A question for those who work with RTK receivers. Is it possible to use the F9P module for the base and the UM 982 module for the rover? If so, are there any who have set it up?
It should work for RTK. I run a F9P base here. You will need to pass the RTCM3 corrections to the receiver - MP will help with that. Your combination will work.
I just have doubts about the compatibility of ublox and unicore in their “internal messages”. @Yuri_Rage has a lot of experience with RTK receivers, maybe he will give me information.
Best luck and happy flying.
Unless you mean you want to mix and match receivers ON the vehicle for moving baseline, it will work fine, and I have nothing more to add to the answer already well stated above.
im running 3x F9P. My base sends its corrections off to RTK2GO.COM which i then connect mission planner to. Im guessing that as long as you can connect mission planner to your base, then your rover GPS’s should be happy, regardless of brand of hardware.
A simple test could be connecting a UN982 to a snip service like RTK2GO for corrections and see if it works… eg confirm RTK FIX, and how long to get a fix.
Keep us posted on your progress. The F9P ArdusimpleRTK2B are working well for us, but get pricey when fitting out a few rovers, so looking for new cheaper tech !
1 Like
RTCM3 is RTCM3. It doesn’t matter what brand the hardware is if it’s valid correction data.
Thanks! I will use one F9P receiver as a base, and the UN982 with two antennas on the rover (without a magnetic compass) moving baseline.
Does it work? My um982 sometimes goes into RTK float, but most of time 3d DGPS Lock.
I’m using a UM980 (single antenna) as a base with two F9Ps on a rover, and it works fine.
The UM980 sends out details on L1, L2, and L5 satellites, while the F9Ps ignore the L5, but otherwise they do fine getting RTK FIXed position.
I previously used an F9P for the base, but wanted to relocate it, and that seemed like a good time to try “upgrading” to a tri-band base to allow future rovers to use an L1/L5 GPS, while continuing with the F9Ps for the time being (plus, it frees up an F9P in the process)
My biggest complaint about using the UM980 as a base was the initial siting. I couldn’t figure out how to get the right RAW data out to convert to RINEX to subsequently locate the base - so I wound up hooking up the F9P for a few days of logging and subsequent post-processing to get the base sited within .004m horizontally, then I fed the UM980 that location.
Did you ever get this to work?
I’m trying to go from a F9P as a base to the UM982 in the rover. I am hoping to feed the serial comms directly from their respective ports without the use of Mission Planner (or any PC involved at all).
How I currently have it is the F9P is outputting RTCM3 on Uart2 over a serial radio and the UM982 is supposed to be receiving the RTCM3 on it’s own port. Without having a PC in the middle though, I can’t see if anything is working and I never get an RTK fix.
Hey ajquick
My setup plan is quite similar to yours, with a few differences:
- I’m using the um982 in the rover for heading determination.
- I’m incorporating an IMU sensor for orientation.
- A ZED-F9P serves as the base.
- An Intel NUC is included in the rover as a PC.
- For base-to-rover communication, I’m using RFD868ux telemetry radios on both ends.
If you’ve come across any resources, guides, or examples similar to this setup during your research, I’d greatly appreciate it if you could share them.
Thank you for your help!