ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Riding > Layin' down tracks
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rating: Thread Rating: 200 votes, 4.87 average. Display Modes
Old 10-27-2013, 02:24 PM   #9811
Terje
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Terje's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Location: Norway
Oddometer: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emmbeedee View Post
Are you saying my Montana works well because it's so close to the Spot? I have no problem with either the Montana or the Spot. They've been that close all this year, for perhaps 15000 kms.


Sent using strings and tin cans and Tapatalk.
Thats great. Because my spot will also be next to my montana
__________________
Terje
(....the chooks had written
F-U-C-K on his windshield,
he wiped it off with a white rag
and smiling coolly drove away....)
Terje is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2013, 04:18 PM   #9812
Countdown
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Location: Carson City/Ridgecrest
Oddometer: 5,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by HogWild View Post
Also, is the 76 filtering the data in order to improve its stationary accuracy? IF so, then that might make it LESS accurate when in motion. The Montana may actually be giving the most accurate data that the GPS system has to offer, and only appears worse because it's not hiding the true results through filtering.
Interesting reading. I don't have Montana but do have 76Cx & 78 and noticed marked difference in performance.

I have both set to "Track Up" and track recording set to "Auto" and "Most". Don't know if Montana has these options. This "pre-filter" gives best active log for future filtering to 500 track points per section to download to customers (90% use 60/76) of my rides.

On a recient scouting trip, I used the 78 because in needed to download over 100 tracks of posibile bypasses to locked gates. The 78 drove me crazy every time I stoped as the map rotated at random which the 76 seldom does unless I actualy move a foot or so. The 78 also recorded many track points while stoped for just seconds. It appearred to me that the algorithum that determines if a new point needs to be recorded (or that the unit actually moved) is way different between the old generation and new generation units and dthe old one is far more user friendly.

In the future I will use the 78 in "North Up" (I generally know which direction I am moving) and also have the 76 on to record tracks that don't need much editing when I get back to PC.
__________________
Jerry Counts
Countdown is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2013, 04:43 PM   #9813
250senuf
Beastly Adventurer
 
250senuf's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: Kootenai, BC, Canada
Oddometer: 2,226
Countdown, perhaps set the 78 from AUTO to DISTANCE track recording mode. That might eliminate clusters of points when stopped.
__________________
Not all who wonder are confused
250senuf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2013, 05:23 PM   #9814
Countdown
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Location: Carson City/Ridgecrest
Oddometer: 5,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by 250senuf View Post
Countdown, perhaps set the 78 from AUTO to DISTANCE track recording mode. That might eliminate clusters of points when stopped.
Obvious answer but sufficient small Distance or Time to get good resolution when going slow or on switchbacks records many hundreds of useless points.
__________________
Jerry Counts
Countdown is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2013, 05:47 PM   #9815
Emmbeedee
Procrastinators
 
Emmbeedee's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Location: Near Ottawa, ON, Canada
Oddometer: 9,069
Quote:
Originally Posted by 250senuf View Post
Countdown, perhaps set the 78 from AUTO to DISTANCE track recording mode. That might eliminate clusters of points when stopped.
Interesting idea even if Countdown doesn't like it. I think I'll create a couple of profiles with nothing but tracking differences to see how well that works.
__________________
Want to know more about the Garmin Montana? See the Wisdom and FAQ Thread.
Want to know more about the Garmin VIRB? See here.
"The motorcycle, being poorly designed for both flight and marine operation, sustained significant external and internal damage," police noted.
Emmbeedee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2013, 06:57 PM   #9816
atlas cached
OX Ambassador
 
atlas cached's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Oddometer: 688
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emmbeedee View Post
Interesting idea even if Countdown doesn't like it. I think I'll create a couple of profiles with nothing but tracking differences to see how well that works.

When I am out hiking, I always record tracks by distance, 3.33 yds.

I can always remove unneeded detail later, but I can not add it :)
atlas cached is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2013, 07:03 PM   #9817
Emmbeedee
Procrastinators
 
Emmbeedee's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Location: Near Ottawa, ON, Canada
Oddometer: 9,069
Quote:
Originally Posted by atlas cached View Post
When I am out hiking, I always record tracks by distance, 3.33 yds.

I can always remove unneeded detail later, but I can not add it :)
Good plan, especially since the setting is saved with the profile so why not customise it for the particular activity?
__________________
Want to know more about the Garmin Montana? See the Wisdom and FAQ Thread.
Want to know more about the Garmin VIRB? See here.
"The motorcycle, being poorly designed for both flight and marine operation, sustained significant external and internal damage," police noted.
Emmbeedee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2013, 08:45 PM   #9818
SteveAZ
Beastly Adventurer
 
SteveAZ's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Location: AZ
Oddometer: 1,156
Quote:
Originally Posted by atlas cached View Post
When I am out hiking, I always record tracks by distance, 3.33 yds.

