical problem. I think the former was true. ☺

Question #2: Have you attended this conference before?

Comment: This was great news that the conference is attracting new attendees. It’s an annual event held in November, so keep your eyes on it for next year!

Question #3: After a brief discussion about the availability of higher accuracy geospatial data (eg. GNSS, UAVs, etc.), I was curious about the level of accuracy the audience required in their typical tasks.

What geospatial data accuracy do your typical tasks require?

Comment: I wasn’t sure what to expect with this question, but since I’ve polled a fisheries audience before, I had a feeling accuracy requirements would vary, and they did. Previously, a fisheries audience had told me that they were satisfied with 5-meter accuracy.

Question #4: The last question leads to this one. I wondered if the audience accuracy requirement was driven by requirement or by availability.

Are you satisfied with the accuracy of the geospatial data you use?

Comment: The answer is clear that, generally speaking, the audience would use higher accuracy geospatial data if it was available.

Question #5: The next question was a pure technology one. In the day of BYOD (Bring Your Own Device), I’ve been very interested in monitoring the trends in mobile devices. The question about operating systems is relevant because it determines which data collection software you can use. For example, if a specific data-collection software is written only for Windows, it will not run on an Android or Apple (iOS) device.

Which operating system do you use on your mobile device(s)?

Comment: These responses surprised me a bit. They certainly don’t match the global market share figures that I’ve read. Following are the latest mobile device operating system market share numbers reported by IDC and Statista.

Question #6: The next part of my presentation discussed unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV, also known as UAS or drone) technology. UAVs were a significant part of the conference this year. We had many presentations and some static demonstrations on UAV technology. On this subject, I had several questions for the audience.

Do you currently use a UAS?

Comment: These answers were not surprising. Flying UAVs commercially in the U.S. requires a special permission from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). To date, the FAA has only issued about 2,000 such exemptions.

Question #7: Do you anticipate using a UAS?

Comment: These answers surprised me a bit. I had no idea the audience would be so interested in personally flying a UAV. This has me thinking about this the same way I think about GPS receivers — just another tool in the toolbox.

Question #8: How much are you willing to spend on a UAS?

Comment: These responses don’t surprise me, although I polled another audience at a different venue that was more engineering-oriented, and the answers were a bit different. The engineering-oriented audience was willing to spend more for a UAV.

Furthermore, in speaking with various attendees during the conference, there was quite a bit of interest in attaching different sensors to UAVs for various requirements. For example, lidar, multi-spectral and thermal (temperature) sensors were commonly mentioned as payloads they would like to see. The challenge is that the cost of a UAV rises sharply when these types of payloads are accommodated, and conflicts with the audience’s response about how much they are willing to pay for a UAV.

In next month’s column, I’ll post links to the papers presented at the Field Technology Conference as well as videos of papers presented by the CGSIC folks.

See you next month.

Follow me on Twitter at https://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

Source: FTC

November 30, 2015
Have Accuracy, Will Travel
Photo courtesy of Trimble.

BYOD Sub-Meter Positioning for Mapping and GIS Professionals

Employees bringing their own mobile phones and tablets to their jobs in the field enables them to complete more tasks using fewer devices. However, this practice introduces operational and security vulnerabilities.

By Matt van Doorn

In the mapping and GIS industries, mobile devices such as smart phones and tablets have a growing presence in the field; they enable businesses to work smarter and more efficiently. The Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) trend — essentially the use of commercial-grade devices for work purposes — will likely not slow down. BYOD is not without its pain points. Organizations face many security vulnerabilities when commercial-grade devices access critical data via corporate IT networks. Additionally, there are applications where a mobile device’s location capabilities are not accurate enough for GIS professionals to efficiently and effectively locate an asset and collect data.

Company IT departments have multiple options that control and monitor access to combat BYOD security issues; however these options do not resolve the accuracy issue. Traditional company-issued handheld integrated receivers for data collection are designed to meet accuracy demands in almost any physical environment condition. While these devices are the most appropriate technology option for some applications, they tend to be expensive for the positioning tasks where a smart phone or mobile device is “good enough.”

