EX 1: Creating and Modeling a Terrain Surface.
Obstacle 1During the modeling of the surface the cold was a major obstacle. The ground was extremely hard and even with a hammer it was hard to break up the surface. Because of this we had to change from our initial model. We wanted to dig down and have a level surface as our base or "floor" which we would then build up from. However, with consistency of the snow we had to flip our features. Instead of building up, we dug in. With this approach we were able to focus our digging into smaller areas. We still reached the depths we originally planned and were able to include the ridges, valleys, and depressions required of the assignment. The areas that suffered the most from this obstacle was the creativity restricted by the knew found time requirement of digging in.
If I was to do this again I would have approached it differently. Possibly digging out all the snow and applying a heater to the sand/dirt. This would have theoretically softened the sand and allowed for easier modeling. Then once the sand is in a desired shape we could turned off the heater and let it refreeze. Later adding the excavated snow back to the plot in the shape of the features we desired.
One group in our class had a similar approach, but used warm water to soften the sand. Initially it looked like a good idea, except with subzero temperatures the water froze quickly and melted/froze surrounding areas quickly.
Obstacle 2
Visualizing the data and comparing our digital model to the landscaped plot. Just hours after we collected our data a large snow storm left 6 inches of snow on our plot box. So if we were to go back and remeasure anything, we would have had to excavate the snow. And to do this we would have had to take the previously created grid off the box first. By the end off all these processes we would have possibly had a new surface and a similar, but possibly different grid, essentially skewing the result's accuracy.
This was an important problem because the assignment called for resampling of problem areas. This was evident in an anomaly point which appeared as a spike of elevation in the depression shown in the top right of Figure 1.
UAS Selection
Prior to the activity, how would I rank myself in knowledge about the topic?(1-No knowledge at all, 2-Very little knowledge, 3-Some knowledge, 4-A good amount of knowledge, 5-I knew all about this)
1-No Knowledge at all. I didn't know anything about autopilot software, planes, copters, etc. Breafly covering the information in class was my first exposure to UAVs outside of the drones you see in hollywood blockbusters.
Following this activity, how would I rate the amount of knowledge I have on the topic?
(1-I don't really know enough to talk about the topic, 2-I know enough to explain what I did, 3-I know enough to repeat what I did, 4-I know enough to teach someone else, 5-I'm an expert)
2-I know enough to explain what I did. There was so much information that went into this lab it was difficult to retain all the information. I believe I have a very broad spectrum of knowledge on the topic, but it is only surface level deep. I think with a little experience using the software or actually building a UAV and I would quickly know the components and applications of what we researched in this lab.
Did the hands-on approach to this activity add to how much I was able to learn?
(1-Strongly Disagree, 2-Disagree, 3-No real opinion, 4-Agree, 5-Strongly agree)
Well we didn't actually use a hands on approach for this lab, the entire lab was theoretical. I think this theoretical approach when we had never learned about the UAVs was a very difficult task. Ultimately we learned a lot, and the time saved from lecturing on the subject was probably better spent with the Y6, kite, and balloon. After learning I agree with the order of the teaching, I just wish there was more time in the class to learn more.
What types of learning strategies would I recommend to make the activity even better?
I think this was too open ended. I personally had to research the topics before I could even start research on answering the questions. If there was more guidance, or prior learning before this exercise I think it would have reduced some of the stress that resulted from such a grand project.
One a side note, making this class into a 4 or 5 credit class and having more time to learn more indepth on some of these topics could make for a more effective class.
EX 4: Conducting a Distance Azimuth Survey.
Prior to this activity, how would you rank yourself in knowledge about the topic?(1- No Knowledge, 3- Some Knowledge, 5- Complete Knowledge of Subject)
I would rank my prior knowledge as a 2. Without prior experience using a compass, all of my experience with angles came from math or science classes. I had heard of azimuth before, but a refresher definition was needed before I knew how to use azimuth..
Following this activity, how would you rate the amount of knowledge you have on the topic?
(1- I don't know enough to talk about the topic, 2- I know enough to explain what I did, 3- I know enough to repeat what I did, 4- I know enough to teach someone else, 5- I am an expert)
I would rank myself as a 4. I had to look up additional definitions throughout the duration of the exercise. Searches such as, "what is true north" and "what is the reference starting point" all helped me better grasp the topic. Now I believe I have a firm grasp of the subject.
Did the hands-on approach to this activity add to how much you were able to learn?
(1- Strongly Disagree, 2- Disagree, 3- No Real Opinion, 4- Agree, 5- Strong Agree)
I strongly agree with the hands-on approach facilitating my learning. Reading a definition and looking at a formula can teach you how to do just about anything. However, the immersive hands-on approach puts you in the middle of the problem and you use the techniques for every surveyed point. The repetitive use drills the skills into your brain until the task becomes autonomous. When something comes that natural, you wouldn't have a problem slowing down and walking someone else through the steps. So yes, the hands-on approach helps master the subject.
