To the OP: agreement within 11m for a pseudorange solution is entirely ok. I don't call that an error; I call it matching. As an experiment, find a physical point you can reoccupy, and on 10 days not all at the same time of day go take a measurement and then tell us the statistics of the data set.
Nicolas Cadieux <njacadieux.git...@gmail.com> writes: > Interesting but I very much doubt they are not applying a geoid on top > of the ellipsoid. If they can put maps of the earth on the device, > they can put a geoid with a posting of 15´x15´! You would think, but it seems that the geoid model in some receivers is very coarse. I've found that with a u-blox F9P (and I think 8 series), the internal model gives me a value that's about 4m off from EGM2008. And it's not an EGM96/2008 thing -- there is some variance (around me) between those, but far smaller. So it seemed like the geoid model was nowhere near 15', more like 2 degrees, but I haven't been the least bit rigorous in checking it. Still, all of this is maybe 4m, which if you aren't doing RTK is really hard to discern.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Qgis-user mailing list Qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