I can always remove unneeded detail later, but I can not add it :)
That's sort of the way I look at it and just leave everything at 1 point per second.... can't get more data than that...
SteveAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2013, 09:01 PM   #9819
rpet
Awesometown
 
rpet's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Location: Brooklyn, California
Oddometer: 809
Anyone swap their Montana onto a mountain bike from time to time? What mount set-up do you use?
__________________
'76 Xl250 '04 XR250R '09 DR650 '10 TR450
Ride The West - OBDR, CDR & western TAT - July 2013
Instagram with plenty of bike pics.
Read my homie's underway Africa trip RR - Round Africa with a Surboard
WTB: Clarke tank for DR650 for cheap - any color but blue.
rpet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2013, 09:26 PM   #9820
atlas cached
OX Ambassador
 
atlas cached's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Oddometer: 688
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveAZ View Post
That's sort of the way I look at it and just leave everything at 1 point per second.... can't get more data than that...
If you use time to determine how often track segments are recorded, every time you stop for 15 minutes to enjoy a scenic view, take photographs, and have a snack or a drink, you are adding hundreds (in your case 900) of unnecessary additional points and segments that provide zero benefit (unless you later enjoy editing out hundreds of data points). If you stop for a longer period to have lunch (etc), it is even worse.

Recording by distance at 3.33yd gives me track points every 10 feet, plenty enough detail to accurately record switchbacks while not cluttering my tracks with hundreds (or thousands) of unneeded segments that will appear as a huge spider web on the map screen.

This is just how I use my Montana, and I am in no way suggesting others attempt the same.
atlas cached is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 01:58 AM   #9821
Emmbeedee
Procrastinators
 
Emmbeedee's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Location: Near Ottawa, ON, Canada
Oddometer: 9,069
Quote:
Originally Posted by rpet View Post
Anyone swap their Montana onto a mountain bike from time to time? What mount set-up do you use?
I had a spare Rugged Mount so I took the wiring off and used that on my bicycle.




Sent using strings and tin cans and Tapatalk.
__________________
Want to know more about the Garmin Montana? See the Wisdom and FAQ Thread.
Want to know more about the Garmin VIRB? See here.
"The motorcycle, being poorly designed for both flight and marine operation, sustained significant external and internal damage," police noted.
Emmbeedee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 06:53 AM   #9822
SteveAZ
Beastly Adventurer
 
SteveAZ's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Location: AZ
Oddometer: 1,156
Quote:
Originally Posted by atlas cached View Post
If you use time to determine how often track segments are recorded, every time you stop for 15 minutes to enjoy a scenic view, take photographs, and have a snack or a drink, you are adding hundreds (in your case 900) of unnecessary additional points and segments that provide zero benefit (unless you later enjoy editing out hundreds of data points). If you stop for a longer period to have lunch (etc), it is even worse.

Recording by distance at 3.33yd gives me track points every 10 feet, plenty enough detail to accurately record switchbacks while not cluttering my tracks with hundreds (or thousands) of unneeded segments that will appear as a huge spider web on the map screen.

This is just how I use my Montana, and I am in no way suggesting others attempt the same.
I'm ok with the extra points when sitting. You're correct, for the most part aside from the plots, I don't need the points when stopped but they don't do any harm. I don't see huge spider webs, just a continuous line with balls where I've stopped. On occasion I've used the balls to get a rough average to create a waypoint and I want the most data I can get when moving. In car/4x4, my greatest use, the units are on switched power (moto is always on) so it turns off when I stop unless I consciously keep it on anyway. In my 5 to 20Hz units I log at full bore on those too. The resolution for speed and acceleration calculations is barely enough at 5Hz and turns aren't as smooth as I'd like even at 5Hz. At 70mph, 1hz is every 100+ft! It's easy enough to throw out data later, but you can't get it if you never had it...
SteveAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 09:10 AM   #9823
SteveAZ
Beastly Adventurer
 
SteveAZ's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Location: AZ
Oddometer: 1,156
On the topic of data logging... this is another place where floptana sort of sucks compared to the older units. For me (and plenty others) data logging is at or near the very top of the list of functions I'm looking for out of any GPS.

The 76 just logs away until it fills the 10Kpt active log and then just keeps it wrapping circular buffer style while simultaneously filling the SD card into a .gpx file with the date as the filename. If there are breaks in logging it creates separate "tracks" in the same log. It only breaks it into a new .gpx file every twenty-four hours.

