GPS-Sport ForenRun.GPS SoftwareRun Gps 2.3.9 vs Android 2.3.3 Gingerbread
Bitte einloggen, um neue Kommentare zu erstellen Foren durchsuchen
Erste Seite<Seite1von4>Letzte Seite
henzel 15.08.2011 23:40:05 UTC

Altitude

I cannot agree based on this: I did Marmotte in June: http://www.gps-sport.net/trainings/race-biking_602490. 5000 climbing and 3900 downhill meters, so severe altitude "issues" expected then. Listed as 174km official and Run.GPS did 176km (HTC Desire, internal GPS antenna). My Sigma Rox 9 with 2096mm wheelsize installed did 177km. Looks like a perfect example it works just fine with altitude. With a little bit of Pythagoras, it would be several KM off if it did not count in the altitude.

As for you example, Karelillo, the DOP values were very bad for a while: http://www.gps-sport.net/trainingReports/Karelillo/trainings201106/110612_093129_863889/training.html

Though, it might be true that the algorithm can be better, but also that the algorithm used by the others, is wrong or too pre-assumed!! You have to be a real expert and examine BOTH algorithms, which probably are not free accessible. So, therefore, in my opinion it is very hard to tell which one is more accurate and due to human nature, most people will off course favorite the one that gives a little bit more meters. ;) That's no offence, that's just how nature works :)

So in all my trainings, I watched carefully the difference between my bike-computer and run.gps and in more then 80% the difference was less then 1,5%. The only conclusion that I can make out of that is that both are pretty accurate in my opinion. If I make a lot of turns in a ride, Run.GPS will give me 2 or even 3% less then my bike-computer. But I cannot worry about that, It will cost a lot more battery to save 2 or 4 trackpoints every second and more CPU power to process that. So it's the best match between user and technique.

I also tested with a Nokia Phone, and other apps for Android, they were all less secure. They were too often too much off what my bike-computer told me. Run.GPS was he only one that was steady and predictable (depending on my bike-computer, I could on forehand tell what Run.GPS had measured). Therefore I trust it more then other apps.

IMHO!

NOTE totally off-topic: Team Saxo with Contador did pass me twice that day on Marmotte, on Galibier and Alpe d'Huez. The police officer of this story (http://road.cc/content/news/37487-contador-pulled-over-police-descent-galibier-riding-without-lights) let me go just minutes before stopping Saxo, I had my backlight on ^^
Also, I jumped into the wheel of Contador on the Galibier and managed that for like 300-400m. He was going 17-19 km/u. It was al recorded off course, you can see it at 6h 46 minutes in the table and graph! : http://www.gps-sport.net/trainingReports/henzel/trainings201106/110615_071701_115021/training.html

:)
Karelillo 15.08.2011 08:42:27 UTC

distance calculations

Hi all,

I agree with corwin42 and ekerstges but my point is that comparing the 3 softwares Tracmaker, Gpsies.com and Run.Gps the last one report the less accurate distance and this is not a problem of the altitude or the track's curves. I think this is caused by the algorithm used by Run.Gps to calculate the distance.
I also considered it is a good piece of software but we can contribute to improve it. In fact the Run.GPS 2.3.9j Full Pro build 2381 works quite well in Android 2.3.3. and may be next version would be even better.
Karelillo
corwin42 15.08.2011 08:23:08 UTC



I think additionally the distance is calculated without using altitude information because GPS altitude information is not very reliable. So the coordinates the software gets are on surface of the WGS84 sphere. So if you climb a hill with your bike Run.GPS will have a shorter distance than in real. This is a problem with all GPS devices.
ekerstges 14.08.2011 17:40:04 UTC



Hi all,

Perhaps the following can explain the difference in GPS-measurement and bike-computer measurement.

In every training there will be curves, and they are measured in intervals (point-by-point). Connecting the dots with straight lines will allways give a shorter route then the real curve that is being followed. In my skating practices I train at a 400 meter oval, but the software will register about 370 meters each round. That's about 7.5% difference, but unavoidable due to the way of measurement. Check http://www.gps-sport.net/trainingReports/ekerstges/trainings201011/101127_175511_477311/training.html for a detailed result. As stated earlier: the oval is a measured and certified 400 meter track.

