How to Improve RTK Fix Rate? 6 Measures You Can Start Today

When using RTK on site, it is common to face problems such as being able to obtain a position but not achieving a Fix, getting a Fix only for it to revert to Float soon after, and having stability vary greatly depending on location. The benefits of introducing RTK are not sufficiently realized by simply owning the equipment. Whether you can obtain a stable Fix solution on site greatly influences work efficiency, positioning reliability, and the need for rework. In particular, for tasks that handle many points in a short time—such as construction management, as-built verification, capturing current site conditions, and layout/setting-out assistance—the difference in Fix rate directly translates into a difference in productivity.

On the other hand, the reasons the Fix rate does not improve are not necessarily due solely to insufficient equipment performance. Elements included in daily usage—how you secure a clear view of the sky, the stability of communications, initialization when starting observations, verification at known points, reviewing settings, and on-site operational procedures—have a major impact. In other words, there are many things that can be improved starting today simply by on-site personnel changing their awareness a little.

In this article, we summarize and explain six practical points to review in order to increase RTK Fix rate. From the six perspectives of sky visibility, communications, initialization, known-point verification, equipment settings, and operating procedures, we delve into why the Fix rate changes, what to review, and how to put it into practice on site. Whether you are currently struggling with unstable Fixes in the field or are an implementation manager who wants to establish operational rules, this should provide practical guidance for decision-making.

Table of Contents

• Introduction

• Measure 1: Ensure overhead visibility is the top priority

• Measure 2: Stabilize communications to prevent loss of correction data

• Countermeasure 3: Carefully perform initialization to ensure the correct state at the start of observation

• Countermeasure 4: Make checking known points a habit to ensure the reliability of the Fix

• Countermeasure 5 Review equipment settings and create conditions that make it easy to fix

• Measure 6 Standardize operational procedures to reduce differences between sites

• Summary

Introduction

When considering RTK Fix rate, the first thing to keep in mind is that a Fix is not simply a state of having satellites in view. In RTK, the rover resolves the integer ambiguities of the satellite signals it receives while applying correction information, thereby determining a high-precision position. A Fix is the state in which this resolution has been stably achieved. Conversely, even if satellites are visible, if conditions are not met it becomes a Float, and although a position may be produced its accuracy and repeatability will be unstable.

A common misunderstanding on site is to look for a single cause for failing to get a Fix. For example, people may think “it doesn’t Fix because the communications are poor,” “it doesn’t Fix because it’s near a grove of trees,” or “it doesn’t Fix because the settings are wrong,” considering each factor in isolation. In reality, multiple factors usually accumulate at the same time and lower the Fix rate. A slightly restricted sky view can be compounded by momentary communication dropouts, the initialization at the start of observations can be insufficient, and on top of that the day’s field operator may be using different procedures than before. When these small disturbances pile up, the Fix rate can drop substantially.

Conversely, to increase the Fix rate, it is more important to eliminate, one by one, the factors that impede Fix than to search for dramatic tricks. Choose locations where satellites are easily visible, create communication conditions that keep the link stable, perform initialization carefully before starting observations, do not skip checks at known points, tailor settings to field use, and reduce variability in procedures between operators. Thoroughly enforcing these basics will ultimately be the most reliable way to achieve improvements.

Also, it is important not to focus excessively on the Fix rate. For example, if you operate in a way that forces a Fix in any location, there is a risk that you will end up trusting unstable Fixes. What matters is raising the Fix rate while simultaneously creating a system that can judge whether an obtained Fix can be trusted. For that reason, the six countermeasures introduced in this article should be regarded not as mere tips but as part of on-site quality control.

Measure 1: Make overhead visibility the top priority

Securing sky visibility is the most basic yet most effective measure for improving RTK Fix rate. No matter how high-performance the receiver is, if the reception environment is poor the Fix will not be stable. In particular, because GNSS requires stable tracking of multiple satellites and a good geometric configuration, how open the sky is directly affects the Fix rate.

What you need to watch for on site is that it’s not enough for only the sky directly overhead to be visible. Near building walls, close to underpasses, beneath slopes, or near tree overhangs, even if part of the sky is open the view of satellites can be biased. This not only reduces the number of satellites that can be tracked but also makes the receiver more susceptible to multipath. Multipath is the phenomenon in which signals from satellites are reflected off buildings, the ground, or other surfaces before reaching the receiver, causing positioning solutions to become unstable. At sites with low fix rates, you should first suspect this kind of reflective environment.

In practice, before entering the survey point, simply moving a few steps around the area can sometimes improve the situation. If stepping slightly out from under the canopy, putting distance between yourself and vehicles or heavy machinery, or moving away from walls stabilizes the fix, you can judge that the location itself is an environment that makes fixing difficult. Conversely, insisting on a specific point and sticking to a position with poor conditions can lengthen waiting times and reduce overall work efficiency. On site, it is important to first check whether there is leeway to adjust the observation position by several tens of centimeters to several meters (several tens of cm (≈ 8-24 in) to several m (≈ 3-10 ft)) and adopt the mindset of choosing the best possible line of sight.

