What was it doing? wandering back and forth? too slow to get to line?
I honestly cant actually remember it was such a long time ago I was trying it. I seem to think I could always “get it to work” at one speed, but then if i tried it at a much slower speed, the settings would all need changing to get it to be stable / work again…vs stanley which I could just set and forget, and would work for it all…
yes, it is a lot more speed sensitive. Looking at some Raven manuals and they have different gains for different speeds rather then trying to do it auto.
I’ve had exactly the same problems with pp and dual as darren. Stanley works fine for me with the same settings from 1 kmh for planting veg or seedbed preparation up to 14 kmh for tillage. With pp i had to adjust the settings for every single speed.
I’m so impatient on waiting for the new version. Videos look great!
Do you think this issue will still be the case if we go to PP only for dual users Brian? Or have things changed so much now its likely to be totally different anyway?
Important to get PP good to work is the right setting of look ahead time. With dual I was able to reduce lookahead and this forces the tractor much more to the line. But on sidehills I had to increase sidehill draft gain.
in my opinion it is the lookahead that have to modified a little bit depending on speed.
Yes, all it needed was the integral to keep turning a bit more to get it there from forces pushing it away.
Honestly, both algorithms use heading to determine the distance and correction. The better the heading - the better it works
Are you say that PP will be working well when we equipped Single GPS + IMU?
Did you watch the latest youtube video on stanley vs PP?
Yes, I have watched a Youtube video. The PP was better than Stanley in U-Turn. But, you and @darrenjlobb say that dual + PP are not good?
But software changes. And stuff gets learned along the way to make it better. The very concept of lining up the pivot on the line makes, in theory, PP far superior to stanley. The limitation, as has been said several times, has been integral.
Stanley has to drive off the line in order to line up the back end (pivot) on the line whereas PP inherently does that. Since it is a calculated steering angle for both, the integral opposes that force by providing more steering angle. The advantage when going around a bend with PP is you first don’t have to add integral to get to the line without any side forces and then also add integral to oppose side forces as well.
Whether dual or single that doesn’t matter.
1 Like
I’m running PP with dual and its great. Like Wolle said, shorten the look ahead and it gets more aggressive and so on.
1 Like
There were certainly issues with the old ino code as well. Too much delay, skips and misses. Now the pid loop is running at 50 hz.
1 Like
Where is this magic ino ?
Is the INO of 4.6.20, available soon.
1 Like
Topic closed. Please continue to this topic for bugs and testing results. Otherwise we need to spit out 2 topics for bugs 
1 Like