• Technologies for the Internet of Things
    Inviato in data 08 lug 2017, 00:18 da iBlio connect
  • Bluetooth 5 and the Internet of Things  The whitepaper of Silicon Labs about Bluetooth 5 and Internet of Things introduces the new features of Bluetooth 5 technology and how they enable the next wave of IoT applications ...
    Inviato in data 21 giu 2017, 08:16 da iBlio connect
  • Sigfox technical overview Sigfox has just published a documentation on the technical basis of the network. This document is a good summary of all what you need to know to get start on ...
    Inviato in data 25 mag 2017, 09:22 da iBlio connect
  • "Universal Declaration of IoT Rights" Si parla sempre di più di Internet delle Cose (IoT) ma occorrerà tenere sempre più in considerazione gli aspetti legati alla sicurezza ed alla privacy degli oggetti interconnessi per evitare ...
    Inviato in data 15 feb 2017, 01:27 da iBlio connect
  • SIGFOX Explained "Simple Communication Network Solution for the Internet of Things" This three videos are from http://makers.sigfox.com/ and explain the main features of SIGFOX IoT Network Architecture. This video ...
    Inviato in data 01 feb 2017, 09:46 da iBlio connect
  • Energy Harvesting Energy harvesting, also known as power scavenging, is the term used to describe methods for powering IoT devices from its local environment, rather than by mains power or primary batteries ...
    Inviato in data 27 gen 2017, 03:12 da Valter Foresto
  • BeaconATTITUDE - Proximity Technology for Everyone Make sure you can be easily found, even without a website. A fully compliant solution with Google Eddystone protocol and Physical Web. Find out how at http://beaconattitude.com/ !
    Inviato in data 05 feb 2017, 03:40 da iBlio connect
  • Designing for Bluetooth Low Energy Applications Bluetooth version 4.0 introduced Bluetooth with low energy functionality, sometimes referred to as Bluetooth Smart, which gave developers the ability to create sensors that can run on coin- cell ...
    Inviato in data 09 gen 2017, 05:46 da Valter Foresto
Post visualizzati 1 - 8 di 55. Visualizza altro »

Technologies for the Internet of Things

pubblicato 08 lug 2017, 00:10 da iBlio connect   [ aggiornato in data 08 lug 2017, 00:18 ]

Bluetooth 5 and the Internet of Things

pubblicato 07 giu 2017, 08:32 da iBlio connect   [ aggiornato in data 21 giu 2017, 08:16 ]

 


The whitepaper of Silicon Labs about Bluetooth 5 and Internet of Things introduces the new features of Bluetooth 5 technology and how they enable the next wave of IoT applications. 


The hallmark features of Bluetooth 5 include twice the speed, four times range, and eight times the advertising capacity for long range, more robust connections, better user experience, and smarter beacons.




Sigfox technical overview

pubblicato 25 mag 2017, 09:21 da iBlio connect   [ aggiornato in data 25 mag 2017, 09:22 ]

Sigfox has just published a documentation on the technical basis of the network. This document is a good summary of all what you need to know to get start on the technology. 

You can get the document  "Sigfox technical overview - May 2017" here.

"Universal Declaration of IoT Rights"

pubblicato 15 feb 2017, 01:22 da iBlio connect   [ aggiornato in data 15 feb 2017, 01:27 ]

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/universal-declaration-iot-rights-raoul-mallart


Si parla sempre di più di Internet delle Cose (IoT) ma occorrerà tenere sempre più in considerazione gli aspetti legati alla sicurezza ed alla privacy degli oggetti interconnessi per evitare "attacchi hackers" di cui già si è sentito parlare in occasione delle ultime elezioni in USA. 







SIGFOX Explained

pubblicato 27 gen 2017, 02:52 da Valter Foresto   [ aggiornato il 01 feb 2017, 09:46 da iBlio connect ]

"Simple Communication Network Solution for the Internet of Things"

 

This three videos are from http://makers.sigfox.com/ and explain the main features of SIGFOX IoT Network Architecture.


