Trimble Business Center

#1) Please add the ability to create Variance Component Groups as we had in TrimNet Plus. We need to be able to treat GNSS observations differently depending on their type, such as static, RTK, VRS, etc. Also, if NGS does create the GNSS Vector Exchange (GVX) File Format, these observations can be grouped based on their lengths. Thank you!

#2) Please add back into the adjustment report the table called, "COORDINATE ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY" displaying the OLD and NEW values resulting from the last adjustment. We need to see the effect of fixing various control values. This is especially useful for finding ill-fitting control, but also for analyzing the local effects on the network when legacy control must be held fixed. We used to have a little executable we could run for TGO to add these extra tables into the network adjustment report that we had in TrimNet Plus.
Thank you. 

#3) Please allow the adjustment to proceed even when there are sub-networks so that we can find those points and make the corrections needed to edit those points and merge them into the over-all network. This will be very helpful on large projects with lots of data produced by many crews working simultaneously on very fast paced jobs. Thanks.

@Joseph Blecha , see above

@Alexander Holsteinson can I get an Amen brother? 

Indeed Jesse  amen indeed     

Thanks Jesse and Alex.  I've got them in a story to enhance NA workflows, getting engineering estimates now...  keep bugging me, we'll get them in!

Joe,

If #1 & #2 are problematic to accomplish quickly, please add #2 asap. If you need weight for establishing these as high priority items, just let Bryn know I am asking for these, and you'll get the backing you need

Hi Joe/Jesse, 

RE: #1 - maybe sorting by length versus by largest standard error should be a report option toggle, not an outright change?

Sorting by length, whilst handy, the largest standard error at the top I believe is the most useful for troubleshooting networks.

RE: #2 - this difference between adjustments would certainly be nice.  On fixing on unproven existing control, I guess this can be somewhat achieved with weighted constraints and reviewing the coordinate deltas summary?

RE: #3 - hopefully under development!

RE: Bugging Joe - you're welcome! 

In regards to #1, wouldn't it be useful to have the report come up inside TBC similar to the vector reports, instead of going straight to HTML? (Liam, is this what you are saying?) From that spreadsheet, a report could be ran that produces an HTML document. I know that many times, I don't need the report as it comes out currently in HTML until I'm completely done. 

I think he summed it up nicely. It would also be nice to give more or less weight to observations like you can in Star*Net. 

Jesse 

Same goes for having user defined obstacle mask for individual baselines

Same goes for adding the fields for the latitude and longitude errors in the Network Adjustment Report

Same goes for adding the residuals fields for the control point coordinates when creating these points in TBC and using these values for post processing the baselines

Same goes for supporting cartesian ECEF XYZ coordinates

it is been more than 12 years with these enhancement requests for TBC...

Have any of these enhancement requests mentioned above for the network adjustment module made it into the 5.20 release? Does everyone believe there is no need to adjust traverse data, even from the SX10? Do people believe surveying to the the few centimeters of accuracy is adequate? Maybe VRS is close enough?  ... sarcasm off now. Reality check. No tech advancements I have seen yet, not even the wonderful automatic point cloud registration can replace the REQUIREMENT to adjust raw survey observation data in order to produce 3D values and their associated positional tolerances to validate the control network is aligned to the design reference frame and all that follows, like point clouds and imagery. Yes, surveyors are still needed

Amen, Jesse

Joe we need these features asap amigo

I find it funny how I recognize almost all the names on this thread

Great minds think alike, and these are definitely needed features.

I'd given up on getting these things, how long has it been??. Ohh to be able to weight individual observations regardless of their observation type if you desire. And all the things mentioned above.