|
WC MN | Arnie - 2/22/2014 09:40
I would like to pile on also but consider the following for great steering performance:
RTK GNSS for sub inch repeatability
Probably a more robust gyro / accelerometers (50 hrz etc)
Ruggedized monitor (although they might be overdone)
Transducer / steering disengage issues
Radios back to base station
CAN games
Some Algorithims are more robust than others
Over the long term though it all will probably become a commodity just like iron....calibrated and all right out of the box.....no training needed......
Arnie
The biggest drawback to the GPS found on our "Drones"(I prefer UAV but whatever) is that they are, AT BEST, capable of 8 ft. radius accuracy. Period. I have a uBlox Lea6. I highly doubt any of you guys would be satisfied with 8 ft. give or take when planting corn. Heck, if it's off 3" I hear that isn't good enough. My UAV is driven by the common "APM" unit.
I own and operate various Trimble equipment. I will agree for the most part they are overpriced for today's technology. The reason being is there isn't a whole lot of market penetration by other suppliers. Building a GNSS receiver was costly. That will soon change. There was a kickstarter project for a "cheap" RTK receiver that was recently funded AND taken to market by Swift Navigation. The base price is roughly $500 a receiver. They have a 2 receiver pair that you can purchase with a radio and that in a sense works as a base station. No telling how soon you will be able to incorporate CORS into it. That's THE largest hurdle in our "cheap" UAV's is a reliable and accurate GPS.
Anyways, when the FMX/FM-1000 came out, it WAS expensive hardware. Today, probably not so much but without competition the price will not change.
As far as the $79 APM knock off being as good as a T3/T2/NavII. It's not likely going to happen. The sample rate is really not as important as the quality. In the APM, we sample anywhere from 10 hz to 50 hz. The 50 hz tends to be jittery in most applications and needs to have a filter applied. Sample rate really means nothing, accuracy of the sample does. I would say anything 20 hz and up that has a decent filter applied is more than "good enough" to steer my planter tractor at 4.5 mph.... as long as you have a good enough GPS source that is corrected. Again, therein lies the problem. GPS source.
No one mentions fit and finish. My CFX and FMX both have beautiful ALUMINUM housings with rugged touch screens. STANDARDIZED cabling and plugs. It doesn't look like a cobbled up piece of..... I am a Tool, Die, and Mold maker by trade and I can tell you a mold to die cast those housings are not cheap. If I were to sell the parts as a caster, in the quantity that they are made in, I would guess there is roughly $125 just in aluminum castings for an FMX. I highly doubt any of us have the skill necessary to put something together that is reliable and will function in the "heat of the moment". I certainly don't.
I will say this however, the software to do a grid (AB line only) is extremely easy to program and use for the UAV's. I have an APM and use Mission Planner to program. I am less than excited about line management in the CFX. The FMX is "OK". You don't get advanced line features like offset curves, or freeform with the UAVS. You basically get point to point (via manual or autogrid) and a few tessellated circle features. Not saying that won't change but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for advanced features.
So what am I saying? I am saying that while we have some neat tools for the UAV market today, and that they are reasonably priced, I wouldn't quite throw them into my mix of precision ag equipment just quite yet. If people think it's that easy, I would suggest they get a kickstarter project started and funded. I am guessing they will come to a conclusion that although there may be money to made, it probably isn't as easy or profitable as running 4 sections of corn.
I cannot comment on CANBUS /ISOBUS. My thought is if CANBUS and ISOBUS was such an easy thing JD, Trimble, AgLeader, CNH, etc would all be able to talk to each other easily. The fact that they DO NOT makes me think that it's a larger project than leads on. Otherwise, some genius would have figured out a brain box to put in between a green planter and a red tractor and have them talk to each other. If someone has that all figured out, I'd be willing to fork some $$$ to commercialize it. My guess is it's feasible, just not profitable... enough....
I agree with Arnie in that some day these will become a commodity. Cheap, easy to access, and reliable. Similar to your phone. Remember when the telephone in your house lasted 20 years? Cell phones are being replaced every 18 months now.
****
A lot was talked about earlier with operating UAV's and the illegality in using them for commercial purposes. I have to put the disclaimer on here I fly around my property for a hobby. Under no circumstance to I use my imagery for any other purpose than pleasure.
Sighs........
****
| |
|
They are charging too much for auto steer
