小程序
传感搜
传感圈

Low Power IoT Connectivity: Cellular Vs. LoRaWAN

2023-07-02 01:57:34
关注

Illustration: © IoT For All

The Internet of Things isn’t just one technology. It includes several different solutions and parts involving many fields, from network to end-user hardware and design to data science. Each of these technologies had to evolve to make your mission-critical IoT system possible—and technologies evolve in response to challenges. 

“The Internet of Things isn’t just one technology. It includes several different solutions and parts involving many fields, from network to end-user hardware and design to data science.”

In the early days of IoT, power efficiency was one such challenge. Connecting to a network requires electricity. Some network technologies consume a lot of electricity from devices. But many of our most valuable IoT use cases are hard to deliver due to the amount of electric power required. 

For example, asset tracking devices have to work wherever the asset goes. Micromobility products travel great distances every day. Even stationary IoT devices can be tough to reach. Think of fish-farming sensors below water or smart gas meters scattered across vast areas. 

These devices don’t have access to hard-wired electricity grids, so they have to run on battery power. Frequent charging or replacement of batteries quickly ruins the business case; it’s simply too arduous and too expensive. For these use cases, devices must consume very limited power as they connect to networks or share data.

Network engineers solved this problem with low-power, wide-area networks, or LPWANs. These connectivity solutions are designed to draw as little power from devices as possible. But LPWAN technology isn’t that simple. Two types of LPWA networks are most common for today’s IoT users: LoRaWAN and cellular LPWAN. If you plan to deploy battery-powered IoT devices, which of these network technologies should you choose? 

To find out, let’s take a closer look at each. Here’s a quick comparison of cellular LPWAN versus LoRaWAN connectivity, including the strengths, weaknesses, and core use cases for each.

Benefits and Drawbacks of LoRaWAN

LoRaWAN is a radio communication protocol that supports data-sharing over the unlicensed wireless spectrum. What does that mean? Well, mobile network operators like AT&T and Verizon license portions of the electromagnetic spectrum that support radio transmission. They pay for exclusive access to these bands. In turn, they must meet certain performance requirements set by regulatory agencies and trade groups. 

While the nonprofit LoRa Alliance supports the LoRaWAN protocol, this technology is much less centralized than cellular LPWANs. That offers self-reliance in exchange for some measure of reliability. 

Here are a few benefits of LoRaWAN connectivity: 

  • LoRaWAN’s use of the unlicensed spectrum has historically brought down costs.
  • The decentralized nature of LoRaWAN allows for a great deal of customization, assuming you know how to build a wireless network from scratch.
  • LoRaWAN has a strong history of success in stationary IoT use cases, like smart buildings and utility meters. 

But LoRaWAN also introduces a few limitations compared to cellular LPWAN technology:

  • Unlicensed radio bands are a particularly limited resource. That leads to lower data-sharing rates for LoRaWAN connections compared to licensed cellular options.
  • It’s very difficult to support mobile IoT devices via LoRaWAN connections since there’s no mobility or solid global provider support. 
  • Perhaps the biggest drawback of LoRaWAN compared to cellular networks is the lack of a single service provider. With LoRaWAN, you either build your own network or trust a third-party developer to build one for you.  

So why the popularity of LoRaWAN? Historically, chipsets that use this protocol were more affordable than their cellular counterparts. The operation was also cheaper since you didn’t have to pay a mobile network operator for bandwidth. As we’ll discuss, however, LTE added NB-IOT and LTE-M, and new types of connectivity-as-a-service providers are narrowing the cost gap between LoRaWAN and these low-power cellular networks.   

Benefits and Drawbacks of Cellular LPWAN

Low-power cellular networks use two main mobile communication protocols: NB-IoT and/or LTE-M. These protocols are supported by major mobile network operators, which offer these machine-to-machine (IoT) connectivity solutions at much lower rates than your typical consumer data plan. They’re also standardized by 3GPP, the leading global partnership for telecommunications standards.   

Depending on where in the world you deploy your IoT devices, you might find better coverage through NB-IoT or LTE-M. However, you don’t have to choose just one. Increasingly, IoT chip designers offer modems that support both protocols at once. 

