LoRa port for TARPN node - Revision history

KV4P at 18:31, 24 September 2023

2023-09-24T18:31:32Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:31, 24 September 2023
Line 225:		Line 225:
	==== 915MHz LoRa, transceiver 60' up a tree, avoiding hills ====		==== 915MHz LoRa, transceiver 60' up a tree, avoiding hills ====

	~~UPCOMING:~~ I ~~will run another test driving~~ north / northeast from my house, where there are no hills higher than my house's elevation. I ~~have~~ one location at 1.5 miles, and another at 4 miles ~~that~~ I ~~plan~~ to ~~try~~. ~~Will update this wiki after testing~~.		In the next test, I drove north / northeast from my house, where there are no hills higher than my house's elevation. I drove to one location at 1.5 miles, and another at 4 miles.

			Unfortunately, neither of these locations could receive the 33cm LoRa signal (8 spreadingFactor, 62.5kHz bandwidth, 6 coding rate). In fact, the only location I've been able to receive the signal (other than literally at my home QTH) is 1/3 mile straight north. This tells me two things:

			# Trees / forest likely attenuate 33cm signals fairly strongly, since other locations within ~1/3 mile of my home QTH did not work
			# Hills are a complete no-go for 33cm signals

			So a LoRa link for TARPN could be an excellent inexpensive option if you live in a flat area and/or have a clear line-of-site to your nearest TARPN neighbor. For example, I'd expect it to work pretty well in a suburban housing district without hills, letting neighbors link up. Or if you're in a part of the US that just isn't very hilly (e.g. farmland area). Where I live is hills everywhere, and I'm in a valley!

KV4P at 15:55, 20 September 2023

2023-09-20T15:55:29Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:55, 20 September 2023
Line 218:		Line 218:
	* I ran my first set of tests at 64.5kHz bandwidth and 8 spreadingFactor.		* I ran my first set of tests at 64.5kHz bandwidth and 8 spreadingFactor.
	* My house is surrounded by hills on most sides (I live in a valley), and I could not get any signal to the south, southwest, or southeast. I tried many different spots, from about 2 miles away, all the way down to about a half mile down the road. None worked, no packets received.		* My house is surrounded by hills on most sides (I live in a valley), and I could not get any signal to the south, southwest, or southeast. I tried many different spots, from about 2 miles away, all the way down to about a half mile down the road. None worked, no packets received.
	* On a lark, I also tried 500kHz bandwidth and 7 spreadingFactor, which ~~in my bench tests~~ was ~~sometimes MORE reliable (inexplicably,~~ since ~~64.5kHz should be concentrating~~ more ~~signal in less bandwidth). This did not help~~.		* On a lark, I also tried 500kHz bandwidth and 7 spreadingFactor. This did not help, which was not surprising since the same power was more spread out.
	* I was FINALLY able to get packets to arrive when I was 1/3 mile north of my house. There are no hills to the north of my house.		* I was FINALLY able to get packets to arrive when I was 1/3 mile north of my house. There are no hills to the north of my house.

KV4P at 02:18, 19 September 2023

2023-09-19T02:18:33Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:18, 19 September 2023
Line 217:		Line 217:
	Observations:		Observations:
	* I ran my first set of tests at 64.5kHz bandwidth and 8 spreadingFactor.		* I ran my first set of tests at 64.5kHz bandwidth and 8 spreadingFactor.
	* My house is surrounded by hills on most sides (I live in a valley), and I could not get any signal to the south, southwest, or southeast.		* My house is surrounded by hills on most sides (I live in a valley), and I could not get any signal to the south, southwest, or southeast. I tried many different spots, from about 2 miles away, all the way down to about a half mile down the road. None worked, no packets received.
	* On a lark, I also tried 500kHz bandwidth and 7 spreadingFactor, which in my bench tests was sometimes MORE reliable (inexplicably, since 64.5kHz should be concentrating more signal in less bandwidth). This did not help.		* On a lark, I also tried 500kHz bandwidth and 7 spreadingFactor, which in my bench tests was sometimes MORE reliable (inexplicably, since 64.5kHz should be concentrating more signal in less bandwidth). This did not help.
	* I was FINALLY able to get packets to arrive when I was 1/3 mile north of my house. There are no hills to the north of my house.		* I was FINALLY able to get packets to arrive when I was 1/3 mile north of my house. There are no hills to the north of my house.

KV4P at 02:17, 19 September 2023

2023-09-19T02:17:25Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:17, 19 September 2023
Line 211:		Line 211:

	==== 915MHz LoRa, transceiver 60' up a tree ====		==== 915MHz LoRa, transceiver 60' up a tree ====
			[[File:PXL 20230915 204140878.MP.jpg\|alt=LoRa "port" enclosed in a waterproof project box with a homebrew groundplane antenna.\|thumb\|LoRa "port" enclosed in a waterproof project box with a homebrew groundplane antenna.]]

