## 3 Results and Discussion  
The results of the tests are presented in Figures 17-24. Figures 17a-24a show the results from the tests using reflective optocouplers, while Figures 17b-24b present the results from the tests using the camera. Figure 17a shows the electrical power profile during the vehicle's path traversal for the right wheel, using reflective optocouplers with SDt = 250 mm, while Figure 17b shows the profile using a camera with SDc = 250 mm. There are significant differences in the power value profiles depending on the sensor used. For reflective optocouplers, the output signal of which is binary, the control system's response to the input signal depended on the duration of the input. In contrast, with the camera, the trajectory information was transmitted as a digital signal, with its value proportional to the deviation from the target path. This resulted in greater dynamics in the changes of motor power values for the control version using reflective optocouplers. Figure 18a shows the electrical power profile during the vehicle's path traversal for the left wheel, using reflective optocouplers with SDt = 250 mm, while Figure 18b shows the profile using a camera with SDc = 250 mm. As in Figure 17, the use of reflective optocouplers was associated with greater dynamics in the changes of the power value of the motor driving the left wheel. The comparison of the power drawn from the vehicle's battery for SDt = SDc = 250 mm is presented in Figure 19.  
Figure 17: The electrical power profile of the right wheel motor driving the vehicle: (**a**) SDt = 250 mm, (**b**) SDc = 250 mm. Figure 18: The electrical power profile of the left wheel motor driving the vehicle: (**a**) SDt = 250 mm, (**b**) SDc = 250 mm. In the case of vehicle control using a camera, higher power consumption is observed when the vehicle starts from a standstill compared to using reflective optocouplers. This is due to the ability to utilize the full power of the motors, as the control system has complete information about the position of the line defining the desired path. In contrast, for reflective optocouplers, line detection occurs \"point by point\", meaning the initial acceleration values of the vehicle--and the associated power consumption by the drive motors--are lower. There are also differences in the power consumed by the AGV after stopping at the end of the transit. When using a camera, the vehicle consumes approximately 10 W after stopping, which is related to powering the control system. In contrast, when using reflective optocouplers, the vehicle's power supply is turned off after stopping. Figure 19(a) shows the electrical power profile during the vehicle's path traversal for the right wheel using reflective optocouplers with SDt = 350 mm, while Figure 19(b) shows the profile using a camera with SDc = 350 mm. When using reflective optocouplers, the transit time for the desired path was noticeably longer compared to using a camera. This difference was due to the control method, which, in this case, was associated with a significantly higher frequency of the system's response to line detection defining the desired path. Control using the camera is continuous, allowing for a proportional response of the motors to the vehicle's deviation from the target path. The discrepancy in transit time was greater than that observed for SDt = SDc = 250 mm. Figure 19(a) shows the electrical power profile during the vehicle's path traversal for the left wheel, using reflective optocouplers with SDt = 350 mm, while Figure 19(b) shows the profile using a camera with SDc = 350 mm. Similarly to the right wheel, these results confirm the advantage of using a camera for vehicle control compared to reflective optocouplers. Figure 20: The electrical power profile of the right wheel motor driving the vehicle: (**a**) SDt = 350 mm, (**b**) SDc = 350 mm. Figure 19: The comparison of the electrical power profiles drawn from the vehicle’s battery: (**a**) SDt = 250 mm, (**b**) SDc = 250 mm.