Whether you use NB-IoT, LTE-M, or both, these cellular IoT networks offer a few benefits compared to LoRaWAN connectivity: 

  • The networks are already built, maintained, proven, and regulated. That makes cellular networks more reliable than LoRaWAN deployments as a whole. 
  • Cellular LPWA networks provide higher data rates than LoRaWAN, opening up powerful capabilities like over-the-air software updates. 
  • Power consumption is similar to LoRaWAN, and can be even more efficient thanks to low-power modes like eDRX and PSM. 
  • Thanks to global coverage, cellular LPWAN technology supports mobile IoT. It’s the go-to choice for supply chain IoT, micromobility, wearables, and many consumer IoT products, just to name a few. 

Traditionally, the main drawback of cellular LPWAN connectivity was the price. A cellular modem costs more than its LoRaWAN alternative, and, of course, you have to pay mobile network operators for connectivity. Or do you? 

The cost of cellular IoT connectivity is no longer an issue, thanks to yet another evolution in IoT technology: The rise of the connectivity-as-a-service provider.   

Connectivity-as-a-Service Providers for Cellular IoT

If you want the mobile connectivity of a cellular LPWAN, without the higher price tag, just find the right connectivity-as-a-service partner. These cloud operators make it easy and affordable to deploy IoT devices, from a single smart building to a global product release. 

They maintain partnerships with many mobile network operators, sparing you with the hassle of handling multiple contracts. They offer multi-identity SIM cards that seamlessly leap from one network to the next, providing backup redundancy and avoiding roaming expenses. They give you control over your IoT system through a single-pane-of-glass cloud platform. 

And they do all this for much less than you might expect. Today, you can purchase cellular IoT connectivity for as low as $1 per year. 

With virtually zero effort, you can bundle a device with several years of connectivity: Just deploy and start reaping the benefits. The simplicity and low cost justify virtually any use case. In the new connectivity market, it’s much easier to choose between cellular LPWAN versus LoRaWAN—because there’s simply much less of a price differential.