Also, issues with sky visibility are related to the overall movement-flow design of the site. For example, surveying the entire premises in the morning to identify which areas are easy to get a Fix and which are unstable makes it easier to organize the subsequent observation sequence. Measuring open-sky locations first can stabilize equipment conditions, and postponing difficult locations can be more efficient. Especially for equipment that is unstable during startup, this sequence alone can change the Fix rate.

The handling of the pole must not be overlooked. If the pole is tilted, if a worker's body or equipment is too close to the antenna, or if metal objects are nearby, that alone may be enough to worsen reception conditions. During observations it is important to stabilize the pole and avoid creating unnecessary obstructions around the antenna. In particular, if you wait with your body pressed close in a confined space, you may unknowingly worsen reception conditions.

When trying to raise the Fix rate, field personnel tend to focus on device screens and correction status, but the very first thing to check is how the sky looks. If the sky view is poor, merely adjusting settings and communications will only go so far. The lower the Fix rate at a site, the more important it is to prioritize evaluating the overhead sky view and to look for opportunities to improve by adjusting the observation position.

Countermeasure 2 Stabilize communications to prevent loss of correction data

In network RTK, maintaining a Fix assumes that correction data are being received stably. Even if satellite signals are being received well, if correction data are not continuously delivered to the rover, it becomes difficult to maintain a Fix. A common situation in the field is that, although communication appears to be working, momentary delays or intermittent dropouts occur, and as a result the solution reverts to Float.

When considering communications, it is dangerous to judge solely by the number of radio antennas. Mobile connections can be unstable even when within coverage, and communication fluctuations are especially likely in mountainous areas, development sites, places close to underground areas, and locations surrounded by buildings. Continuity is important for correction data, so even a momentary disconnection affects maintaining a Fix. Even if you think there is no problem because the screen shows it has reconnected, each reconnection reduces the stability of the observations.

As a practical improvement, first establish the connection in a location with good signal reception before entering the work area. If you power up immediately upon arrival in a spot with poor conditions, operations will begin with an unstable connection and you will carry on a state that is difficult to achieve a Fix from. It is often more successful overall to stabilize reception of corrections and the Fix state in a location with good reception and an open sky before moving.

How you hold or position the communication device also affects performance. If you keep a smartphone in your pocket and cover it with your body, reception can deteriorate. It is important to understand whether the connection between the receiver and the communication device is Bluetooth or a cable, and which device is handling correction reception, and to keep the communication device stable in as clear a line-of-sight position as possible. Because some sites can change conditions simply based on the direction of the body, deciding on a reproducible way of holding it will make operations more stable.

Also, at sites with unstable communications, reviewing the line contract or SIM can be effective. Because signal reception varies by carrier even within the same area, if the fix rate frequently drops at a particular site, you should suspect the network environment as well as the equipment. If the site is limited, simply checking the communication status in advance and preparing an alternative connection if necessary can bring improvement.

The important point is not to assume that a failure to obtain a Fix is a satellite-side problem. Even if reception is good, the Fix will not be stable if correction data is interrupted. When Floats increase in the field, you should always check the communication logs, whether reconnections occurred, and the status of correction information updates, and look for any communication fluctuations. To raise the Fix rate, you need to place as much emphasis on continuity of communication as on satellite reception.

Countermeasure 3 Carefully perform initialization to prepare the state at the start of observation

In RTK, the initialization at the start of observations has a major impact on the subsequent Fix rate. On site, because people want to get to work quickly, they sometimes begin measuring immediately after power-up, but this rough startup often leads to unstable Fixes. In particular, if the state from the previous use remains or if the environment has changed significantly right after moving, starting observations without properly setting the initial state makes it difficult to reach a stable solution.

What matters during initialization is giving the receiver enough time to track satellites. Immediately after powering on, satellite selection, acquisition of orbital information, and alignment with correction signals may not yet be stable. If you force measurements in this state, the Fix can appear and disappear repeatedly. If the situation improves simply by waiting a few minutes in an open area, that waiting time is not wasted but should be considered preparation time for stable operation.

Also, immediately after a long-distance move or when using the device in an environment completely different from the previous one, the equipment may carry over its prior state. In such cases, restarting or performing reinitialization as needed can improve the situation. Rather than persisting on-site while things remain unstable, it can be faster to return to a location with better conditions and start up again from power-on. Don’t rely solely on the operator’s experience; decide in advance under which conditions reinitialization should be performed to reduce hesitation.

