> Where can we get a real value for g? Whoever mows their lawn next must
> measure a typical cutting and work it out for us!
My 1E-7 figure is based on a 6cm growth in a week.
That's 'in the ballpark' for a rainy week.
A quick visit to the store (and shed) shows the width of
the smallest trimmers is about 22cm (gain some there).
(I'll post summary spec's when I get a chance).
I've cut the number of 'mowable hours' to 8 per day
on a rule of thumb "two hours charging for one hour work".
That gives me figures in the 100 - 300 square meter range.
(Come to think of it I really have no idea how big my yard is.)
>
> If this latest calculation is right, then we are right on the border of
> acceptable performance. Since I'd like to have a generous margin on
> this, it looks as though we have no choice but to have a wider cutter (w)
> and move faster (v). We might also have to consider how we can be more
> efficient (e) and if we can put up with longer cuttings (c).
I agree.
Time is more of a problem than originally anticipated.
> Should just resign ourselves to tackling a more modest area,
> with the expectation that two or more mowbots would be needed to cope
> with bigger spaces. Opinions?
Seems very reasonable.
Shoot for "average yard" capability;
live with "smallish yard" capability;
Large yard folks need to increase the number of mowbots.
-- -Monta Elkins--------------------------------------------------------- | "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is | | for good men to do nothing." -- Edmund Burke | | Monta nospam at bev.net ----------------- http://www.bev.net | | System Administrator - Blacksburg Electronic Village | ---------------------------------------------------------