Long range wireless

Post Reply
User avatar
kb1gtt
contributor
contributor
Posts: 3663
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 1:42 am
Location: ME of USA

Long range wireless

Post by kb1gtt »

This chip / device is very similar to the ITEAD_HC-0X but has the potential of a 9 mile range. It costs more but likely has a longer and more better-er range.

http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/RN2483-I%2FRM095/RN2483-I%2FRM095-ND/5323579?WT.z_cid=ref_octopart_dkc_buynow&site=us
Welcome to the friendlier side of internet crazy :)

User avatar
abecedarian
Posts: 386
Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2013 10:49 am

Re: Long range wireless

Post by abecedarian »

But not Bluetooth.
You can lead the horticulture but you can't make them think.

User avatar
kb1gtt
contributor
contributor
Posts: 3663
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 1:42 am
Location: ME of USA

Re: Long range wireless

Post by kb1gtt »

Also not bag of flour, or a crayon.

I put your message in https://translate.google.com/ and selected "abecedarian --> constructive criticism". This is what came out.
This long range wireless device does not have native support on laptops, cell phones or tablets. To make this device work with a PC or tablet you would need a min qty 2 such that you can make a serial connection.
Welcome to the friendlier side of internet crazy :)

User avatar
abecedarian
Posts: 386
Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2013 10:49 am

Re: Long range wireless

Post by abecedarian »

You need constructive criticism to point out flawed logic and suggestions?

Okay.

BT operates around 2.4GHz; this module is dual band / MIMO at 433/868MHz, so no compatibility there.

You would need one of these on the ECU, and another somewhere else that could talk to your cell phone or laptop or whatever via a serial connection- so UART, BT or whatever. At $17+ each, that's a fair bit of coin, no? $35 USD for a module sans antennae, backplane and such is a lot. Considering those, even if using an inverted "F" antennae * 2 (one for 433 and another for 868), you're still out some coin.

Then, you'd need to interface the module at the computer or phone to some protocol those would understand... another how much? ... $5-10 maybe?

And, to get the 9 mile range, you'd have to implement LoRa protocols (short for Long Range, by the way), and then be stuck with about 5Kbps throughput at best.

What's not stated is that the proposed range is based on using a directional antenna, i.e. yagi or similar. An omni wouldn't reach that far, nor would the aforementioned inverted "F", because the output power- +14dBm at 868 and +10dBm at 433 are too low, and the "F" likely wouldn't handle much more power than that without a lot of design mods.

Did I mention the max range is dependent on using the LoRa protocol which reduces max throughput to around 5Kbps?

Is that acceptable for constructive criticism?

No? Okay.

Even then, you wouldn't have FCC certification to use this in the USA: despite the fact it operates in "unlicensed" ISM bands around 433 and 868 MHz you still need certs to sell the parts. Might have something to do with why Microchip only have EU certs... you think?


*edit - By the way, Jared, your FCC Amateur license expired more than 2 years ago. Maybe you should change your user name.
You can lead the horticulture but you can't make them think.

Post Reply