I didn’t spent too much time on the bluetooth/wifi aspect of my C099 as I knew I wanted to use USB - but I noted when I set the ODIN to either of them, it knocked the other two methods out. Serial/USB, bluetooth or wifi - pick one.
Maybe something I was doing wrong, but it seemed a shortcoming to me.
I’m using bluetooth over the last two years: (nmea for Agopengps and ntrip for c099, caster is connected via tablets sim card):
started with mbed-firmware as delivered:
→ there were every start some problems to connecting the gps in Ago. (connect - disconnect - connect and then mostly works.)
so i decided to go with odin-w2-firmware:
→ bluetooth working very well, no connection problems
in the meantime I had to swap back once (caused of a configuration conflict) to mbed-firmware (c099mbed3_v2.0.0)
→ bluetooth working very well, no connection problems
WIFI/Udp:
It’s a nightmare. Each Step/Try another problem.
I found out that the udp packets which are sent are sometimes fragmented, so that previous AgOpenGps modules are crashed.
Some investigation for doubled nmea messages …
Panda serial hardwired:
I tried a panda setup which I used for my last field seeding. Teensy was connected via serial to c099 board, Bluetooth was diabled by oe3 - open Jumper, oe4 - Jumper closed (enables ntrip via serial from Ardurino Header)
No need to pass rtcm3 on 2244, it already works on 2233.
The only change from the original .ino was picking up the ublox nmea on 2244 vs hardwiring the uart. That way the same .ino works with “all in one” and over udp without issue.
The “all in ones” are cool but a GNSS upgrade is inevitable, this small change allows a door left wide open to upgrade accuracy or performance at any time without having to remake a whole new board each time. Any NMEA source will do.
Also allows fully modular unit. Leaving the ads1115 and Bno085 calibrated and on the machine. So that any other tablet with a copy of the vehicle file can instantly use the tractor without any WAS recalibration, Bno zeroing once setup.
MBED…… my eyes hurt from the last time I tried to use one, did not enjoy it. Its old online complier is getting shut down, I am not sad.
That is how it works for c099 via WIFI . I have no serial connection at all.
What hardware are you useing for connecting the F9P to Ethernet? Is it the USR-TCP232-T2 as described in https://discourse.agopengps.com/t/f9p-in-ethernet-mode/7979?
Would a ENC28J60 Ethernet Shield do the job? I have one but I am unsure how to proceed…
Depending on what you want?
But as this is in Panda section I believe it includes a Teensy.
So UDP could go from teensy. (using an Ethernet Kit PJRC Store)
This link suit usb, but show connection between f9p and teensy.
Autosteer Single GPS+IMU+Panda - #44 by Vili
My plan was to create a distributed system where I use a Tennsy 4.1 to combind GGA over UDP with IMU over UDP into a panda sentence. I though that was what this thread was discussing, have I missunderstood what you are trying to achive here? Maybe I am trying to over complicate things but I like the idea of the distributed system 
They teensy 4.1 would be connected to the rest of the system via ethernet…
Then I did not tell you correct info.
Use the USR one in the first link and connect as described in the thread.
But you should not use the second link , because that shield is for the Nano.
EDIT: if you already have one USR then try it, but it is not as fast as the one Potatofarmer is using (in the start of this thread)
Thanks! I do not have a USR yet. Going to order stuff this weekend.
Found the Eport-E20-PIN (Amazon) on Amazon. Would the USR be fast enogh or is the Eport needed for a reliable system?
For single the big draw of the E port is 921600 speed that matches the max speed of the F9p.
Not sure about other ports, and most run at 460800 max, so they did not interest me too much.
Once happy with singles equipment, have a dual ttl adapters to give dual a go.
Ive made changes to the ports going forward.
Gps 1 2211, Gps 2 2222, rtcm3 2233
The panda board runs at 115200 and works.
But it also has dedicated lines that can wait forever for data.
I want the GGA to come in as fast as possible, so it can be processed fast as possible and take the least amount of time using network resources or waiting in buffer.
Yes the goal is a distributed system, reducing electrical noise, increasing ease of install. Also all the cables are field rebuildable ethernet cables.
I have almost the exact same setup that I am working on. The Teensy 4.1 is giving me trouble. Which .ino file did you use or recommend using. I have the power over ethernet splitter to run it with ethernet kit that is made for the Teensy after I get the right software loaded on it to run over the ethernet port. Any help would be appreciated. I am using a POE switch and then a ethernet cable to the ethernet to usb adapter with usb plugged into the Panasonic toughpad. The 5.8.2 version of Ag Open GPS is what I am using.
I am using the ace .ino from the “Ace repository” on github. Also the Ace version of AgIO that can be copy/pasted in to replace the regular version of AgIO in any release.
I assume you have to generate the AgIO version with visual studio to make a .exe from the files available on github. Also using the AceSteer on the nano after creating a .hex file for it correct?
Also is there a machine section control “Ace” .ino? I didn’t see it on github and I didn’t see one for the gps. Any help is appreciated. Thanks!
I think section control is the same as the regular AoG
The ACE version of AgIO just gets rid of the limitations of USB, by getting rid of USB.
This allows all data to be networked and available at the same time to all devices that require it.
Section control is determined by the AOG program running on the tablet, and output commands sent in a PGN to the hardware that is configured to read the PGN for section control.
AgIO only creates and maintains the communication between hardware.
I have everything showing that it is hooked up except machine section control with the ACE branch. But if I just install the regular AGIO it shows machine section control and no IMU or Steert control. I am at a loss. The UDP monitor shows the IP address for the machine section control and 192.168.1.123:51223 <237. However the IP address doesn’t show up in the ethernet configuration window of AGIO when running the ACE branch.
I’m not intimately familiar with the details of changes made to AgIO. Maybe @BrianTee_Admin or @PotatoFarmer can comment. If you compare the PGN parsing code of the Ace modules and the machine module, are they both using the same UDP ports and PGN numbers? Are they sending replies back to the same IP & UDP port?
You are welcome to try my new machine class (with examples) on GitHub. It’s meant for the regular AgIO but maybe it works with the Ace AgIO.
Thanks for some ideas of what to look at. I will check out your code. I have also sent messages to Brian and Potato Farmer. But didn’t know if you might have any ideas. So thanks again!
I might get to trying it myself yet too.