Floptana on the other hand fills the active log until it gets somewhere near the 10Kpt limit and then lops a 45min (2700pt) chunk, moving it into a .gpx file (at least when stationary logging at 1Hz) with the start time of the chunk as the filename into the "archive" directory in the onboard flash. I don't think there's any way to get it to go into the SD. You end up with gobs of little files that have to be appended together to be able to extract longer logs. Pain in the ass. This step took me more time than anything when creating the scatter plots. While I acknowledge the scatter plots are a very specific use case, post-trip log analysis has always been annoyingly more painful due to the need to do all this appending and finding the true breaks in the tracks.

To extract the data from the 76 was simple. Just extract the portion you want from the .gpx file. The breaks in the tracks are already there. Occasionally I might have to do an append if the logging crossed over midnight - no biggie.

Even though .gpx log files are very bloaty for the data they hold, they are small. SD card are nearly infinite relative to the logs. I'm not terribly concerned about running out of on-board flash in floptana but it is a finite resource that often is pretty full with maps, etc. and is the home for all the non-volatile essential data for the unit operation. I'm not sure what happens if the flash gets close to full, but I sure don't expect anything good from this gem.

As straightforward, predictable and simple as the 76 logging is, the floptana is pretty much the opposite. The floptana method doesn't make much sense to me and I can't see any advantage over the 76 method, just disadvantages.

More garmin "innovation" in this wonderful product...

If it ain't broke....break it...
SteveAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 09:29 AM   #9824
atlas cached
OX Ambassador
 
atlas cached's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Oddometer: 688
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveAZ View Post
Well I ran comparisons between old floptana s/w ver 3.8 and the new 5.4 and the results were definitely.... interesting...

The tests were only 2 hour runs, but enough to get the general gist. As always I ran it alongside the 76Cx to keep an unchanging standard.

The quick:



The variation on the 76 between the two runs is normal for short two hour runs.

And the numbers show the old floptana software as much better than the new software..... but that does *not* tell the whole story there. The old software gave one of the weirdest scatter plots I've ever seen.
Steve, did you notice how much more stable and consistent the current position is with 3.8 compared to newer firmware? Montana firmware version after 3.80 create much larger spider webs and seem far more erratic when calculating current position.

I believe this to be the result of Garmins solution to the sticky compass issue commonly experienced when moving at very slow speeds (the actual position was very slow to update, sometime not until more than 30 yds of movement, or worse). Garmin adjusted the firmware to be more sensitive to potential movement at slower speeds, and it works for the desired purpose, but also gives a more jumpy position when stationary, as your test show.
atlas cached is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 10:12 AM   #9825
SteveAZ
Beastly Adventurer
 
SteveAZ's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Location: AZ
Oddometer: 1,156
Quote:
Originally Posted by atlas cached View Post
Steve, did you notice how much more stable and consistent the current position is with 3.8 compared to newer firmware? Montana firmware version after 3.80 create much larger spider webs and seem far more erratic when calculating current position.

I believe this to be the result of Garmins solution to the sticky compass issue commonly experienced when moving at very slow speeds (the actual position was very slow to update, sometime not until more than 30 yds of movement, or worse). Garmin adjusted the firmware to be more sensitive to potential movement at slower speeds, and it works for the desired purpose, but also gives a more jumpy position when stationary, as your test show.
I have a slightly different take. The 3.8 plot is very unusual.

3.8: 5.4:


These are both two hours but they look *very* different. The 5.4 is very typical of the numerous plots I've seen - except for the precision.

3.8 gives the appearance of a lot less data even though the number of points is the same. I may go ahead and crunch the data to count how many discrete unique positions are reported in each. I'm pretty sure there are way fewer in the 3.8 than the 5.4. The 76 shows fewer discrete positions but that's due to the lack of resolution in the log. I wouldn't be surprised if I log the 76 NMEA and plot from that we wouldn't see the log "quantization noise" that looks like stair-stepping and then the unique positions would probably be similar to the 5.4 or the Ublox.

I'm thinking that maybe the receiver firmware was "sticking" at the points its reporting (not the actual solution, just what's reported) and maybe even not allowing the reported position to move as great as the receiver sensed. I.e. the receiver is not sending the actual position solution but running it through this weird filter. It's really bizarre.

I do wonder if that odd firmware was a band-aid to cover the receiver's poor precision. It is pretty bad compared to not just today's standards, but the last ten years. Perhaps(?) when they discovered the band-aid caused more problems like you describe they gave up on it and just let the receiver report the solution directly. Every other receiver I've looked at plots for seem to do the latter.

I don't know. It's very odd and while strictly looking at the numbers, they appear better but I don't think the receiver's internal solution is really any better, just what's coming through some weird filter.


BTW I went ahead and appended the logs enough to get four hour plots. I've been to lazy to post them.

The four hour numbers:



Not a whole lot different...
SteveAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 01:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014