What types of learning strategies would your recommend to make the activity even better?
I think having more time for the exercise would have helped my group out. One week is plenty of time to accomplish many tasks. However, with the whole class using the same two laser range finders, the availability of the equipment was mildly limited. The combination of limited schedules of my group also was a factor. Not wanting to postpone data collection to the weekend, this allowed for a very select time span to work with. Everything worked out, but the 1.5 hour window to collect data limited our ability to create an effective project. As a result, we ended up collecting very basic data.
Navigation 1: Constructing a Field Map
Prior to the activity, how would I rank myself in knowledge about the topic?(1-No knowledge at all, 2-Very little knowledge, 3-Some knowledge, 4-A good amount of knowledge, 5-I knew all about this)
3-Some knowledge. I had never made a map with the express purpose of using it the following week. This was a new experience for me, and the idea of being lost in the forest because I made a poor quality map was quite the motivating force.
Following this activity, how would I rate the amount of knowledge I have on the topic?
(1-I don't really know enough to talk about the topic, 2-I know enough to explain what I did, 3-I know enough to repeat what I did, 4-I know enough to teach someone else, 5-I'm an expert)
4-I know enough to teach someone else. After building the maps, then going out in the field and testing them, I'm very confident in my knowledge about field maps. I just think the term "expert" is such a strong term to use. I don't know if I'm qualified to say I'm an expert at much of anything with so little experience.
Did the hands-on approach to this activity add to how much I was able to learn?
(1-Strongly Disagree, 2-Disagree, 3-No real opinion, 4-Agree, 5-Strongly agree)
Again this was theoretical approach. Yes the construction of the maps was hands on, but we didn't have any prior experience navigating courses before. This made the construction of the maps difficult. The exercise was not unguided though. The professor provided ample advice into what elements to include on the maps and what elements would fall in a grey zone and eventually fall on the cartographer for personal preference. There were also blogs from previous year's students which analyzed what components on the map worked out best. So although we lacked the experience, we were not left to wander the dark. I would say I Strongly Agree-5 that this approach worked best.
What types of learning strategies would I recommend to make the activity even better?
I can't think of anything that would make the exercise better. Although I do want to mention that repeatedly stressing the elements to include, but not to overclutter the map was effective. Also, providing us with the links to last years blog posts helped a lot. Having examples gave me a starting point and a direction of thought for me to work with.
Microclimate Geodatabase Construction for Deployment to Arcpad
Prior to the activity, how would I rank myself in knowledge about the topic?(1-No knowledge at all, 2-Very little knowledge, 3-Some knowledge, 4-A good amount of knowledge, 5-I knew all about this)
I would rank myself as a 4, having a solid grasp on the topic. I had learned about geodatabase management in GIS II and taken a couple of classes from ESRI online training last semester. Most of the information was still fresh in my memory.
Following this activity, how would I rate the amount of knowledge I have on the topic?
(1-I don't really know enough to talk about the topic, 2-I know enough to explain what I did, 3-I know enough to repeat what I did, 4-I know enough to teach someone else, 5-I'm an expert)
I would again rank myself as a 4. When I think of an expert I think of that person knowing all that there is to know about a topic, and I am far from that. However, I am confident I understand the relationship of domains, subtypes, feature datasets, etc.
Did the hands-on approach to this activity add to how much I was able to learn?
(1-Strongly Disagree, 2-Disagree, 3-No real opinion, 4-Agree, 5-Strongly agree)
I don't have much of an opinion. This is one activity where a classroom setting for the first 2/3s the class was more effective than just jumping into the topic like we usually do. Having background in geodatabase hierarchical relationships was essential to this lab.
What types of learning strategies would I recommend to make the activity even better?
I think the assumption that we know about geodatabases was sound. However, we may not have all been on the same playing field. So maybe having 10 minutes to refresh our memories on how domains, subtypes, feature classes, feature datasets, etc. all fit into the geodatabase.
UAS I
Prior to the activity, how would I rank myself in knowledge about the topic?(1-No knowledge at all, 2-Very little knowledge, 3-Some knowledge, 4-A good amount of knowledge, 5-I knew all about this)
3-Some Knowledge. I hadn't seen UASs in action before, but we had done the extensive researching and implementation of that research a couple weeks before.
Following this activity, how would I rate the amount of knowledge I have on the topic?
(1-I don't really know enough to talk about the topic, 2-I know enough to explain what I did, 3-I know enough to repeat what I did, 4-I know enough to teach someone else, 5-I'm an expert)
2-I know enough to explain what I did. I didn't learn much from the Y6 launch. But watching the assembly of the kite and attaching the picavet rig to the kite string was a first. I could see this little mechanism and those like it being very useful for my future carreer.