What to do when better accuracy on a mobile device is required, but it doesn’t make sense to invest thousands of dollars in a traditional receiver? With proper research, field professionals will find professional solutions that pair with consumer-grade smart devices to produce the requisite accuracy for a fraction of the cost of a traditional receiver.

Requirements and Accuracy

At a minimum, handheld receivers destined to work in conjunction with mobile devices must meet the following requirements:
- The device must have moisture ingress protection to function properly in snow, ice, rain or dust environments.
- The device must survive falls in hard terrain. It should have shock, drop and vibration protection.
- The device must last the full workday for the professional to complete all workflows on a single battery charge.
Legacy company-owned receivers typically meet the requirements above and have had a long-term reputation for accurately providing positioning data. These devices are still the appropriate solution for environments where it does not make sense to take a smart device, such as a remote location in rough terrain where the smart device may not perform.

However, a smart device can in many cases enable the employee to be more efficient. Thanks to the accessory market, many of the above-listed requirements can be easily addressed. For example, smart-phone juice packs can fix the battery longevity issue; cases can protect against weather, shock or dropping; and screen covers can address the sunlight screen visibility issue. With a smart device in hand, GIS and mapping professionals not only have access to GPS data, but they are able to access and complete other work-related tasks from the same device such as email, internet access and voicemail. Plus, a smart phone is only a fraction of the cost of traditional receivers.

The most critical component that smart devices still cannot address is sub-meter accuracy, which many mapping and GIS professionals require to successfully do their job.

Accuracy Drives Cost. Mapping and GIS businesses are acutely aware of the efficiencies created by greater accuracy. With poor information, errors become increasingly costly. When robust, accurate data is collected, there is a direct correlation to improved workflows and operations. This allows professionals to be more strategic in ensuring that applications are effective and efficient across operations.

Aerial and satellite imagery made initial steps toward generating more accurate data collection, bringing mapping and GIS professionals to within a 50-centimeter range of the assets. Subsequently, high-speed lidar collection tools, designed to capture large areas at 5–10 cm accuracy, came to the market. While these tools significantly improved data collection, precise measurement typically requires more time, more expense and highly specific instruments in order to generate more data.

Today, handheld receivers can achieve high accuracy without using survey-grade tools, in applications that include:
- Mapping: Any application, including locations, quantities, densities, specific areas and map change.
- Aquatic monitoring
- Buried utility infrastructure/cable location
- Water/wastewater disposal
- Location and elevation measurements: for example, elevation data on manholes or trunk lines.
Requirements vary across applications and industries. The mapping/GIS professional must determine the level of accuracy their workflow requires.

Accuracy Evaluation

A typical smart device, properly assisted, can achieve an accuracy range of up to 5–6 meters when used to locate an asset. In many cases this is good enough. To obtain positioning data, iOS devices use the application “Location Services,” which is available on multiple mobile platforms. Location Services enables location-based apps and other applications to use information from GPS and cellular and Wi-Fi networks to determine location information. The location provided by a hybrid system with cellular-assisted GPS (A-GPS) allows the device to identify location within a 5–6 meter range of an asset. Wi-Fi positioning alone can determine a location with an accuracy of about 74 meters, and cellular positioning alone offers about a 600-meter range for location, according to industry sources (www.windowscentral.com/gps-vs-agps-quick-tutorial).

However, cellular positioning can be limited when there is no network available. In remote or industrial settings, this could create difficulties in asset location. In water/wastewater, for example, when a GIS professional is in a ditch looking for a valve or a meter and there isn’t a network connection, the accuracy level provided without GPS may not be sufficient for that application. When A-GPS is not available due to a lack of cellular network, GIS professionals also have to deal with convergence time.

Another example involves searching for a manhole cover when the ground is covered by a couple feet of snow. In this case, the 5-6 meter range is quite large and could lead to a lot of time spent digging until the manhole is uncovered. This wastes time and energy, and leads to higher costs. Some receivers have the sub-meter capability and can provide the location data directly to the professional’s consumer-grade smart device through Bluetooth. By simply pairing the receiver with a cellphone, the GIS professional can quickly locate the asset, collect data and move on to the next task.

