Posts made by canique

@NeverDie said in RFM69 sensitivity vs packet loss:

How is it that you're increasing your receive sensitivity?

When I say "sensitivity setting" I mean the RSSI threshold setting in register 0x29 as posted above.

@NeverDie said in RFM69 sensitivity vs packet loss:

RxReady just means that the RSSI Threshold has been met and that the SX1231 can start listening for a preamble. See figures on page 39 of the SX1231 datasheet

The bold part of your statement is plain wrong. RxReady means that enough preamble (or any other data like noise) has been received to read RSSI and optionally tune AGC/AFC. [This is why -if you set the wrong RSSI Threshold- you permanently get RxReady interrupts.]
The preamble is there to help adjust the AGC/AFC. That's the purpose of the preamble. So your preamble must be sent before the RxReady interrupt, not after it like you claim. Of course you can send the preamble after the RxReady interrupt (like you can pour soup over your salad) but then you have a potentially wrong AGC/AFC setting. It's just not meant to be.

@NeverDie said in RFM69 sensitivity vs packet loss:

It doesn't mean that that a matching preamble has been found, nor does it necessarily mean that a matching preamble will be found in the time allowed.

This is true. RxReady will also fire on noise. The formulas given on the page you refer to more often than not suggest ~14 bits of data for RxReady to fire (with AGC enabled, AFC disabled). This data can stem from noise. This is why it is important to keep the RSSI threshold above the noise floor. I'm not sure whether you got me right regarding my goal: I'm not trying to improve sensitivity. I'm trying to reduce packet loss to a minimum.

@NeverDie said in RFM69 sensitivity vs packet loss:

In packet mode, there's a fixed window between rxready and timing out in which to receive a valid packet, so a stream of rxready events could just mean a stream of timed-out receive windows triggered by ambient noise, not a series of received preambles.

Are you referring to RegRxTimeout2 (register 0x2B)? By default it is not set.
And iirc I only get this series of RxReady events if I restart the RX loop. Otherwise RxReady will stay set.

I have gathered data in a LibreOffice table...

Sensitivity vs RX Ready at different bit rates

The gist of it is:
@19.2 kbps I was able to achieve -105 dBm with low noise (low number of false RX Ready interrupts)

@25 kbps -104 dBm
@4.8 kbps -110 dBm
@40 kbps -99 dBm
@76.8 kbps -99 dBm

@alexelite I guess you'd have to reduce sensitivity to below -90 dBm, maybe -85 dBm, for things to work while TV is on.

Just to give a few numbers...

Condition: Bitrate 76800 bps / RX BW 125000

I could measure the following numbers:

Sensitivity | number of RX Ready per minute
-101 dBm | 4500
-100,5 dBm | 1300
-100 dBm | 1100
-99 dBm | 800

If set to -99 dBm, packet loss is small.
But today evening, the number of RX Ready events went up significantly. Packet loss went up too.

Reason: I switched on my television. Distance to Gateway ~30cm.
So a TV in the vicinity of the Gateway has a tremendous effect on sensitivity.

I ran a similar test some days ago with a sensitivity of -90 dBm and did not notice any packet loss then.

I am biased since I run that website but I can recommend https://www.canique.com/boost
I've never heard it making noise.

@Yveaux alas I can't due to lack of time. But maybe somenbody has spare time to tackle this.

@tssk There is a name for this noise: it is called "coil whine". In German "Spulenfiepen". It stems from the inductor - I wouldn't know any way to get rid of it.
My mainboard or power supply on my PC creates similar noise when the CPU goes in certain doze modes.

@Yveaux

There are 2 points I'm trying to make:

1. the sensitivity setting (register 0x29) is very important. Setting it too low makes AGC (and AFC, but it's rarely used) completely useless. One could even think of setting AGC manually instead.
2. The RFM69 chip is not smart enough to restart the RX procedure at the right point in time. It has some interrupts that tell you at which stage of the RX procedure it is currently. If you don't use these interrupts but follow the approach "I'll just wait for a Payload Ready IRQ" you will face packet loss.

There are multiple ways I can think of to fix this:

a) use the internal timeout setting (register 0x2B) of the RFM69 chip to set a timeout for the payload ready interrupt + listen to the RFM69 timeout interrupt (DIO0, DIO3 or DIO4 can be used) in your microcontroller. As soon as the timeout interrupt fires, the RX loop has to be restarted via register 0x3D (RegPacketConfig2).

b) same as above but more sophisticated: Instead of using the RFM69 internal timeout a timer of the MCU can be used for the task and more fine grained control is achievable via these interrupts (in the given order):
RxReady, SyncAddress, Fifolevel (you'd have to set Fifothreshold to some sane value like 3 bytes first), PayloadReady.
According to the bit time (called Tbit in the RFM69 documentation) every interrupt must occur within a certain time frame. E.g. if your SyncAddress is 2 bytes long (standard), the timeout must be at least 2x8xTbit time. That's the time needed to receive the SyncAddress after RxReady has fired. But it's a bit more complicated than that, because afaik RxReady can fire while still receiving the preamble (e.g. 5 byte preamble, but RxReady firing after 2 bytes). This is dependent on whether AFC/AGC are used or not and explaind in the documentation.
If there is a timeout detected at any stage -> RxRestart like in a).

