Open philw6 opened 6 years ago
Interesting. Please provide this data set and I will investigate these issues. Thanks for your patience as these issues with the 'new' data formats get ironed out
The .SON files are very large... can I send them to you via FTP link? To your email address perhaps?
sure thing. however you want to send is fine with me
I've fixed the issues associated with incorrect reported range, but I am also getting errors in the map module, because either the heading is incorrect or some other reason that is creating latitudes outside of the range -90 to +90. I haven't been able to figure it out. I've tried various epsg codes etc. Is there something unusual about your setup, such as an external non-Humminbird GPS?
Ok, I figured it out. For some reason, your data doesn't work with
epsg:4326
I managed to run the map module with
epsg:29101
using the latest version 1.4.6
Hi Daniel,
I almost have it working except now the requirement to add in values for all variables has me stumped on a few. Please see the python input script and the cmd output. It seems to be missing some values for the plot_contours module which I cant find any documentation to work out what they should be.
Are you able to take a quick look at the attached and advise on what I need to do from here?
On another note, we are a company based in Australia that does a lot of river and marine geomorphic analysis and so could potentially collaborate with you given that much of your research appears to be in the same area. We are going to the field again in March/April to the Brazil location that I provided data for previously. There are actually 20 sites across a 650km river system including a variety of substrates and habitat types. We are also taking Hydroacoustic (fish biomass) measurements in conjunction with the Humminbird sonar data, using a Biosonics DT-X system. The hydroacoustic biomass is actually the main data for the project where as we are using the Humminbird as a supporting dataset to look at habitats (e.g. visually identifying woody debris etc and using Reefmaster to extract E1, E2 and PSV values). If you were every interested in collaboration/consulting let me know.
Regards,
Phil
-----Original message----- From: Daniel Buscombe notifications@github.com Sent: Saturday 27th January 2018 14:12 To: dbuscombe-usgs/PyHum PyHum@noreply.github.com Cc: Phil Whittle Phil.Whittle@hydrobiology.biz; Author author@noreply.github.com Subject: Re: [dbuscombe-usgs/PyHum] MEGA data processing errors (#52)
Ok, I figured it out. For some reason, your data doesn't work with
epsg:4326
I managed to run the map module with
epsg:29101
using the latest version 1.4.6
— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.
Input file is C:\Users\philw\BHPsonar\R00170.DAT
Sonar file path is C:\Users\philw\BHPsonar\R00170\
Window is 10 square pixels
Number of sediment classes: 4
[Default] Number of processors is 8
processing port side ...
processing starboard side ...
Plotting ...
Plotting ...
Plotting ...
Plotting ...
Plotting ...
Plotting ...
Plotting ...
Plotting ...
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "bhp_pyhum_pw1.py", line 112, in
(PyHum) C:\Users\philw>
Apologies for the delay in my response - the plotting routines in the texture module need an overhaul. I promise I will try to make it a priority soon. In the meantime, I suggest playing with the input parameter 'win', or just making your own plots with the exported data. Remember, PyHum is an API. You can incorporate it into your own scripts for making plots. I am planning a series of ipython notebooks that demonstrate some examples of this. Please bear with me - things progress slowly.
Also, you may use the e1e2 module in pyhum to compute E1 and E2 values. This is a little-used function within PyHum that I'd be happy to revise as directed
Always interested in collaboration - just let me know how I can help!
There are a few errors that pop up when processing MEGA data, not sure if its only for this transducer set-up.
The first is that the horizontal distance of the output processed data is much less than actual. For instance the right bank is ~21m from the boat track in the attached file, where as PyHum is reading it as ~7m. . This does not happen if I set the transducer to the incorrect "1199" (instead of "'mega'"), whereby the correct horizontal distance is returned.
Shadow removal does seem to remove anything beyond about 10m from the transducer where as the data was collected out to 30m. Contouring only returns a thin strip at the edge of the data area (see attached).
The second issue is that I get a memory error in the gridding process where by it keeps trying larger and larger resolutions until infinity, regardless of having "99" or "1" in the res setting. I have to hit exit/enter in the CMD terminal to get it to stop. This also happens when I used the (incorrect) 1199 transducer type in the script.
I dont know if its relevant but I get the "memory mapping failed in sliding window - trying memory intensive version" in the initial read module. It seems to continue from this point OK though. Using a Windows 10 machine, i7-8550 with 16GB RAM.
Does anyone know the correct transducer array length for the MEGA units (XM 9 20 MSI T)? It physically measures about 16-18cm but I cant find details about the internal array length.
Script below:
-- coding: utf-8 --
syntax for script without file path included: (pyhum) C:\Users\philw>python bhp_pyhum_pw1.py -i C:\Users\philw\BHPsonar\R00170.DAT -s C:\Users\philw\BHPsonar\R00170\
""" Spyder Editor
This is a temporary script file. """ import sys, getopt
from Tkinter import Tk from tkFileDialog import askopenfilename, askdirectory
import PyHum import os
if name == 'main':