Accuracy Solutions

Location shortcomings in consumer-grade devices generally boil down to antenna performance. Consumer-grade smart devices are designed for exactly that: consumers. With antennas for Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and GPS built into the small device, there will be compromises in location accuracy. When location must be pinpointed, an integrated handheld receiver can enhance accuracy. Receivers are readily available with 12 channels parallel tracking. Some receivers can also support multiple satellite constellations, including GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, Beidou, and QZSS with up to 44 channels of parallel tracking. The accuracy of these devices is further supported by augmentation: WAAS, EGNOS, MSAS and GAGAN. These receivers can provide sub-meter accuracy, with asset location with as close as 60 centimeters. Some devices also support Virtual Reference Stations (VRS) and Trimble’s Real Time eXtended (RTX) correction service for sub-meter accuracy. Some RTX services achieve real-time sub-meter accuracy with IP and cellular connectivity, or over satellite L-band.

A receiver that integrates with the workflows of various mapping and GIS softwares as well as third-party applications will pair up nicely with a mobile device. The computations are all done for the professional, and will transmit signals via Bluetooth into the host devices using NMEA protocol. On iOS and Android devices, the location is available through the Location Services API. Third-party applications are also able to work with the receiver through consumer-grade devices that utilize the location services API. Some receivers are available across operating systems including iOS, Android and Windows, and are available to upgrade to the latest smart device whenever needed.

Important Device Attributes

Receivers designed to be compatible with a variety of smart devices can be shared among multiple devices. When it is time for a smart device upgrade, the new device can easily integrate with the receiver. Additional features that make these receivers especially convenient to use in the field include:
- Small size: Mapping and GIS professionals don’t always have an extra hand available to carry an extra device. If it can fit in a vest, jacket pocket, pouch, clipped onto a belt, or pole mounted it will function in many scenarios.
- Lightweight.
- Rugged: Some receivers comply with MIL-STD-810 ruggedness with IP65 rating for shock, drop and vibration.
- Battery life: for field performance for a full work day.
- External antenna port: An accessory port for external data if the collecor needs to be mounted on top of a vehicle, or in a hard hat situation; a bonus feature worth consideration.
BYOD Trend and Limitations

The smart-device market will not cool down anytime soon. Gartner Research predicts that in 2015, almost 2.3 billion devices will be shipped worldwide. Whether these smart devices are provided by the company or truly BYOD, they will need to be augmented to effectively serve the applications they are intended to support. Solving the security issue can have a bearing on whether a company chooses to let employees use their own device or provide one; either way, enhancing the location capabilities of the device can be easily achieved with accurate receivers.

Matt van Doorn is a product management, product marketing, market management and business development professional at Trimble Navigation. He has years of experience in the data communication and telecommunication industry with deep knowledge of international markets.
October 4, 2015
Spectra Precision Introduces New and Enhanced Survey Solutions

Spectra Precision introduced at INTERGEO this week new and enhanced products in its portfolio of survey solutions. With the new additions, survey and construction professionals have more positioning instrument choices to meet their job requirements, the company said.

Spectra Precision made the announcement at INTERGEO 2015, the world’s largest conference on geodesy, geoinformatics and land management.

The new and enhanced products include:

Spectra Precision FOCUS 35 RX – A new range of motorized total stations providing high-speed, accuracy and precision in measurement. The FOCUS 35 RX robotic instrument moves the power of the observer from the instrument to the range pole, improving efficiency. The speed of observation and precise positioning of the FOCUS 35 RX Robotic Total Station is provided by patented StepDrive motion technology, which controls the horizontal and vertical motion of the motors, eliminating the need for traditional motion locks. The FOCUS 35 RX includes a tracking sensor that uses LockNGo FastTrack tracking technology, enabling the instrument to constantly lock onto the prism.

The FOCUS 35 RX is available in 2”, 3” or 5” accuracies, features market leading extended operating time with its dual battery system and is controlled externally by Spectra Precision Ranger, Nomad, or T41 data collectors running Spectra Precision Survey Pro or Spectra Precision Layout Pro field software on the Ranger or Nomad.

