Good Afternoon!
Unless I am missing something, most of the areas I’m trying to mow do not need, nor do I want, any perimeter laps. It would be very useful to have an option for “none” in each area config.
Likewise with no-go zones; not all want to have laps taken around them.
Please add “None” as an option for how many perimeter laps are taken to any area that presently performs perimeter laps.
Likewise, the core’s travel speed when making perimeter laps is unnecessarily slow. Running these perimeters that I do not need almost takes as long as mowing the areas within them.
These two behaviors significantly reduce the amount of acreage that can be mowed in a day. The below map is about a third of the acreage I intend to mow with this unit. I have no use for most perimeters laps around areas, and the navigation around objects is immature enough that I don’t want perimeters around them at this time. Maybe some day, but the object navigation is not useful at this time.
Thank you for your valuable feedback! We fully understand your desire to avoid unnecessary perimeter laps in order to improve mowing efficiency. Based on your input, we’re excited to let you know that we will be adding an option to disable perimeter laps around no-go zones in an upcoming update, so please stay tuned for that!
Additionally, we’ve added your suggestion for a “none” option for perimeter laps around each individual area to our request list, and we will consider this feature for future releases.
Regarding the core’s travel speed during perimeter laps, the default speed is set to 0.3m/s for safety reasons. While we understand that this may feel slow, this setting helps ensure the system operates safely, particularly when navigating around the edges of the mowing area.
We also recognize the importance of improving object navigation efficiency, which has been a common request from many of our users. We are actively working on enhancing this feature and will keep you updated as our tests progress smoothly.
Once again, thank you for your suggestions! We truly value user input and remain committed to improving our products.
This is a good idea. I’d expand on it and say add the option to manually select 0 to X number of laps thereby letting the user determine if they want none, 1, 2, 5, etc…
Followup clarification on “0 perimeter laps” for M1 mowing areas -
Yarbo presently requires the two laps as a way to stay away from the perimeter during the ZigZag portion of a job. I should clarify that the two lap distance does not need to be changed.
When “0 perimeter laps” is selected, Yarbo can maintain that buffer with the perimeter. No change to the zig-zag’s perimeter handling is wanted for this feature; literally do what Yarbo currently does when “2 Laps” is selected, but skip doing the perimeter laps.
It is intended that a section of perimeter, when desired, would be cleaned up with Dead-Ends and such.
I’d thought about that and decided against it as part of this specific request.
I’m not convinced that the navigation is up to that accuracy. One little track-slip and you’re over the line, and that already occurs on occasion with the 2-lane buffer. Since Yarbo’s current policy appears to treat a resulting ripped off antenna as a warranty issue, that’s a risk I’d probably have them avoid, for now.
One day when they are confident that out-of-bounds behavior is fully mitigated, then, sure. I’m totally being selfish, but I personally don’t want this feature held up because of that risk. Their warranty risk with the existing buffer has already been accepted, so build upon that.
For me, running two perimeter laps takes almost as long as mowing its area. The laps reduce the amount I can cut in a day by a significant amount, along edges that are either overlapped, bounded, or will need to be dead-ended or weed-whacked, anyway.
I understand a slower perimeter for safety reasons, but maybe only the outermost perimeter lap needs to be slowed down. It would save a lot of time if even just the inner perimeter lap(s) were at full speed.
It is my understanding from Smart People that the perimeter direction and No-go Zone direction are intentional:
The antennae have slightly different roles, and they are oriented so that the more important antenna is toward the work as the rover goes to the perimeters/borders
The consistent orientation allows for modules, like the Trimmer, to be developed without having to worry about working on both sides of the rover when running autonomously
I sent a question to Bryan but I expect he is at work this Monday morning. Indeed, you may be also. I am retired so I am free all the time. I have two questions for you.
When editing my perimeter can I edit just a portion or must I redraw the entire perimeter?