Additionally [valid for a) + b)] the sensitivity has to be tuned in such a way, that there are not thousands and thousands of false preambles within a short time. Or to put it in other words: The sensitivity must be above the noise level.

The advantage of b) over a) is that the RX loop can be aborted at an earlier stage without having to wait the full "timeout" time.

Let's have a look @ some other setup.
Location: Vienna, close to center.
Acks: Not used.
Receiver: Orange Pi Zero with custom Gateway Hat with noise filtering (using mains power) with RFM69HW
Sender: Custom battery powered nodes with RFM69W
Same Radio settings as above, but sensitivity: -110 dBm

I have measured packet loss from 5 sender devices over a time window of ~ 16,5 hours.

Device | Received | Missed | Packet Loss %
A | 2000 | 28 | 1,38%
B | 1978 | 27 | 1,35%
C | 2002 | 45 | 2,20%
D | 1970 | 26 | 1,30%
E | 2000 | 25 | 1,23%

A 2nd test showed similar results ranging from 0,91% to 1,74%.

I repeated the same test, this time, with a battery powered node as receiver - just to make sure it has nothing to do with noise on the power line.
The results were even slightly worse: ranging from 1,3% to 2,41% packet loss.

Using the gateway as receiver again, I changed radio settings (BR 76,8 kbps, BW 125kHz, Whitening, changing sync word etc) but the figures were still not better.

So what happend when reducing sensitivity to -90 dBm? Still no substantial improvement.
Because RFM69 libraries are broken by design in a 2nd manner. It has to do with the way the transceiver works when listening for packets. It goes through multiple stages.
The problem is: If you only wait for "Payload Ready" the receiver can be caught in the wrong stage, just at the very moment when your sender is transmitting the message - in this case the receiver will miss the packet, because it was waiting for the end of the packet of the "wrong" sender.

This is the reason for the packet loss.
After fixing this error by introducing timeouts, I have achieved the following figure:

Received | Missed | Packet Loss %
2745 | 7 | 0,25%

Same environment, same receiver, one the the same senders, same message frequency.
Before I had missed packets every hour. At maximum I would have 1 hour without missed packets. Now 5-6 hours can pass without a single missed packet. All figures are without ACKs/retransmissions.

I want to share some measurements regarding RFM69 settings.

First the setup:
RFM69W, 868 MHz, on battery powered custom PCB node
sensitivity -102.5 dBm / BR 19.2kbps / RX BW 41.7 kHz, time window of measurement ~90s

30 messages have been sent during this time window.
Now the number of different interrupts during this time window:

28600 RX READY => RX READY every 3ms on avg
28571 Sync Addr Timeouts
17 SYNC ADDR

This shows that at least on this node there is a huge number of false RX Ready interrupts. (Happens after preamble has been received - including Automatic Gain Control) So the node thinks that it is receiving a preamble all the time (although this is only noise).
One point to note: In all RFM69 libraries that I know of the receive function only waits for the "Payload Ready" IRQ. Now actually this means that all RFM69 are broken by design.
Why? Because If you have an imperfect sensitivity setting, and only wait for Payload Ready IRQs the preamble you receive will be wrong (it won't be the one from your sender). If you now use AFC or AGC (AGC is on by default) they will be wrong or only correct by chance because they rely on a preamble from the right sender. It's then left up to your luck whether AGC has adjusted to the right value.

The reason why this broken design does not show up prominently is that
a) you're living in an environment where Radio hasn't been invented yet - or there are just no other senders that are triggering your receiver erroneously
b) you're using ACKs and thereby "hiding" the actual broken design (by retrying something that should have been received in the first place)

Coming back to the figures:
If I reduce sensitivity to -100 dBm, the number of RX READY interrupts within ~60 seconds goes down to ~800 (from almost 20k).

@skywatch cheapest price I could find is 4,1€ by the way incl. VAT + shipping. I guess that's a good price - especially if you consider that you don't have to buy thousands of it to get that price.

A quick search revealed the LPC4300 series (LPC4310 e.g.) from NXP. That one has a Cortex M4 and a Cortex M0+ inside.

How would you solve things like certificate updates / TLS connections on a gateway with an MCU?

@skywatch Its ADC has an offset of 30mV because the reference voltage comes from an RC divider.
The sleep current is somewhere in the mA range according to https://datasheets.raspberrypi.org/pico/pico_datasheet.pdf - that's way too high.

There are plenty Cortex M0+ processors out there. And they have way better specs regarding peripherals. This one is a Dual Cortex M0+ - so it could maybe compete by a low price.