“The streamlined design, extremely light weight, very quick turning speed and exceptional battery life enhance the overall value-proposition of the FOCUS 35 RX and make this instrument a very compelling choice for a wide range of survey and construction applications,” said Olivier Casabianca, Spectra Precision Business Area Director. “With the introduction of the FOCUS 35 RX, Spectra Precision continues to expand and improve its portfolio with powerful solutions using new technologies.”

Spectra Precision Nomad 1050 Data Collector — The Nomad 900 has been updated with new features and capabilities. The Nomad 1050 has more RAM, more Flash and more speed. The base processor is now 1 GHz compared to 806 MHz on Nomad 900 and the Nomad 1050 has 512-MB RAM and 8GB flash storage. The other major enhancement is a new 3.75-G dual-mode GSM and CDMA WWAN modem to provide fast and versatile connectivity for Spectra Precision customers. Also, the new WWAN module uses an internal antenna eliminating the need for an external antenna.

Spectra Precision Survey Pro 5.7 Field Software — Constant improvement and enhancement continues with Survey Pro. Survey Pro version 5.7 contains significant changes to enable more productive field data collection. Included in this update are new map displays that enable viewing and managing most of the map features that are located on the main map display. The GNSS and robotic staking screens can also display a map view to include background maps along with the standard dynamic guidance control option. The GNSS offsets routine has been updated and now includes a distance-distance option. For those customers who wish to use GNSS and robotic simultaneously, there are now enhanced options for configuration and switching between modes.

Spectra Precision Survey Office v3.60 Software — Spectra Precision Survey Office now includes enhanced functionality; support for the Spectra Precision FOCUS DL-15 Digital Level and the import of leveling data from any DiNi level; least squares and 5 and 7 parameter Helmert transformations with reports; Geoid 12B support and grouping by country in the Coordinate System Manager; Point Cloud support plus many more additional enhancements.

Spectra Precision MobileMapper Field GIS Application for Android Devices — A new version of the popular MobileMapper Field GIS application now running on Android devices. This new software is dedicated to GIS data collection and focuses on simplicity to maximize the number of field personnel contributing to the geospatial business. Primarily for MobileMapper 300 users, the application will be the key component of Spectra Precision’s Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) solution. This makes it possible to pair Android tablets and/or smart phones with the MobileMapper 300 GNSS receiver to collect GIS data with survey-grade accuracy.

“With the introduction of these new and enhanced products into the Spectra Precision portfolio, survey and construction professionals have a wider range of economical choices to get the job done,” said Olivier Casabianca. “These new Spectra Precision optical products complement the ground-breaking line of Spectra Precision solutions, enabling Spectra Precision to offer a complete range of survey products.”

September 15, 2015
First Day at INTERGEO: UAVs and RTK GNSS Receivers

Every fall thousands of geospatial professionals are drawn to Germany, like bees are to honey, for the largest geospatial exhibition on Earth. This year in Stuttgart, more than 17,000 attendees from 92 countries are flooding the halls of the Stuttgart Exhibition grounds located adjacent to the Stuttgart International Airport. Attendees are being treated to a vast array of geospatial technology treats from 500+ exhibitors representing 30 countries.

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

I recall a few short years ago, there were only a handful of UAV vendors at the entire exhibition. Now, there is hardly an aisle that does not contain a quad-copter, fixed-wing aircraft or a UAV-related accessory. The growth of UAVs into the geospatial market growth has been the most explosive geospatial technology introduced in the past 25 years, the span of time that I’ve been involved in the geospatial industry. It’s over the top — there is so much hype surrounding UAV technology that there might be more sellers than buyers. It’s become so crazy that there are vendors presenting UAVs that haven’t even been built yet! It reminds me of the days that Atari would announce a new game system nine months before it was ready to ship.

In the UAV space, I wonder which companies are actually making money. My guess is very few. A few of the big players like DJI, Parrot (owns senseFly) and 3D Robotics are doing well, plus a few others. But it’s an unhealthy buyer/seller ratio. Something’s going to give.

The sensefly eXom UAV in flight.