	For the next test, I put the LoRa + pi "port" about 60 feet up in a tree, with a homebrew groundplane antenna instead of the quarter wave vertical (i.e. piece of wire). The idea was to give the test a better chance at success. I also added a [https://www.amazon.com/dp/B095JTW6XM 5dBi rubber duck antenna] to my portable TARPN node's LoRa port, so it was a little better than the piece of wire as well.		For the next test, I put the LoRa + pi "port" about 60 feet up in a tree, with a homebrew groundplane antenna instead of the quarter wave vertical (i.e. piece of wire). The idea was to give the test a better chance at success. I also added a [https://www.amazon.com/dp/B095JTW6XM 5dBi rubber duck antenna] to my portable TARPN node's LoRa port, so it was a little better than the piece of wire as well.

KV4P at 02:15, 19 September 2023

2023-09-19T02:15:33Z

@@ Line 210: / Line 210: @@
 Both LoRa nodes used a 1/4 wave vertical antenna made of magnet wire (no counterpoise or ground plane).
-==== 915MHz LoRa, longer distances (IN PROGRESS) ====
+==== 915MHz LoRa, transceiver 60' up a tree ====
-Will update this section once testing is complete. I plan to test with a groundplane antenna 60ft up in a tree, to see how far this can go with better conditions.
+For the next test, I put the LoRa + pi "port" about 60 feet up in a tree, with a homebrew groundplane antenna instead of the quarter wave vertical (i.e. piece of wire). The idea was to give the test a better chance at success. I also added a [https://www.amazon.com/dp/B095JTW6XM 5dBi rubber duck antenna] to my portable TARPN node's LoRa port, so it was a little better than the piece of wire as well.

KV4P: Tweaks to socat, to try to stop BPQ from hanging (after a while) when the TCP connection to the LoRa device goes down.

2023-09-12T12:29:35Z

Tweaks to socat, to try to stop BPQ from hanging (after a while) when the TCP connection to the LoRa device goes down.

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:29, 12 September 2023
Line 172:		Line 172:
	while true		while true
	do		do
	sudo socat -T 600 pty,link=/dev/ttyS0,b115200,raw,nonblock,echo=0,mode=777 tcp:192.168.1.90:10001~~,forever,interval=10~~		sudo socat -T 600 pty,link=/dev/ttyS0,b115200,raw,nonblock,echo=0,mode=777,wait-slave tcp:192.168.1.90:10001
	printf "LoRa port /dev/ttyS0 disconnected, waiting 1 second and bringing it up again.\n"		printf "LoRa port /dev/ttyS0 disconnected, waiting 1 second and bringing it up again.\n"
	sleep 1		sleep 1

KV4P at 00:21, 11 September 2023

2023-09-11T00:21:37Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:21, 11 September 2023
Line 203:		Line 203:
	With 500kHz bandwidth and spreadingFactor of 7 in config.py, a throughput test on my own TARPN node with a "bench setup" (2 LoRa transceivers right next to each other), I achieved 135bytes/sec. That's about as good as a very solid 9600 baud link with a NinoTNC and high quality mobile radios.		With 500kHz bandwidth and spreadingFactor of 7 in config.py, a throughput test on my own TARPN node with a "bench setup" (2 LoRa transceivers right next to each other), I achieved 135bytes/sec. That's about as good as a very solid 9600 baud link with a NinoTNC and high quality mobile radios.

	Both LoRa nodes used a 1/4 vertical made of magnet wire (no counterpoise or ground plane).		Both LoRa nodes used a 1/4 wave vertical antenna made of magnet wire (no counterpoise or ground plane).

	==== 915MHz LoRa, quarter mile ====		==== 915MHz LoRa, quarter mile ====
	With 62.5kHz bandwidth, spreadingFactor of 8, and coding of 6, the module worked very well at a distance of about 1/4 mile. I live in a valley, and put one LoRa transceiver in my attic (3rd floor) and I tested it from a nearby hill. That worked well. I also walked down a flat road that's level with my house (no intervening hills) and that also worked well. I did not do a throughput test, but at these settings it's roughly equivalent to a 1200 baud typical TNC link.		With 62.5kHz bandwidth, spreadingFactor of 8, and coding of 6, the module worked very well at a distance of about 1/4 mile. I live in a valley, and put one LoRa transceiver in my attic (3rd floor) and I tested it from a nearby hill. That worked well. I also walked down a flat road that's level with my house (no intervening hills) and that also worked well. I did not do a throughput test, but at these settings it's roughly equivalent to a 1200 baud typical TNC link.

	Both LoRa nodes used a 1/4 vertical made of magnet wire (no counterpoise or ground plane).		Both LoRa nodes used a 1/4 wave vertical antenna made of magnet wire (no counterpoise or ground plane).