I think every GPS-software will miss a couple of meters on every training on a course with a lot of sharp turns. The maps in the training mentioned earlier will make that more clear. Used during running races I see the measurements by the RunGPS software is a lot more accurate.

For my part: during my skating trainings I use RunGPS mostly as a lap-counter, so I don't mind the "miscalculation". It's a great little piece of software!

Greets,

Erwin
Karelillo 13.08.2011 00:13:35 UTC

software and distances

Thanks Henzel, I know these are negligible differences but I think the problem of Run.Gps is the interpretation of the data obtained from the gps unit. The data imported into Tracmaker and Gpsies.com was registered by Run.Gps and this software gives the shortest distance. My point is that the developers of Rung.Gps has to correct this small error to have a more accurate software. I am not talking about Endomondo cuase I do not have high DOP values and the difference I am having now are about 1-2% but in June I rode the HalvVättern in Sweden in 150 km track (http://www.gps-sport.net/trainings/race-biking_599341), and Run.Gps registered 134.64 km. I am sure you understand that I was very disappointed with this software and started to think in using other apps available in the market.
Karelillo
henzel 12.08.2011 13:04:49 UTC geändert am 12.08.2011 13:09:13 UTC



Sorry to bother, but I think you overestimate GPS? That is only 1 % off! There is NO way that any GPS device that is NOT used by the USA military is any more secure due to the limitations of GPS! This is far more secure then most maps, be VERY happy that is is that slight off, most devices or apps have far worse results being 2-5% off. Besides, values from maps are more then 1 % off, and then there is the pressure in your tire... also brand/wearness of tyre.... most tyres are 2096.

Be happy it is only 1 % !! That's very nice and very accurate :)

If endomondo says it has more, it is lying. Software can add meters, but just to make you happy. Thats not fair in my opinion.
Karelillo 12.08.2011 11:36:08 UTC geändert am 12.08.2011 11:39:13 UTC

run.gps underestimate the distance

I have corrected the wheel size value in my bike computer from 2133 recommended by its manufacturer (Sigma) to 2100 and these are the results.
run.gps: 42.45 km
gpsies.com: 42.762 km
GPS trackmaker: Cartographic Length = 42.836 km
My bike computer: 42.85 km.
Definitively Run.Gps underestimate the distance!!!
Any idea to solve this issue admin?
Would it help to decrease the buffer values to about 2-3s?
Karelillo
Karelillo 06.08.2011 11:31:43 UTC

Default speed and altitude buffer values too high

After reading som comments in this foro I have make some changes in speed and altitude buffers (8 and 8 s, respectively). I believe that the accuracy of the track has improved a lot. For instance the speed values I read form my by computers are now closer to the regeistered by Run.Gps. Nevertheless, the use of my old SirIII bluetooth GPS receiver have dramatically decreased my DOP values. I can say that now I usually have DOP values lower than 1.
Hope you find this information useful,
Karelillo
bertbortier 05.08.2011 19:18:46 UTC geändert am 05.08.2011 19:19:57 UTC

bad GPS running tracks with high DOP values

I am using the version 2.3.9J build 2381 with my Samsung Galaxy S1 (Gingerbread 2.3.3) and carried in a Run.GPS neoprene carrier belt. GPS tracks are erratic, with often high DOP values of above 20 or even above 30. I tried to put max. DOP value from 20 to even 40, but nothing seems to help. Any advice on what the best max. DOP value should be set at ? Looking forward to a solution. Thanks. Bert
Karelillo 26.07.2011 22:54:36 UTC geändert am 26.07.2011 23:07:54 UTC

work done

Following the recomendations you made I exported my train as a gpx and opened wirh trackMaker and this are the results:
run.gps: 30.05 km
gpsies.com: 30.34 km
trackmaker: Cartographic Length = 30,441 km
My bike computer: 31.29km.
As you said it seems the distance is overestimated in my bike computer but the run.gps is underestimating the distance. Is there any setting I can do in the program in order to improve its accuracy considering that my DOP values very low ?
I also have make some changes in speed and altitude buffers (8 and 15 s, respectively). The first results are in the max speed showed in my bike computer is the same run.gps registered.
Looking forward to hear from you,
Karelillo
Erste Seite<Seite1von4>Letzte Seite
© 2024 | Impressum | Allgemeine Geschäftsbedingungen | Nutzungsbedigungen | Datenschutzerklärung | Widerruf und Rücksendung | Batterieentsorgung