Today’s winners in the UAV market are companies like Pix4D, Agisoft and others who make mission planning and image-processing software for UAV-collected data. They are smart in that they aren’t competing against the hundreds of other UAV airframes on the market; they work with data from most of them. Following is a 3D example of what the Agisoft software can create given a bunch of images shot with a $1,500 DJI Phantom at 200-foot elevation.

The resolution is very good, and you’re able compute material volume such as the piles of aggregate on the west side of the river.

Inexpensive RTK

In the past, I’ve written a lot about inexpensive RTK GNSS receivers. At the InfoAg Conference a couple of months ago, Swift Navigation announced it is testing its $500 RTK receivers. At INTERGEO, CHCNav introduced L1 RTK GNSS in a mobile phone (check our website for a video on that). It’s not capable of centimeter accuracy yet, but quickly heading in that direction. NVS Tech is also pushing sub-$500 L1 RTK GNSS modules.

It’s interesting because L1 RTK is nothing new. That technology was first introduced almost 10 years ago, and wasn’t accepted very well. Now, the UAV phenomena is breathing new life into L1 RTK receiver technology because it’s driving the requirement for low-cost, high-precision GNSS receivers. L1 RTK GNSS are finally getting the love they were looking for nearly 10 years ago.

In case you weren’t able to make it to INTERGEO this year, Joelle, Michelle and I are shooting a bunch of short (~2-minute) videos at various exhibition booths while we are here. We hope to give you a flavor of the geospatial technology being offered this year in Stuttgart.

See you next time.

Following me on Twitter at https://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

September 15, 2015
Trimble Launches R2 GNSS Receiver at Intergeo

Trimble debuted its new R2 GNSS receiver at Intergeo 2015, held this week in Stuttgart, Germany.

The R2 GNSS receiver is a receiver that works with Trimble handheld devices and iOS, Android or Window mobile handhelds, smartphones and tablets using Bluetooth or USB connectivity. When paired with a mobile device, the receiver adds professional-grade GNSS capabilities for better accuracy. The rugged Trimble R2 provides GIS and survey professionals the flexibility to choose the mobile device, workflows and accuracy they need based on applications.

Trimble R2 GNSS Receiver for Mobile Devices

The Trimble R2 GNSS receiver is compact and portable, weighing 2.4 pounds. With one-button operation and a field swappable battery, the receiver can be pole or vehicle mounted or carried on a backpack. The R2 is a multi-constellation receiver that supports GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, BeiDou and QZSS satellite signals, as well as SBAS.

With a variety of standard and optional correction capabilities, the Trimble R2 can achieve sub-meter to centimeter positioning for a broad range of accuracy requirements. The receiver is an option for the Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) strategy.

“Today’s geospatial professionals require flexible solutions which allow for configuration to meet their specific job requirements,” said Ron Bisio, general manager of Trimble’s Surveying and Geospatial Division. “The Trimble R2’s versatility to support GIS and survey workflows as well as BYOD deployment enables geospatial professionals to collect data using the mobile device, workflow and accuracy they choose.”

Workflows – GIS and Survey Field Software

Designed for both GIS field data collection and survey workflows, the Trimble R2 receiver integrates with Trimble TerraFlex mapping and GIS field software and Trimble Access survey field software.

TerraFlex software is a scalable cloud-based solution for geospatial data collection. By pairing the R2 with a smart device or Trimble handheld running TerraFlex, the solution addresses a wide variety of field requirements, including attribute-rich GIS data collection on consumer and professional devices.

Trimble Access software supports the workflows of everyday surveying tasks such as topographic and control surveys and specialized surveying tasks such as roads, monitoring, tunnels and mines. By pairing the receiver with a Trimble handheld running Trimble Access or TerraFlex field software, the Trimble R2 is a versatile solution that supports the full range of geospatial data collection workflows for both GIS and survey applications.

Flexible Accuracy

The receiver is capable of receiving a broad range of corrections from traditional RTK, VRS networks and SBAS to Trimble RTX correction services via cellular/IP connections or satellite (L-band), the Trimble R2 provides high-accuracy data worldwide.

The R2 GNSS receiver can leverage the entire portfolio of subscription-based Trimble RTX correction services to accommodate a wide range of applications and accuracy requirements. This includes CenterPoint RTX (less than 4 centimeters), RangePoint RTX (less than 50 centimeters), and ViewPoint RTX (less than 1 meter) correction services.