Did the hands-on approach to this activity add to how much I was able to learn?
(1-Strongly Disagree, 2-Disagree, 3-No real opinion, 4-Agree, 5-Strongly agree)
5-Strongly Agree. Watching everything being assembled and the process was much easier than I anticipated. Before the exercise I thought collecting aerial imagery was left only to highly experienced experts. However, afterwards I realized with a small amount of investments and a little research I could repeat this exercise on my own.
What types of learning strategies would I recommend to make the activity even better?
I thought the exercise was effective. The only thing I would change is more student handling of the equipment. I understand the equipment is expensive, but if we could have training into how to properly handle everything we would come out of the class with a much deeper grasp on the subject of UASs and possibly have that extra leg up on the competition that would land us that next level job.
UAS II & III
Prior to the activity, how would I rank myself in knowledge about the topic?(1-No knowledge at all, 2-Very little knowledge, 3-Some knowledge, 4-A good amount of knowledge, 5-I knew all about this)
3-Some knowledge. We had watched the Professor use the various technologies of aquiring aerial photography the week before. So these two exercises were not completely foreign to me. I had still never personally assembled the picavet rig or flown the Y6 before though.
Following this activity, how would I rate the amount of knowledge I have on the topic?
(1-I don't really know enough to talk about the topic, 2-I know enough to explain what I did, 3-I know enough to repeat what I did, 4-I know enough to teach someone else, 5-I'm an expert)
2-I know enough to explain what I did. I am much more familiar with the elements of UASs, but I don't think I have enough knowledge were I would feel comfortable operating a multicopter. The balloon launch and the kite mapping were straight forward enough though. There was much less that could go wrong with the kite and the balloon. Where as with the Y6 you needed to have multiple people monitoring the battery life, if the Y6 was correctly flying to the waypoints, if the copter would clear the top of any obstacles in the area....in general a much more sophisticated piece of equipment. I wish I had more experience operating a multicopter and/or fixed wing UAV.
Did the hands-on approach to this activity add to how much I was able to learn?
(1-Strongly Disagree, 2-Disagree, 3-No real opinion, 4-Agree, 5-Strongly agree)
These were as hands on as they could be at the level of knowledge/experience we had. I would give it a 5-Strongly Agree the hands on approach helped. My one negative comment is that we didn't get to use the kite to map anything.
What types of learning strategies would I recommend to make the activity even better?
I like the idea of students taking a flight simulator proficiency test. If we could have the oportunity to pass that and then actually get experience operating the Y6 or a fixed wing, I would be very happy. I like the direction the department is headed.
Surveying with a Topcon Total Station
Prior to the activity, how would I rank myself in knowledge about the topic?(1-No knowledge at all, 2-Very little knowledge, 3-Some knowledge, 4-A good amount of knowledge, 5-I knew all about this)
I would rank as a 1. I have probably driven past total stations in use along highways, but I had never been a part of surveying or even read about a total station and its proper use.
Following this activity, how would I rate the amount of knowledge I have on the topic?
(1-I don't really know enough to talk about the topic, 2-I know enough to explain what I did, 3-I know enough to repeat what I did, 4-I know enough to teach someone else, 5-I'm an expert)
I would only give myself a 3 for surveying. I still need to use the total station a couple more times before I would know how to set up the job, collect a back sight, etc. However, I feel I know the principles of what we were doing thoroughly and once we were past the initial configurations the labs went by smoothly.
Did the hands-on approach to this activity add to how much I was able to learn?
(1-Strongly Disagree, 2-Disagree, 3-No real opinion, 4-Agree, 5-Strongly agree)
I think the hands-on approach was the only way to do this lab. You can't just theoretically imagine the setup of the total station. I think having to do that lab with a small group was a quality method for making us solve the problems with teamwork. As opposed to not even encountering the problems because you only read about the total station.
What types of learning strategies would I recommend to make the activity even better?
I thought the approach designed for the class worked well. The classroom method of having each group set up the total station and then helping the following group worked well. The only improvement would have been if the teacher had stayed in the class the whole time. I noticed as the groups went on more and more hints/tips were being lost through the grape vine; or, new questions were coming up that previous groups had not thought of. If the teacher was there it would have helped deepen our understanding when those initial questions came up.
Another thing that would have helped was if each group could have been able to participate in the field when first explaining how to set up the total station, the project, blue tooth connection, etc. Obviously having a total station for each group is out of the question. But I thought that group 1 had a significant amount of explanation, and then the other groups were supposed to know what was happening based off their explanation. I was trying my best to follow along, but I couldn't see the screen of the GPS and wasn't fully able to absorb all the information. In the future having better time management for equal instruction on each group would be beneficial.