@emre299 must be something wrong with the booster. Canique Boost module (I run the site selling it) outputs 3.3V no matter if no load is attached or if 50mA or more are drawn from it. It's based on the MCP16251 chip.
I guess the ebay modules are based on chinese chips having minimum price as the one and only design goal. Years ago I've bought 2 different ebay modules myself to test them, but they were crap (unnecessary LEDs and even if they were unsoldered the modules had bad efficiency).

@evb I'm doing RFM69W based tests rights now. It would be good to compare figures about packet loss in a more scientific way.
Right now I am sending from 5 custom nodes (max 10 meters from custom gateway) every 30 seconds. That's 600 messages per hour.
I have a second gateway only listening on that frequency and counting messages. This 2nd gateway has missed 11 messages in 1 hour.
That's a packet miss rate of 1.8% (while RSSI is always stronger than -80 dBm).
A quick research in the internet shows ~1% should be more or less normal.

One thing that caught my eye was data whitening. If a message contains multiple zeros in succession, this can lead to the receiver not waiting till the end of the message.
Solutions: Using dating whitening or encryption.

@evb If it's intermittent, chances are high that it is noise. But the noise could also stem from the gateway itself. Just a theoretical example to illustrate what I mean: access to an SD card on the gateway => noise. Then it would appear that you randomly lose messages, although it coincides with an access to the SD card.

It's time intensive to spot stuff like this. You could setup a gateway that just scans the same frequency (in promiscous mode) and samples RSSI. You could log each detection of a transmission (when RSSI values go from say -100dBm to -70 dBm) and then check if something is being transmitted from your nodes at the time in question.

Or you could setup a second gateway right next to your first one and see if that one is receiving the message. If one of them is receiving the message, it's probably a gateway issue. If neither is receiving the message there could be another transmission ongoing or it's a node issue.

@evb when doing range tests I also tested range through multiple buildings, so there was no clear line of sight. Distance was approximately 200 meters @ 13 dBm (max transmission power restricted due to regulations in the EU) with an external 5dbi antenna. That was the edge where TX was working.

For door nodes, ACKs and retransmissions are a must. I even use that in my temperature nodes.

@bjornhallberg it's improbable that there's something wrong with the RFM69
you have a frequency marking at the back, and I've never had a module with a wrong marking.

If an RFM69 is being outperformed by an nrf24, than this is kilometers away from normal. 868 MHz will -if used right- always outperform 2.4 GHz in terms of range. Always.
I tested nrf24 years ago and the first thing I did was: dismiss them immediately. It was crap.

Possible causes for low range can be: wrong settings (like coding for a HW but using a W version) or oscillations @ the gateway or @ the node (noise in the supply/gnd voltage, or nearby the device).

@evb I wonder what the lock mechanism looks like. Is it a key? Or some knob that you turn around?

How long did it take you to design the case?

@evb I can't see it clearly on the picture but this seems like a reed sensor to me.
Well, usually the transmitter does not have to be at some specific location. There are reed sensors based on magnets (connected with 2 wires to the transmitter). As soon as the magnets are close to each other, a small current flows (or vice versa). They are just attached to the window/door with some sticky adhesive. The transmitter can well be a meter away.

I can say from experience with Atmega328P, that when drawing ~24uA in sleep and sending every 30 seconds a single battery lasts ~ 1 year.
This can all be calculated (rough estimates).
A basic online calculator for this kind of stuff can be found @ https://oregonembedded.com/batterycalc.htm

@evb little info regarding the LED on the SCK pin.
Assuming it is a red LED with a forward voltage of 1.8V, considering the chip is powered with 3.3V and considering the 330 Ohm resistor in series with the LED, the additional current draw when SCK goes high should be about 4.5mA.

@mfalkvidd you're right. I've noticed it later, hadn't clicked on the link before. The project uses a uCurrent for calibration.

@kiesel do you mean a copy of the same project or something that does a similar job using an RFM69?

@evb Hello. I am the maker of the Canique MK2 boards. I started just like you with the website from Andreas Rohner, desoldering the LED and desoldering the voltage regulator from such a chinese board until I realized this is the wrong way round.
As far as I recall, I've seen voltage regulators consume something in the order of 100uA when reverse powered. So that might be a hint.
The external crystal should not be drawing that much current. Using a 16MHz oscillator current can go as low as 4uA with watchdog enabled - in theory and on boards built with minimum consumption as a design goal.

To your question regarding the SCK pin: yes, if it is connected to a LED every clock pulse on the SCK pin (when SPI is enabled) will make the LED draw current.

You also have these kinds of troubles (SPI drawing too much current when active or inactive) with chinese boards having a BME280 on them for example. If you have high quality standards, the stock chinese boards won't fit your needs.

I don't know the mentioned project, but for this type of measurement people like to use the uCurrent.
It would allow you to measure 0-50 uA. It can measure up to ~1400-1500 uA with a full 3V battery, when set to the uA range. It's output is in mV - so you'd need to hook a multimeter to its output to display the measurement.

Limitation: It's not good @ measuring pulses. So if you're not measuring a constant current but pulses of currents, like from a boost converter, things get complicated.