I replaced my tall antennae with the shorter as I live in Florida and only use Yarbo for mowing. It may be my imagination but I have noticed a loss of gps signal more often than when I was using the tall antennae. Can that be?
Nawp, Ken M., I’m an old retired fahht like y’all. It’s why I write so much drivel. Oh, I wish I was Ken Regular, especially after Taco Tuesday nails this old guy bad for about four days. (Heh, that’s just a badge the Forum gives you after you’ve annoyed enough people. Win!)
Anywho…
You can use the Edit Area feature to change the border of an Area by driving the rover to re-map just what you want to change.
If it works, you will be prompted to save one of two slices. If it presents only one slice to save, don’t save anything, back out of it, try again, this time drive a few extra feet out of the Area after you are done doing your edit and see the “Next” button light up. I hear driving on an extra few feet is a workaround to the “one slice bug” but haven’t tried it.
Yarbo will be allowing a “split Area” feature where you keep both sections but they become separate things – future feature.
Heh, that’s actually a Bryan question. I don’t know. GPS reception is darn sensitive. The HaLow antenna reception can be improved by getting rid of the squishy washer and putting in something thinner, so there’s an example of an SMA connection improved by tightening it another turn or two. I’m thinking the tall masts are more problematic due to exaggerated tilt if you have slopes, else I’m not sure they’d be any better or worse.
Have you reviewed the Diagnostics screen? HeadingDop is probably the best thing to look at in this case. The lower the better, with stuff over 1.5 being borderline and anything over 2 not good. To be “scientific”: I think I’d make sure my antennas are snug, then study the Diagnostics screen for the masts you have now, even just sitting on the Docking Station. Then swap in the other masts and observe. Or just study what you have, and if they’re bouncing around 0.whatever to 1.2 or so, you’re probably OK.
They claim there is no difference in GPS reception for either RTK antenna mounting option. I didn’t notice a change when I switched, but I feel like higher up would have a better impact, except potentially in the angle that Ken describes. The biggest reason to switch is the lower profile to not rip them off with low hanging branches and other suspended objects.
I checked the heading dop nd it fluctuated from 1.06 to 1.2 so I think I am ok. I tightened the antennae a little. I removed the blade guard brackets and changed the blades today. I sprayed a liberal amount of wd40 and everything looked good. I will be mowing the back yard tomorrow. Thanks for all your help and advice.
Thanks a lot. You were very helpful. I have a friend who saw my Yarbo and just bought one for himself. All he has done so far is open the boxes. I told him about this forum and How it is far more helpful than the instruction manuals.
I’d love the option to select 0 perimeter laps (not just for no-go zones). Currently, I mow the perimeter using my riding mower (simply because I can get closer to rocks and other yard features). I don’t need Yarbo to mow the perimeter, and doing so just wastes time and battery. Thank you!
I agree i think “0 or None” would be a great option to have. I also would like to see a perimeter or edge only option. where you can you send it out to just do the edge.
Does anyone know if I make the perimeter larger, will the smart turn factor that in? For example, Smart Turns take a really long time because it seems to want to hug the border. Is that because I’ve limited the border to only 2 laps?
For example, when I had a small tractor with a tight turning radius, I could make really small tight smart turns at the end of the row. When I got a larger tractor, with a larger turning raidus, my perimeter lap size needed to increase to cover the turning around area. Fortunately, the larger tractor had a larger mowing deck, so this wasn’t an issue (it was still one perimeter lap).
It currently will turn around in lane 2 no matter the setting. The PPP have been asking Yarbo to adjust the zig zag start to be in line with the number of perimeter laps so that at least the user can vary the turn around locations until something more permanent is available.
I don’t know. GPS reception is darn sensitive. The HaLow antenna reception can be improved by getting rid of the squishy washer and putting in something thinner, so there’s an example of an SMA connection improved by tightening it another turn or two. I’m thinking the tall masts are more problematic due to exaggerated tilt if you have slopes, else I’m not sure they’d be any better or worse.