This video describe how works the SIGFOX network.


This video explain how the SIGFOX network can achieve such low power, by optimizing the protocol itself.


This video explains how the SIGFOX network can achieve the great capacity needed for the IoT.

For more informations continue at http://www.sigfox.com/en ...

Energy Harvesting

pubblicato 23 gen 2017, 03:28 da iBlio connect   [ aggiornato il 27 gen 2017, 03:12 da Valter Foresto ]

Energy harvesting, also known as power scavenging, is the term used to describe methods for powering IoT devices from its local environment, rather than by mains power or primary batteries. The main sources of environmental power are photovoltaic, thermoelectric, kinetic, and radio frequency. These are complement by energy harvesting and power storage systems.

A key misconception is that people equate power scavenging with perpetual life, that device will run forever. However, all systems have limitations. For example, a rechargeable cell powered by a solar panel will die after a period of time or a set number of cycles. So the intelligent design of energy harvesting systems is important, and this may or may not include a battery.


Kinetic

Kinetic energy harvesting systems are powered by physical motion. Available wherever thing are moving. Examples range from sources of micro-power, such as switches/buttons and watches/wearables through to larger sources such as wind and water.

The micro-sources produce a small spike of energy that is just enough to send a small piece of information. The larger sources do not have to be traditional wind power or hydroelectric systems. From an IoT perspective, it is possible to create miniature devices that fit inside pipes to power a single device.

It is possible to fit energy harvesting devices inside pipes with moving water to power an IOT device measuring the flow in remote locations.


Thermoelectric

Thermoelectric energy harvesting systems are powered by differences in temperature, usually between a source at a higher or lower temperature and the ambient environment. Thermoelectric sources are often available in industrial settings which often have, for example, cold or hot pipes. There are even products that can generate power from the difference between skin temperature and the surrounding air, to power a wearable device.




Solar

Solar, also known as optical energy, has been used for a long time has been used in many different applications because the power density that can be generated from a solar cell is reasonable significant for its size. The main challenge with optical energy is to model how big a solar panel, and associated power storage system, needs to be to make sure that an IoT system will function through natural variations in light levels and in the worst case scenario.



Radio Frequencies

RF energy harvesting system, and the closely related induction charging, can extract energy from radio waves, in the same way that old crystal set radios extracted enough energy from AM broadcasts to listen to them without a batter. However, this approach has the lowest efficiency of all the harvesting techniques because the amount of power that must be broadcast in order to get a tiny little bit of power exchange over even a small distance is huge.

The most useful example of this technique is the use of passive RFID tags, which normally consist of a tiny chip and very thin antenna. As the RFID tag passes through a gate or scanner, there is a wireless power exchange that's very short range. The main reason RFID tags can be manufactured for few cents and last such a long time is because have no battery.


Engineering challenges

The main engineering challenge is knowing when it is appropriate to use energy harvesting. There are a small number of applications where energy harvesting just makes sense, such as switches and some solar cells on devices that are visited regularly. However, many people fall into the trap of including energy harvesting in their IoT design because they can, when it fact it might not make sense to use it. For example, a kinetically charged dog tracking collar is possible but a battery may much more cost effective.

  • Possible applications where energy harvesting does make sense are:
  • Unusual form factors –e,g, where you've got to get something really thin, woven into clothing etc.
  • Massive deployment applications – e.g. where it's not commercially feasible to replace or recharge batteries.
  • Inconvenient locations – e.g. places that are really difficult to get to.


Power storage

Power storage option range from batteries through super-capacitors to solid-state options. The main factors to consider are cycle life, before the component needs to be replaced, the rate at which it goes flat, the overall storage capacity and the length of time the charge is available to execute the IoT device’s function.

storage.JPG

A comparison of common power storage options. Diagram curtesy of Simon Blyth, LX Group.

High density rechargeable battery technologies generally have a self-discharge problem and can be hard to charge up using the small sources of power available via some sources of energy harvesting. Super capacities obviously only hold their charge for a very short time but provide an alternative in the right contexts, particularly where the device is being charged/discharged frequently. Examples may be on rotating equipment etc.