During initialization, it is also important to keep the pole stationary. Starting up while walking or remaining on an unstable setup makes it harder for the solution to stabilize. Especially when aiming for an initial fix, keeping the receiver stable and avoiding unnecessary movements increases the reproducibility of the solution. Movements that feel trivial to the operator can easily affect the startup, so you should consciously develop the habit of remaining still during initialization.

At some sites, you may observe tendencies such as it being hard to get a Fix first thing in the morning or Fixes becoming stable after a restart. These phenomena can be caused in part by not standardizing the initialization procedures. By ensuring that everyone follows the same sequence, under the same site conditions, and allows the same waiting time, the equipment’s startup quality will stabilize. To increase the Fix rate, it is essential to be meticulous not only about the操作 at the moment of measurement but also about the preparation procedures before starting to measure.

Countermeasure 4: Make checking known points a habit to ensure the reliability of the Fix

When you want to raise the Fix rate, it's easy to focus solely on whether a fix is achieved. However, in practical work, confirming whether that fix can be trusted is more important than the mere fact that a fix was obtained. For that, verification against known points is indispensable. Making a habit of checking against known points not only makes accuracy management easier, but also provides the diagnostic material needed to isolate causes that make fixes difficult.

For example, at a site where a Fix is obtained but the reproducibility of the coordinates is poor, the person in charge may feel that "the Fix rate is low today." However, in reality the problem may not be the Fix rate but other issues such as coordinate system settings, antenna height input, or overlooking differences from known points. If you check at a known point every time, you won't be deceived by the appearance of a Fix and will quickly notice any abnormalities in quality.

The reason that checking known points leads to an improved fix rate is that it speeds up decision-making on site. If measurements consistently match at known points, you can assume the equipment condition, correction reception, and configuration settings for that day are not significantly off. Conversely, if you have a fix but it does not match the known points, you should not continue the main observation as is. With such a criterion, field personnel can more easily take the next steps—reinitialization, checking settings, verifying communications, or changing location—without needlessly persisting.

Checking known points does not need to be done on a large scale every time. What matters is not to omit it. Simply verifying one point at the start of work, one point midway during long tasks, and one point before finishing can greatly improve operational quality. Checking a known point at the start is especially effective at sites where the Fix rate is unstable. If you can detect an anomaly at the initial stage, you reduce the risk of having to redo a large amount of subsequent observations.

Also, it is important not to leave the results of known-point checks as verbal reports only, but to record them, even briefly. Accumulating trends such as "it was slightly off today," "it became unstable in the afternoon," or "the discrepancy widened when entering a particular area" helps analyze the causes of decreased fix rates. When differences by site, time of day, and operator become apparent, the priorities for countermeasures also become clear.

When it comes to increasing the Fix rate, the conversation tends to focus on techniques to make the equipment Fix, but in practice the quality of operations is supported by verification mechanisms. By making checks of known points routine, the success or failure of a Fix can be judged not merely by a screen display but as positioning quality. As a result, unnecessary observations are reduced, leading to reproducible Fix operations.

Countermeasure 5 Review device settings and create conditions that make fixes easier

It's surprisingly common to blame only the field environment and not review the equipment settings when the Fix rate is unstable. However, in RTK operations, if the settings are not suited to the site, it can become difficult to obtain a Fix even when the reception environment is not poor. Conversely, properly tuning the settings can improve the stability of both start-up and maintenance even at the same location.

First and foremost is ensuring consistency between the coordinate system and the correction method. If the fundamental settings are misaligned, the entire operation can become unstable even before Fix rates are considered. You should check whether there are any items you haven’t reviewed since installation, such as the correction data format, connection destination settings, and the positioning mode on the receiver. In particular, when equipment is reused across multiple sites, leftover settings from a previous site can lead to poor Fix performance after arriving onsite.

Next, important items are those related to satellite selection, such as satellite usage settings and mask angle. Using many low-elevation satellites may increase the number of satellites available, but they can become more susceptible to obstructions and reflections. Conversely, if you make the conditions too strict, there may not be enough usable satellites and obtaining a fix can become difficult. You need to strike a balance according to the field environment; there is no one-size-fits-all setting. That is why it is important to have standard settings based on whether your company’s primary sites are urban, suburban, or mountainous.

The update rate and how display items are presented should also be reviewed. While a high update rate can improve operability, it may affect stability depending on the equipment and communication conditions. The settings to prioritize change depending on whether the site requires continuous navigation or mainly point observations. Rather than always prioritizing speed, settings that prioritize maintaining a stable fix are often more suitable for practical work. Especially at sites where beginners are operating the equipment, narrowing the display to the items that need to be checked will reduce mistakes, rather than requiring overly complex displays or fine manual adjustments.

How antenna height and equipment height are entered is also an important factor that affects operational quality, not the Fix rate itself. If the procedures for entering numerical values are unclear, even if a Fix is achieved the results become untrustworthy, and on site this leads to the mistaken impression that "the Fix seems suspicious today." By organizing the settings screen, standardizing input units, and clarifying verification procedures, you can reduce anxiety after a Fix.

