Performance Intelligence uses controlled studies to establish a baseline for this mower on this lawn, regardless of the mower's age. We then compare later operating data with that frozen baseline, together with measured mowing results, to determine how well the mower is doing its job and whether its mowing strategy can be improved.
Recent comparable mowing sessions are performing within the range established for this mower.
Repeated controlled mowing sessions established what normal first-charge performance looks like for this mower on this lawn.
Individual runs can vary with grass growth, cutting height and mowing conditions. Battery performance is judged from patterns in comparable mowing sessions, not from one run in isolation. Portal 2 does not convert these observations into a made-up “Battery Health %.”
Controlled Baseline v1.0: Aug 10–21, 2026. Ten controlled 3-hour runs. Dry-weather first cutting cycle averaged 112.4 minutes; recharge averaged 50.9 minutes. This is a frozen historical benchmark and is not rewritten by later runs. See the August 2026 Calendar for individual run details.
The goal is to mow long enough to do the job, but not longer than the evidence says the lawn needs.
Battery testing showed that this mower normally reaches its first recharge after about 112 minutes of mowing. That made approximately 100 minutes a practical duration to test.
Independent coverage testing then showed that repeated ~100-minute sessions provided strong coverage across this lawn. The question was not whether the mower could continue mowing; it was whether the lawn needed the additional mowing and recharge.
Repeated ~100-minute mowing sessions consistently reached about 95–96% of the lawn across mature rolling three-session periods.
A robotic mower does not need to reach every part of the lawn during every session. What matters is whether later sessions progressively reach areas missed earlier.
Areas missed during one mowing session were progressively reached during later sessions.
The three values above show the first three study sessions. More importantly, by Runs 6–10 the rolling three-session result repeatedly remained between 95.0% and 96.4%. The 99.5% union of all ten runs is retained as study evidence but is not used as the operating metric.
| Date | Session Spatial | Rolling / Cumulative | Runs |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 10, 2026 | 81.1% | 81.1% | 1 |
| Sep 11, 2026 | 75.5% | 91.4% | 2 |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 71.9% | 94.0% | 3 |
| Sep 13, 2026 | 80.7% | 91.5% | 3 |
| Sep 14, 2026 | 85.1% | 93.1% | 3 |
| Sep 15, 2026 | 86.2% | 95.0% | 3 |
| Sep 17, 2026 | 84.0% | 95.6% | 3 |
| Sep 18, 2026 | 82.8% | 95.7% | 3 |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 87.3% | 96.4% | 3 |
| Sep 20, 2026 | 82.5% | 96.0% | 3 |
Coverage was measured independently because mower-reported positions were not precise enough for this spatial study. The detailed study used a separate GNSS logger, known lawn geometry, stationary validation and a conservative processing method. These measurements support the Phoenix/MMA conclusion only; they are not transferred to another mower or lawn.
See the September 2026 Calendar for individual coverage-study runs.
Repeated ~100-minute sessions provided strong coverage when spread across the week. The evidence does not show that this lawn needs to be mowed every day.
This is a recommended frequency supported by the controlled study—not a claim that three sessions per week is a mathematical optimum for every season or every lawn.
Measured fact first. Practical interpretation second.
A formal study is prospective, controlled and repeatable. Its conditions are defined before results are accepted, qualifying and nonqualifying runs remain distinguishable, and the resulting baseline is frozen rather than rewritten by later mowing. Ordinary operating history remains observational evidence for comparison. Battery baseline results, independent coverage measurements, qualifying sessions, methods and limitations remain available beneath the owner-facing answers rather than being turned into a single invented “performance score.”