Suunto 9 baro and climbed meters + suunto app
-
Hello!
As I understand suunto 9 baro does not register hills less then 2 meters (?).
When I plot a typical track in suunto app I get total climb of 30 m in 2 km. When i run my suunto only register 15 m. I’m ok with that but I really thought suunto app would convert my activity to the right amount of meters. The map is always gonna show better data than an hand held gps-device while running
In this case i know for sure that the total climb is 30 meters. Strava does not eather convert to the right amount of meters.
Anyone else having the same trouble?
-
That is correct. Needs 3m to register ascent that is to remove noise as your arm swings even 1m
-
@Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos said in Suunto 9 baro and climbed meters + suunto app:
That is correct. Needs 3m to register ascent that is to remove noise as your arm swings even 1m
I know, but my question was really why the suunto app (and strava) does not autocorrect when they make use of the terrain model? It should be an easy implementation.
-
@ollemelin Strava can via the web but all service have filters for ±2m as it’sa too small variation.
-
@ollemelin
I would prefer trust my Baro instead of map corrections in mountain.
Altitude correction assumes your position is really exact AND map altitude data are exact. -
Yeah, but the terrain model does not have variations. I understand the ”problem” but autocorrection with terrainmodel should really work if the numbers are off that much.
-
@Mff73 said in Suunto 9 baro and climbed meters + suunto app:
@ollemelin
I would prefer trust my Baro instead of map corrections in mountain.
Altitude correction assumes your position is really exact AND map altitude data are exact.On longer climbs the numbers are almost always correct. But on small climbs it does not work that good. Not even with 3-4 meters climb.
As an GIS and survey engineer I do understand the problem with measurment. But thats why er have software to manipulate data
But then…the terrain model can also be off
-
I think you understand the problem here, and why the decision to make such a filter.
On a side note, the altitude data are recorded unfiltered. So a simple parser could expose the “real” ascent, though imo at least a -=1m filter is needed. (remember arm swing) -
@ollemelin said in Suunto 9 baro and climbed meters + suunto app:
I know, but my question was really why the suunto app (and strava) does not autocorrect when they make use of the terrain model?
Map auto-correction may be very inaccurate because it depends on accurate coordinates, which is often challenging on mountainous terrain.
Consider the following example. You traverse across a steep mountain slope on a narrow trail. Half of sky is obstructed by the mountain, so the number of GPS satellites is limited and positional accuracy isn’t great. As a result of that the GPS track can wobble 10-15 meters either way across the slope. Now, those inaccurate coordinates are fed into the elevation model, and each movement to either side may translate into a large elevation jump or drop that wasn’t actually there. That may add to a lot of extra elevation gain.
The model is also very inaccurate when crossing bridges or going through tonnels. Every time you cross a bridge the elevation model will have you going to the bottom and then go up again to your previous level.
-
@silentvoyager said in Suunto 9 baro and climbed meters + suunto app:
@ollemelin said in Suunto 9 baro and climbed meters + suunto app:
I know, but my question was really why the suunto app (and strava) does not autocorrect when they make use of the terrain model?
Map auto-correction may be very inaccurate because it depends on accurate coordinates, which is often challenging on mountainous terrain.
Consider the following example. You traverse across a steep mountain slope on a narrow trail. Half of sky is obstructed by the mountain, so the number of GPS satellites is limited and positional accuracy isn’t great. As a result of that the GPS track can wobble 10-15 meters either way across the slope. Now, those inaccurate coordinates are fed into the elevation model, and each movement to either side may translate into a large elevation jump or drop that wasn’t actually there. That may add to a lot of extra elevation gain.
The model is also very inaccurate when crossing bridges or going through tonnels. Every time you cross a bridge the elevation model will have you going to the bottom and then go up again to your previous level.
Yes, thats correct. But on longer climbs in the mountains its not a problem. The device is spot on.
My issue is with flow-tracks with small hills. I actually take a lot of meters on that kind of trails. As I live in sweden the data for terrainmodels are also very good.
