why mysensors is based on nrf24?
-
Well, as many have pointed out now, they don't have problems with range on the nrf and for even better range, use rfm, so why should we look for other radios? The ones we support are perfectly adequate.
-
Well, as many have pointed out now, they don't have problems with range on the nrf and for even better range, use rfm, so why should we look for other radios? The ones we support are perfectly adequate.
@Anticimex
i read myconfig.h and i think if i understand right , with RFM we can set 3 different frequency . but we can not have several channel. is that right ?
there is a defect in each radio :/
thank you dear friend for answer -
Sure in myconfig.h, you can only set 3 freq for the moment, but this is not a rfm69 problem. It's because for the moment the driver is still lowpowerlab based.
Lot of improvements have been done, and a completely new rfm69 driver will be released in future, including this feature ;)
I agree too, esp8266 is too power hungry for simple sensors node.. -
Sure in myconfig.h, you can only set 3 freq for the moment, but this is not a rfm69 problem. It's because for the moment the driver is still lowpowerlab based.
Lot of improvements have been done, and a completely new rfm69 driver will be released in future, including this feature ;)
I agree too, esp8266 is too power hungry for simple sensors node.. -
this problem is for several month for me and i test with one relay and one sensor and some regulator and capacitor and etc... and i am be tired and accept i can not have better connection. so this is not my issue now . just i offer a suggestion .
if you can add a stronge radio with long range and more power consumption (for people that need long range and power consumption is not important for them.)Anyway i am thank you for your trying :pray:
@Reza I don't know the source of the module you use, but the modules with same outfit did not perform really well for me.
I have linked some modules in this thread, which work very well for me.
There are modules with higher power consumption with PA, but other modules (without PA) may also work in higher ranges.If there are other transmitter near the frequency you use, it affects the range and packet loss you may see - so, you may also check it.
I may use a stronger module (with PA) using appropriate antenna for the central transmitter/receiver and another module (maybe without PA) for battery-driven parts. Good antenna is mandatory for both parts.
Anyway, 433 / 866 / 315 MHz frequency bands have much better wave propagation, but have much more limitations by regulations and not all frequencies can be used in different places of the world...
-
@Reza I don't know the source of the module you use, but the modules with same outfit did not perform really well for me.
I have linked some modules in this thread, which work very well for me.
There are modules with higher power consumption with PA, but other modules (without PA) may also work in higher ranges.If there are other transmitter near the frequency you use, it affects the range and packet loss you may see - so, you may also check it.
I may use a stronger module (with PA) using appropriate antenna for the central transmitter/receiver and another module (maybe without PA) for battery-driven parts. Good antenna is mandatory for both parts.
Anyway, 433 / 866 / 315 MHz frequency bands have much better wave propagation, but have much more limitations by regulations and not all frequencies can be used in different places of the world...
@VaZso thank you friend for answer , i am using several model (different radio) with pa and without pa. but with just one model i had a good connection. so i think other models(with pa+lna and simple ...) all is fake!
sorry friend just a question.
how much most range that you test with simple original NRF (without pa+lna) ? how meter with how Barrier (cm) ? without any lost packet and failed.thank you
this moldel :) According to told Producer , this module can coverage 2000 meter. but i could connect this for 15meter with 60cm brickwall.
-
@VaZso thank you friend for answer , i am using several model (different radio) with pa and without pa. but with just one model i had a good connection. so i think other models(with pa+lna and simple ...) all is fake!
sorry friend just a question.
how much most range that you test with simple original NRF (without pa+lna) ? how meter with how Barrier (cm) ? without any lost packet and failed.thank you
this moldel :) According to told Producer , this module can coverage 2000 meter. but i could connect this for 15meter with 60cm brickwall.
@Reza Internal walls and special circumstances may affect range very badly in 2.4 GHz band.
Even fake modules may allow relatively high ranges, but the quality of the antenna also highly affects the range.We have not really tried two modules without PA...