Furthermore, the update status of firmware and apps cannot be ignored. If equipment is operated in an outdated state, support for certain satellite systems and communication stability may differ. However, updating itself should not be the goal; it is important to thoroughly verify updates before field deployment and maintain a unified environment. If each operator uses a different version, the perceived Fix rate can vary even at the same site, making it difficult to isolate the cause.

Settings are not something you decide once and finish. By feeding back issues that occur on site into the settings and gradually refining the standard settings, you create conditions that make fixes easier. To harness the full performance of the equipment, you need to optimize not only the reception environment but also the configuration environment.

Measure 6 Standardize operational procedures to reduce differences across sites

At sites where RTK fix rates are unstable, an unexpectedly large cause is variation in operational procedures. Even with the same equipment, the same correction service, and the same site, the perceived fix rate can differ depending on the operator. This difference arises not only from individual skill levels but from lack of standardization in how systems are started up each time, the order of checks, how long one waits, and how measurements are taken.

For example, one operator, after arriving on site, first goes to an open area to verify the connection and initial Fix before starting work, while another operator might head straight to the work point and power up. One operator does not skip checking known points and checks the communication status each time, whereas another operator might proceed based only on the Fix indicator on the screen. When such differences accumulate, Fix rates can differ even with the same equipment.

What becomes important then is to establish standard procedures on site. If you put into writing the workflow — for example, choose a startup location with good sky reception, confirm receipt of corrections before moving, remain stationary during initialization, verify at a known point before starting work, decide how many minutes to wait before reinitializing when conditions are unstable, and in what order to isolate causes if the situation does not improve — you can reduce differences between operators. To raise the fix rate, reproducibility of procedures is required rather than individual skill.

Also, on-site decision criteria should be standardized. For example, if it is unclear whether you should move location after a certain number of seconds without obtaining a Fix, how many times returning to Float should trigger a communications check, or what magnitude of discrepancy from a known point requires re-observation, each person will make inconsistent judgments. As a result, one person may be overly cautious and lose time, while another may be overly optimistic and lower quality. With standardized criteria, it becomes easier to both improve the Fix rate and ensure quality.

Training is also important. Although RTK may at first glance seem usable simply by following the on-screen display, in reality there are points you can only learn in the field—how to identify locations likely to yield a Fix, signs of unstable communications, and an intuitive sense for environments prone to multipath. By capturing veterans' rules of thumb in a form that can be passed on to newcomers, rather than leaving them as individual tacit knowledge, the team's overall Fix rate will improve.

Furthermore, sharing examples of trouble cases is also effective. If you briefly share which site, under what conditions, what caused the drop in fix rate, and how you dealt with it and improved things, you'll be able to respond more quickly when the same situation occurs again. Operational procedures are not something you create once and finish; they should be updated to reflect insights from the field.

Improving the fix rate is ultimately an improvement in the quality of on-site operations. Even if you introduce good equipment, you cannot fully leverage its performance if operations are not properly organized. Conversely, if standardized procedures are in place, the same equipment is more likely to deliver consistent results. As a measure you can start today, organizing operational procedures is a highly effective initiative.

Summary

To increase the RTK Fix rate, rather than looking for special tricks it is important to reduce the factors that hinder Fix one by one. The six measures covered here can all be reviewed on site immediately, but their actual effect is significant and they reliably affect daily work efficiency and positioning quality.

First, securing a clear view of the sky is the foundation for improving Fix rate. Rather than sticking around in locations with poor sky visibility, it is important to choose a position with even a slightly better view. Next, communication stability is the lifeline of network RTK, and simply preventing loss of correction data can change the stability of Fix maintenance. Furthermore, carefully performing initialization at the start of observations can reduce the instability immediately after startup.

Additionally, making it a habit to check known points will let you judge positioning quality itself rather than relying solely on the Fix display. By reviewing device settings, you can adapt usage to the site and reduce unnecessary sources of instability. Finally, standardizing operational procedures will reduce variations between operators and make it easier for the team to achieve a stable Fix rate.

At the worksite, if you assume there is a single cause for not getting a fix, improvements will not progress. Only by inspecting the situation from multiple perspectives—sky visibility, communications, initialization, confirmation, configuration, and procedures—does the true cause become revealed. Conversely, simply being mindful of these six points on a daily basis will reliably improve many worksites.

RTK is not a device that automatically becomes high-precision just by being introduced. Its true value is realized only when it is used correctly, when conditions are established to enable stable Fixes, and when operations are conducted while verifying the results obtained.

If you are troubled by a low Fix rate, start by implementing these six measures one by one at today’s site. The accumulation of small adjustments will lead to stable positioning and on-site operations with less rework.