Energy harvesting chips

Many manufacturers are now making chip-based solutions that make it easier to design an energy harvesting system into an IoT device.

Chips.JPG

Comparison of a range of chip-based energy harvesting systems. Diagram curtesy of Simon Blyth, LX Group.

Selection of the right energy harvesting chip would relate to the overall architecture and design of the IoT device.


Thanks to Tim Kannegieter @ Applied IoT Engineering Community

BeaconATTITUDE - Proximity Technology for Everyone

pubblicato 19 gen 2017, 03:42 da iBlio connect   [ aggiornato in data 05 feb 2017, 03:40 ]


http://beaconattitude.com/

Make sure you can be easily found, even without a website. A fully compliant solution with Google Eddystone protocol and Physical Web. Find out how at http://beaconattitude.com/ !

Designing for Bluetooth Low Energy Applications

pubblicato 09 gen 2017, 03:55 da Valter Foresto   [ aggiornato in data 09 gen 2017, 05:46 ]

Bluetooth version 4.0 introduced Bluetooth with low energy functionality, sometimes referred to as Bluetooth Smart, which gave developers the ability to create sensors that can run on coin- cell batteries for months and even years at a time. Some of these sensors are so efficient that the kinetic energy from just flipping a switch can provide operating power.

Bluetooth low energy technology is inherently different from BR/EDR. BR/EDR establishes a relatively short-range, continuous wireless connection, which makes it ideal for uses such as streaming audio from a smartphone to a headset. Bluetooth low energy technology allows for short bursts of long range radio connections, making it ideal for IoT applications that depend on long battery life.


Thanks to Mikko Savolainen of Silicon Labs in the paper below :

  • We explore the fundamentals of the Bluetooth 4.0 specification.
  • Discuss the 4.0 architecture, including link layers and security.
  • Explain how device discovery and connections work.

What is LoRaWAN ?

pubblicato 01 dic 2016, 06:59 da iBlio connect   [ aggiornato in data 19 gen 2017, 08:40 ]

https://www.lora-alliance.org/
Even long-time IoT enthusiasts struggle with the wealth of technologies that are on offer these days. One of the most confusing phenomena for someone who isn’t a RF engineer is the scale and range of LoRaWAN. If you’ve been in the game for a while, you may have used a ZigBee radio module for wireless data transmission in your own projects. ZigBee-compliant modules had become a gold standard for many industrial applications in the 2000s, featuring >10m range (it was said to be 100m, but that was hardly ever achieved), up to hundreds of kbit/second transfer rate (depending on the model and radio band used) and message encryption by default. Over most cheap proprietary RFM22 transceivers, ZigBee also offered an industry standard following the IEEE 802.15.4 specification for mesh networking. This allowed ZigBee devices to forward messages from one to another, extending the effective range of the network. Despite their rich features, ZigBee devices are limited in range and limiting when it comes to their power consumption and the potential use in IoT application. And this is where LoRaWAN comes into play: It’s a Low-Power Wide Area Network (LPWAN) standard promising a reach of tens of kilometres for line-of-sight connections and aiming to provide battery lives of up to ten years. How can this work?
https://www.thethingsnetwork.org/

First, let’s contrast short-range radio standards like the ZigBee with the LPWAN standards like LoRaWAN. RFM22, ZigBee and LPWAN all use radio frequencies in the ultra high frequency (UHF) range. Following the ITU 9 classification, these are devices that use a carrier frequency of 300 MHz to 3 GHz. That is, the radio waves have a peak-to-peak distance of 10-100 cm — a tiny proportion of the electromagnetic spectrum. Here, we find television broadcasts, mobile phone communication, 2.4 GHz WiFi, Bluetooth, and various proprietary radio standards. We all know that television broadcasting transmitters have a significant range, but clearly that’s because they can pack some punch behind the signal. There must be another reason that LoRaWAN does better than the other radio standards. The carrier frequency itself can therefore not explain the range of LPWAN standards.