I had communication for about 50-70 meters in one of my very first tests using the worse modules I had, in open field...Otherwise, we could achieve ~1.2km in open field one module using PA and other module without PA.
There was a straight open field between modules and ~1.2km was the maximal range where they could communicate (with packet loss).
That case when something was inside them, the communication stopped. Till about 1km, the communication was very well in the same setup while it was completely open field.
One module had a relatively good antenna (and PA) with authentic IC inside, other one had a PCB antenna with counterfeit IC...The 2000 meter for that module is sure to be in open field using two modules with PA and good antenna.
Walls are lowering the coverage. -
@Reza Internal walls and special circumstances may affect range very badly in 2.4 GHz band.
Even fake modules may allow relatively high ranges, but the quality of the antenna also highly affects the range.We have not really tried two modules without PA...
I had communication for about 50-70 meters in one of my very first tests using the worse modules I had, in open field...Otherwise, we could achieve ~1.2km in open field one module using PA and other module without PA.
There was a straight open field between modules and ~1.2km was the maximal range where they could communicate (with packet loss).
That case when something was inside them, the communication stopped. Till about 1km, the communication was very well in the same setup while it was completely open field.
One module had a relatively good antenna (and PA) with authentic IC inside, other one had a PCB antenna with counterfeit IC...The 2000 meter for that module is sure to be in open field using two modules with PA and good antenna.
Walls are lowering the coverage. -
@VaZso you are right , but most of used NRF and mysensors is inside home with wall...
friends told me dont have any problem in their home , so i think this is just related my radios. probably all of my radios are fake...@Reza It really depends on the special circumstances in your house, the quality of the antenna, the quality of the module and so on.
In a building we tested, it could communicate in the two far end of it (upstairs to downstairs), however, there was a place where the communication was not perfect (using two authentic modules with PA).
In my house, I was able to communicate upstairs to downstairs through an about 80cm of "wall" (Godet?) in between, but I haven't done extensive testing with our best modules there yet - however, I have places there where also my WLAN devices fails because of too many walls and concrete... so I think there should be places there where it would fail...Otherwise, I found generally internal range is also very good using these modules.
-
@VaZso you are right , but most of used NRF and mysensors is inside home with wall...
friends told me dont have any problem in their home , so i think this is just related my radios. probably all of my radios are fake... -
-
@Reza Don't forget it is only true if there are no other noises in that frequency like any WLAN radios at a nearby channel or microwave oven, etc.
Even a bluetooth connection can cause some loss as it is hopping from frequency to frequency.
Bluetooth works somewhat like in the tale - it does not interfere with other equipments but it interferes with all of them a bit...So, if data integrity is really important, one should handle re-sending missing informations by software especially in wider ranges of distance. However, internal retry also helps.
(I don't know what mysensor's library do about this question.) -
@Reza Don't forget it is only true if there are no other noises in that frequency like any WLAN radios at a nearby channel or microwave oven, etc.
Even a bluetooth connection can cause some loss as it is hopping from frequency to frequency.
Bluetooth works somewhat like in the tale - it does not interfere with other equipments but it interferes with all of them a bit...So, if data integrity is really important, one should handle re-sending missing informations by software especially in wider ranges of distance. However, internal retry also helps.
(I don't know what mysensor's library do about this question.) -
@VaZso i see different channels in my home and all channel was never busy.i am sure this is just related to radio structure
thank you
@Reza What are you mean about "all channel was never busy"?
(I assume you tried free channels.)Anyway, a simple wlan-scan only shows occupied wlan channels but not other communications (or noises) in the same frequency range.
Anyway, some modifications of the antenna may highly affects signal strength. -
@Reza What are you mean about "all channel was never busy"?
(I assume you tried free channels.)Anyway, a simple wlan-scan only shows occupied wlan channels but not other communications (or noises) in the same frequency range.
Anyway, some modifications of the antenna may highly affects signal strength.