	==== 915MHz LoRa, longer distances (IN PROGRESS) ====		==== 915MHz LoRa, longer distances (IN PROGRESS) ====

	Will update this section once testing is complete. I plan to test with a groundplane antenna 60ft up in a tree, to see how far this can go with better conditions.		Will update this section once testing is complete. I plan to test with a groundplane antenna 60ft up in a tree, to see how far this can go with better conditions.

KV4P at 00:20, 11 September 2023

2023-09-11T00:20:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:20, 11 September 2023
Line 200:		Line 200:

	=== Performance ===		=== Performance ===
	With ~~500MHz~~ bandwidth and spreadingFactor of 7 in config.py, a throughput test on my own TARPN node with a "bench setup" (2 LoRa transceivers right next to each other), I achieved 135bytes/sec. That's about as good as a very solid 9600 baud link with a NinoTNC and high quality mobile radios.		==== 915MHz LoRa, bench test ====
			With 500kHz bandwidth and spreadingFactor of 7 in config.py, a throughput test on my own TARPN node with a "bench setup" (2 LoRa transceivers right next to each other), I achieved 135bytes/sec. That's about as good as a very solid 9600 baud link with a NinoTNC and high quality mobile radios.

	~~It can probably be~~ made ~~to go much faster with additional optimization. It's unclear if the KISS service running in Python represents a cap on the throughput,~~ or ~~if it's just the settings~~.		Both LoRa nodes used a 1/4 vertical made of magnet wire (no counterpoise or ground plane).

	~~Although~~ the distance of ~~this link hasn't been tested yet~~, ~~the~~ LoRa ~~module claims to work between 4km~~ and ~~40km (~~from ~~city to perfectly~~ flat ~~ideal conditions~~). ~~33cm has the nice property of easily going through windows and walls~~, so it ~~should be especially good for suburban links~~, ~~or between nodes~~ with a ~~fairly clear shot~~.		==== 915MHz LoRa, quarter mile ====
			With 62.5kHz bandwidth, spreadingFactor of 8, and coding of 6, the module worked very well at a distance of about 1/4 mile. I live in a valley, and put one LoRa transceiver in my attic (3rd floor) and I tested it from a nearby hill. That worked well. I also walked down a flat road that's level with my house (no intervening hills) and that also worked well. I did not do a throughput test, but at these settings it's roughly equivalent to a 1200 baud typical TNC link.

			Both LoRa nodes used a 1/4 vertical made of magnet wire (no counterpoise or ground plane).

			==== 915MHz LoRa, longer distances (IN PROGRESS) ====

			Will update this section once testing is complete. I plan to test with a groundplane antenna 60ft up in a tree, to see how far this can go with better conditions.

KV4P: Add timeout to socat so buffer doesn't overflow when the LoRa device can't be contacted.

2023-09-09T14:00:06Z

Add timeout to socat so buffer doesn't overflow when the LoRa device can't be contacted.

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:00, 9 September 2023
Line 172:		Line 172:
	while true		while true
	do		do
	sudo socat pty,link=/dev/ttyS0,b115200,raw,nonblock,echo=0,mode=777 tcp:192.168.1.90:10001,forever,interval=10		sudo socat -T 600 pty,link=/dev/ttyS0,b115200,raw,nonblock,echo=0,mode=777 tcp:192.168.1.90:10001,forever,interval=10
	printf "LoRa port /dev/ttyS0 disconnected, waiting 1 second and bringing it up again.\n"		printf "LoRa port /dev/ttyS0 disconnected, waiting 1 second and bringing it up again.\n"
	sleep 1		sleep 1

KV4P at 00:37, 1 September 2023

2023-09-01T00:37:32Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:37, 1 September 2023
Line 200:		Line 200:

	=== Performance ===		=== Performance ===
	With ~~the above~~ config.py ~~settings~~, a throughput test on my own TARPN node with a "bench setup" (2 LoRa transceivers right next to each other), I achieved 135bytes/sec. That's about as good as a very solid 9600 baud link with a NinoTNC and high quality mobile radios.		With 500MHz bandwidth and spreadingFactor of 7 in config.py, a throughput test on my own TARPN node with a "bench setup" (2 LoRa transceivers right next to each other), I achieved 135bytes/sec. That's about as good as a very solid 9600 baud link with a NinoTNC and high quality mobile radios.

	It can probably be made to go much faster with additional optimization. It's unclear if the KISS service running in Python represents a cap on the throughput, or if it's just the settings.		It can probably be made to go much faster with additional optimization. It's unclear if the KISS service running in Python represents a cap on the throughput, or if it's just the settings.

	Although the distance of this link hasn't been tested yet, the LoRa module claims to work between 4km and 40km (from city to perfectly flat ideal conditions). 33cm has the nice property of easily going through windows and walls, so it should be especially good for suburban links, or between nodes with a fairly clear shot.		Although the distance of this link hasn't been tested yet, the LoRa module claims to work between 4km and 40km (from city to perfectly flat ideal conditions). 33cm has the nice property of easily going through windows and walls, so it should be especially good for suburban links, or between nodes with a fairly clear shot.