There is all sorts of hardware trickery that can be applied to radio signals. Rather than allowing those electromagnetic waves orientate randomly on their way to the receiver, various polarisation strategies can increase range. A circular-polarised wave that drills itself forward can often more easily penetrate obstacles, whereas linear-polarised signals stay in one plane when progressing towards the receiver, concentrating the signal rather than dispersing it in different directions of the beam. However, these methods require effort and preparation on both the sender and receiver side, and wouldn’t really lend themselves to IoT field deployment…

The secret sauce of LPWAN is the modulation of the signal. Modulation describes how information is encoded in a signal. From radio broadcasting stations you may remember ‘AM’ or ‘FM’, amplitude or frequency modulation. That’s how the carrier signal is changed in order to express certain sounds. AM/FM are analog modulation techniques and digital modulation interprets changes like phase shifts in the signal as binary toggle. LPWAN standards are using a third set of methods, spectrum modulation, all of which get away with very low, noisy input signals. So as the key function of LPWAN chipsets is the demodulation and interpretation of very faint signals, one could think of a LoRaWAN radio as a pimped ZigBee module. That’s crazy, isn’t it? To understand a little more in detail how one of the LPWAN standards works, in the following we are going to focus on LoRaWAN as it is really ‘the network of the people’ and because The Things Network -a world-wide movement of idealists who install and run LoRaWAN gateways- supports our idea of open data.

LoRaWAN uses a modulation method called Chirp Spread Spectrum (CSS). Spread spectrum methods contrast narrow band radio as ‘they do not put all of their eggs into the same basket’. Consider a radio station that transmits its frequency-modulated programme with high power at one particular frequency, e.g. 89.9 MHz (the carrier is 89.9 MHz with modulations of about 50 kHz to encode the music). If you get to receive that signal, that’s good, but if there is a concurrent station sending their programme over the same frequency, your favourite station may get jammed. With spread spectrum, the message gets sent over a wide frequency range, but even if that signal is just above background noise, it is difficult to deliberately or accidentally destroy the message in its entirety. The ‘chirp’ refers to a particular technique that continuously increases or decreases the frequency while a particular payload is being sent.

The enormous sensitivity and therefore reach of LoRaWAN end devices and gateways has a price: throughput. While the effective range of LoRaWAN is significantly higher than ZigBee, the transmitted data rate of 0.25 to 12.5 kbit/s (depending on the local frequency standard and so-called spreading factor) is a minute fraction of it – but, hey, your connected dishwasher doesn’t have to watch Netflix, and a payload of 11-242 bytes (again, depending on your local frequency standard etc) is ample for occasional status updates. Here is where the so-called spreading factor comes into play. If your signal-to-noise ratio is great (close proximity, no concurrent signals, etc), you can send your ‘chirp’ within a small frequency range. If you need to compensate for a bad signal-to-noise ratio, it’s better to stretch that ‘chirp’ over a larger range of frequencies. However, that requires smaller payloads per ‘chirp’ and a drop in data rate.

Power consumption, reach and throughput are all linked. To burst out a narrow transmission consumes more power than to emit a spread signal. Hence, LoRaWAN implements an adaptable data rate that can take into account the signal-to-noise ratio as well as the power status of a device.

Text authored by Boris Adryan


A Comparison of IoT Gateway Protocols: MQTT and Modbus

pubblicato 27 nov 2016, 02:50 da iBlio connect   [ aggiornato in data 27 nov 2016, 02:51 ]

The Internet of Things (IoT) isn’t just about new technologies, it’s also about integration with older technologies, a key attribute of which is communication. 
The available methods of communication are diverse, however, and numerous protocols play a role in bringing the plethora of “things” to the Internet. This article explores two complementary protocols for the IoT: Modbus, a local protocol for short-distance device attachment, and Message Queuing Telemetry Transport (MQTT), a scalable Internet protocol that enables global communication for the IoT.


1-10 of 55