<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 12:45 PM, L. V. Lammert <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:lvl@omnitec.net">lvl@omnitec.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">At 12:28 PM 8/26/2009 -0400, you wrote:<br>
>But if that doesn't do it for you then I suppose the absolute minimum<br>
>spacing is the GPS resolution which is normally 1 meter. Anything under<br>
>that and gps positional uncertainty will overtake your sample accuracy.<br>
>It would be best to space at least twice the GPS resolution but the<br>
>farther apart the two points are the better your accuracy.<br>
<br>
</div>BUT taking a differential reading should theoretically cancel any position<br>
innaccuracy over a statistical sampling period, assuming identical GPS<br>
units and identical satellite usage - which is why I'm looking for any<br>
resources that might be available to answer the question.<br>
<br>
TFTR,<br>
<br>
Lee<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"></div></div></blockquote><div><br>Yes. Again, that's what serveyors do.<br><br>But the details might be tedious, as the<br>difference between theory and practice<br>often can be.<br><br>
-- Bob<br> <br></div></div>