Navigation 2: Orienteering
Prior to the activity, how would I rank myself in knowledge about the topic?(1-No knowledge at all, 2-Very little knowledge, 3-Some knowledge, 4-A good amount of knowledge, 5-I knew all about this)
3-some knowledge. We had been instructed on distance and azimuth about 5 weeks earlier. We had also had a couple field exercises using distance and azimuth in various ways. So I thought I was solid in my understanding of the technique. However, one I was actually in the field I realized I was not as sharp with the map and compass navigation as I presumed. (My bearings were off when I calculated between points).
Following this activity, how would I rate the amount of knowledge I have on the topic?
(1-I don't really know enough to talk about the topic, 2-I know enough to explain what I did, 3-I know enough to repeat what I did, 4-I know enough to teach someone else, 5-I'm an expert)
3-I know enough to repeat what I did. I was the runner for this activity, so my hold on the topic didn't improve that much. I know how to find North, "red in the shed," but I would have to stop and think logically before I calculated a bearing. I'm not automatic in finding the correct bearing angle yet.
Did the hands-on approach to this activity add to how much I was able to learn?
(1-Strongly Disagree, 2-Disagree, 3-No real opinion, 4-Agree, 5-Strongly agree)
5-Strongly agree. Once again the hands on approach was effective. I underestimated the difficulty the terrain/underbrush would add. There where times when a machete would have been helpful. Also, the lack of visibility interfered with the line of sight so we had to take shorting intervals of finding a landmark, running, and pace count. I think this contributed to the lack of effective navigating.
What types of learning strategies would I recommend to make the activity even better?
I thought the exercise was very effective. My only suggestion is to find a better way to mark the points on the map. Since many of the points were in dense tree cover, the GPS location of some of the points were incorrect. As a result, when searching for the flag we found the correct geographic location of our map point, but the flag was not there.
Navigation 3: GPS Navigation with Paintball Guns
Prior to the activity, how would I rank myself in knowledge about the topic?(1-No knowledge at all, 2-Very little knowledge, 3-Some knowledge, 4-A good amount of knowledge, 5-I knew all about this)
3-Some knowledge. I have used the Trimble Pro XRs, the Juno units, and other various GPS units fishing. So I was not a complete novice. However, I still do need to think about the steps to take to deploy a data dictionary to the GPS and other such tasks.
Following this activity, how would I rate the amount of knowledge I have on the topic?
(1-I don't really know enough to talk about the topic, 2-I know enough to explain what I did, 3-I know enough to repeat what I did, 4-I know enough to teach someone else, 5-I'm an expert)
4-I know enough to teach someone else. I feel much more confident after this lab. There were times during the middle of the field when the GPS would malfunction and we would have to stop and fix it. During this time we were very anxious and the tension was high. But we were still able to figure out the bugs and I think that created a larger oportunity to learn than a situtation of normal stress levels.
Did the hands-on approach to this activity add to how much I was able to learn?
(1-Strongly Disagree, 2-Disagree, 3-No real opinion, 4-Agree, 5-Strongly agree)
5-Strongly Agree. I really liked the exercise, and I'm glad we were able to have two days to work on the lab. The day of preporation was key to our success, and I'm very proud of who the lab as a whole turned out.
What types of learning strategies would I recommend to make the activity even better?
I thought the lab was very effective. The added element of the paintball guns/stress added a nice touch to the lab. I had a lot of fun with the lab, and I learned more than I thought I would. The only recommendation I would have is if the Professor could have joined in on the fun. Possibly have a couple teams of geography professors in on the fun. Test out if their years of experience would be enough of a significant advantage to impact the navigation of the course.
End of Class Reflective Evaluation:
In reflection on the semester I'm happy with the knowledge I came away with. This was my last semester at college and I felt a little anxious about going into the field. I had heard so much about UAVs and LiDAR being such up and coming markets, yet I had absolutely no experience with them. This class addressed a lot of my concerns and even when the labs weren't expressly designed to cover these topics, the informal nature of the class allowed for students to open up about any curiosities they had in relation to geography and other geospatial fields.In addition to my exposure to UAVs and other broader knowledge, I'm also happy with the various forms of data collection we covered in class. The pace was rather quick for only meeting one day a week, but I am very happy with the many types of equipment we used in class. The Total Station was a particular favorite of mine. My group had a rather frustrating time initially setting it up, but I feel like I had a wonderful oportunity granted to me by getting to use such a finely tuned instrument. It would be cool if the geography department could acquire a survey grade GPS in the future.
With that in mind, I wanted to mention how jealous I am of the up-and-coming direction of this class and the geography program as a whole. I think the idea of the flight simulators is a great way to get students experience before they go out into the workforce. Having that hands on experience would make students more comfortable around the UAVs and their depth of knowledge will be much deeper than mine as only watched them in use. I think the flight simulators are great idea.
No comments:
Post a Comment