Tweet

Share

Share

Email

  • Connectivity
  • Cellular
  • LoRaWAN
  • LPWAN

  • Connectivity
  • Cellular
  • LoRaWAN
  • LPWAN

参考译文
低功耗物联网连接:蜂窝网络与LoRaWAN
图示:© IoT For All --> 物联网不仅仅是一种技术。它包含多种不同的解决方案和组成部分,涉及许多领域,从网络到终端硬件、设计到数据科学。每一种技术都必须不断发展,才能使你的关键任务型物联网系统成为可能——而技术的演变往往是为了解决挑战。“物联网不仅仅是一种技术。它包含多种不同的解决方案和组成部分,涉及许多领域,从网络到终端硬件、设计到数据科学。”在物联网发展的早期阶段,功耗效率就是一个挑战。连接网络需要电力。一些网络技术会消耗设备的大量电力。但由于电力限制,我们许多有价值的物联网用例却难以实现。例如,资产追踪设备必须能随资产一起工作。微型出行产品每天都要行驶很长的距离。即使是固定的物联网设备,也很难接触到。比如水下水产养殖的传感器,或者广泛分布的智能燃气表。这些设备无法连接到固定的电网,因此它们只能依靠电池供电。频繁地充电或更换电池会迅速破坏商业可行性;这显然是过于费力且昂贵的。对于这些用例,设备在连接网络或共享数据时必须消耗极低的功率。网络工程师通过低功耗广域网(LPWAN)解决了这个问题。这些连接解决方案旨在尽可能少地从设备中获取电量。但LPWAN技术并不那么简单。目前,物联网用户最常采用的两种LPWA网络是LoRaWAN和蜂窝式LPWAN。如果你计划部署电池供电的物联网设备,那么你该如何选择这两种网络技术之一呢?为了找出答案,让我们逐一深入了解每种技术。以下是一个蜂窝式LPWAN与LoRaWAN连接的快速对比,包括每种技术的优势、劣势和核心用例。LoRaWAN的优势与劣势LoRaWAN是一种无线电通信协议,支持在非授权无线频谱上共享数据。这意味着什么呢?像AT&T和Verizon这样的移动网络运营商会获得部分电磁频谱的授权,以支持无线电传输。他们需要为这些频段的独家使用权付费。作为交换,他们必须满足监管机构和行业组织设定的特定性能要求。尽管非营利组织LoRa联盟支持LoRaWAN协议,但与蜂窝式LPWAN相比,这种技术的集中程度要低得多。这种去中心化以牺牲一定的可靠性为代价,但提供了更高的独立性。LoRaWAN连接的几个优势包括:LoRaWAN使用非授权频谱,历史上降低了成本。LoRaWAN的去中心化特性允许进行大量定制,前提是你知道如何从头构建一个无线网络。LoRaWAN在固定的物联网用例中有着良好的成功记录,如智能建筑和公用事业计量。但与蜂窝式LPWAN技术相比,LoRaWAN也存在一些局限性:非授权无线电频段是一种非常有限的资源。这导致LoRaWAN连接的共享数据率低于授权蜂窝式选项。通过LoRaWAN连接支持移动物联网设备是非常困难的,因为既没有移动性,也没有可靠的全球运营商支持。也许与蜂窝网络相比,LoRaWAN最大的缺点是没有单一的服务提供商。在LoRaWAN中,你要么自行构建网络,要么信任第三方开发者为你构建网络。那么为什么LoRaWAN如此受欢迎呢?历史上,使用这种协议的芯片组比蜂窝式芯片组更便宜。而且运营成本也较低,因为你无需为带宽向移动网络运营商付费。然而,正如我们将要讨论的,LTE增加了NB-IoT和LTE-M,以及新型的连接即服务提供商,正在缩小LoRaWAN与这些低功耗蜂窝网络之间的成本差距。蜂窝式LPWAN的优势与劣势低功耗蜂窝网络使用两种主要的移动通信协议:NB-IoT和/或LTE-M。这些协议由主要移动网络运营商支持,他们以低于普通消费者数据套餐的价格提供这些机器到机器(IoT)连接解决方案。它们也由3GPP(电信标准的全球领先合作组织)标准化。根据你在世界哪个地方部署物联网设备,你可能会发现通过NB-IoT或LTE-M获得更好的覆盖范围。但你不必只选其一。越来越多的物联网芯片设计公司提供同时支持这两种协议的调制解调器。无论你使用NB-IoT、LTE-M,还是两者兼用,这些蜂窝式物联网网络相比LoRaWAN连接都有一些优势:这些网络已经建成、维护、验证,并受到监管。这使得蜂窝式网络整体上比LoRaWAN部署更可靠。蜂窝式低功耗广域网(LPWA)网络提供的数据速率高于LoRaWAN,从而开启了强大的功能,如空中软件更新。功耗与LoRaWAN相当,并且由于eDRX和PSM等低功耗模式,甚至可以更高效。由于全球覆盖,蜂窝式LPWAN技术支持移动物联网。它已成为供应链物联网、微型出行、可穿戴设备和许多消费者物联网产品的首选,仅举几例。传统上,蜂窝式LPWAN连接的主要缺点是价格。蜂窝式调制解调器的成本高于LoRaWAN的替代方案,当然你还需要为连接支付移动网络运营商的费用。或者需要支付吗?得益于物联网技术的又一次演变,蜂窝式物联网连接的成本已不再是问题:连接即服务提供商的兴起。蜂窝物联网的连接即服务提供商如果你想要蜂窝式LPWAN的移动连接,而又不需要更高的价格标签,只需找到合适的连接即服务合作伙伴。这些云运营商使部署物联网设备变得简单且经济,从一个智能建筑到全球产品发布。他们与许多移动网络运营商建立合作伙伴关系,省去了你处理多个合同的麻烦。他们提供多身份SIM卡,可无缝切换网络,提供备用冗余并避免漫游费用。他们通过一个单一视图的云平台为你提供对物联网系统的控制。而且他们所提供的这一切,成本远低于你可能预期的。如今,每年只需1美元,你就能购买蜂窝式物联网连接。几乎无需付出任何努力,你就可以将设备与数年的连接捆绑在一起:只需部署,开始享受收益。这种简单性和低成本几乎可以支持任何用例。在新的连接市场中,选择蜂窝式LPWAN与LoRaWAN之间的差异变得更容易了——因为两者之间的价格差异已经非常小。TweetShareShareEmail ConnectivityCellularLoRaWANLPWAN --> ConnectivityCellularLoRaWANLPWAN
您觉得本篇内容如何
评分

评论

您需要登录才可以回复|注册

提交评论

广告
提取码
复制提取码
点击跳转至百度网盘