• State Verified Answer
  • Replies 3 replies
  • Subscribers 75 subscribers
  • Views 3811 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Attachments (0)
Nordic Case Info
  • Case ID: 230669
Options
This post is older than 2 years and might not be relevant anymore
More Info: Consider searching for newer posts

BLE 5 or LoRa

czuvich

I currently have a hobby product that reads sensors and turns on/off relays based on that sensor input.  I've got an nRF52840 that sits on my sensors and relays, and I have a Gateway (nRF52840 + ESP32) that syncs information to the cloud and coordinates the relays/sensors.

All of my products sit outside (including the gateway) and run off of battery.  I really like the BLE 5.0 spec, and I haven't even added an external antenna to my projects yet (I use the Raytac variant with the ceramic antenna).  I get OK range, but with an outdoor project it'd be nice to get more range.

I've been recently looking into LoRa, and well... I'm trying to figure out where BLE 5 fits now.  If the goal is a low-power, battery operated project that transmits data every 20m or so in an outdoor environment, is BLE 5 really the right choice for me?  My product right now will last for years off of 1 AA battery (solar recharged LFP), and I think I could achieve decent results with LoRa and have long range.  I'm somewhat new to the hardware world (I'm software engineer), and so I'm trying to figure out what are the real advantages to BLE 5 vs LoRa in my particular scenario.

Is it cost? Development time?  Is BLE really more useful for higher bandwidth applications in comparison to LoRa (every 20m or so... possibly up to once a minute)?

  • 0

    LoRa is an LPWAN technology = Low-Power, Wide Area Network.

    BLE really isn't "Wide" Area in that sense.

    As in any engineering, it's all a tradeoff.

    BLE gives you much better throughput - in both directions - but at the cost of range.

    LoRa give you far better range, but at the cost of throughput - especially in the downlink direction.

    They really are different horses for different courses.

    But, if you're just thinking of covering your back yard, either will probably do the job.

    Also note that BLE 5 is very new, but LoRa is (relatively) well-established.

  • 0 in reply to awneil

    Thanks for your response.  It's more like an acre instead of a backyard.  I noticed if I run the Gateway outside (the Central that bridges the Peripherals to WiFi), then it seems to be ok; however, if I put my Gateway indoors, then BLE doesn't reach it.

    Horses for different courses.. I get that, but I'm trying to figure out the right course for my project.  I've already coded everything in BLE 5; however, I'm not sure I have the right "horse" now.  What is considered high throughput generally?  Right now I send packets from the peripherals at most once a minute, and I receive packets once a minute.  The packets are very small (state variables).

    It sounds like a Wide Area Network may be a better choice; however, all of my nodes ARE generally clustered, but they don't talk to each other (just talk to the gateway).

  • +1 in reply to czuvich
    czuvich said:
    if I put my Gateway indoors, then BLE doesn't reach it

    That'll be because BLE is 2.4GHz - which is not good for going through wall.

    LoRa is sub-GHz - which does better in that respect.

    This really isn't anything to do with Nordic - it's a general comparison of the technologies. So try some general googling; eg "comparison of wireless technologies" came up with this:

    https://www.electronicspecifier.com/around-the-industry/managing-power-in-the-iot-with-cellular-lpwan-technology

    (not sure if that's including BLE 5?)

    People like drawing diagrams like that!

    czuvich said:
    all of my nodes ARE generally clustered, but they don't talk to each other

    A Mesh could help you, then.

Related
Terms of service