September 15, 2015
Ohio UAS Center Forwards Precision Ag, Sensor Research

Flying at Molly Caren Agricultural Center in the Ohio State project.

Clark State Community College in Springfield, Ohio, now includes flying unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) as part of its new precision agriculture program, according to the Ohio/Indiana UAS Center (UASC). The new program is designed to prepare students for employment with companies using geospatial technologies, including geographic information systems (GIS) and GPS applied to agricultural production or management activities, such as pest scouting, site-specific pesticide application, yield mapping, or variable-rate irrigation.

Clark State will process and analyze the UAS-collected data. Students will learn how fly and use UAS-gathered data to determine the overall health of crops and manage a range of farming issues, including how to spot early diseases, identify specific pest infestations, and determine fertilization requirement.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) approved the Certificate of Authorization (COA) for UASC earlier this year. The center is working to expand the number of FAA-approved Certificates of Authority for research across Ohio, and operates 11 COAs in support of public entities and universities with an additional 17 COAs pending at the FAA.

Ohio State Sensor Research

In another UASC project, UASC and The Ohio State University initiated regular flight operations in July at Molly Caren Agricultural Center to research various types of UAS sensors to improve agricultural productivity and enhance environmental management practices through improved nutrient use efficiency.

3D Aerial, a UAS business in Dayton, Ohio, pilots the small 1.5-lb fixed-wing aircraft for this project. Data gathered is part of a research and development effort focused on noninvasive assessment of crop health.

“This data will be analyzed and results will be used in support of research on cropping systems and assessment of environmental factors affecting crop growth,” said Scott Shearer, professor and chair of the Food, Agricultural and Biological Engineering at Ohio State. “In addition to precision agriculture experiments, this research will help enhance water quality by better understanding how best management practices may impact surface and ground water quality.”

The UAS market is projected to be an $82 billion industry with a potential to create approximately 100,000 jobs nationally over the next 10 years.

August 25, 2015
Proteus Launches Satellite Image Procurement Service

Emirates Palace, courtesy of DigitalGlobe, taken on November 14, 2014, by WorldView-3 satellite at a resolution of 30 cm.

Proteus, a provider of satellite derived mapping and geospatial services, announces the official launch of its new professional satellite image procurement service. The service provides an approach to satellite imagery sales that is sensor agnostic, calling upon partnerships and agreements with the majority of satellite operators. Because of this, Proteus has the capability to support all imagery purchasing requirements.

The service was developed from customer feedback when conducting imagery purchases, which indicated that the experience and knowledgeable advice provided by Proteus removed the stress and complexity they had previously experienced when attempting to complete a purchase and navigate the end-user licenses themselves.

“These days there are many satellite imagery providers, all with a range of products, resolutions, licensing conditions and costings,” David Critchley, CEO of Proteus explained. “This can be overwhelming and time consuming for the end users. Our aim is to break down all the technical barriers and find the best coverage for your area of interest. We strive to determine the most suitable imagery at the most competitive pricing.”

Proteus has now developed relationships with all the main satellite imagery suppliers and provide their customers with a comprehensive, sensor agnostic and personable service.

August 12, 2015
MAPPS Announces 2015 Geospatial Excellence Awards Competition
MAPPS, the association of private sector geospatial firms, is accepting entries for the 9th Annual MAPPS Geospatial Products and Services Excellence Awards. The Excellence Awards exemplify the professionalism, value, integrity and achievement of MAPPS member firms as demonstrated over the previous year.

A panel of five judges will evaluate the submitted projects from eight categories.
- airborne and satellite data acquisition;
- photogrammetry/elevation data generation;
- remote sensing;
- GIS/IT;
- surveying/field data collection;
- small projects;
- technology innovation;
- licensed data products.
The panel will review each submission and select a winner for each category. A Grand Award will be presented from the category award winners to represent the MAPPS Project of the Year. Winners will be announced at the 2016 MAPPS Winter Conference in Las Vegas, Nev. The deadline for entries is October 31, 2015.

Click here to learn more about the submission process.
August 10, 2015