SmartDiagnostics Application Note Wireless Interference

Similar documents
Maximizing Range and Battery Life in Low-Cost Wireless Networks

Planning for ac Adoption with Ekahau Site Survey 6.0

Crestron Best Practices for Installation and Setup of Crestron RF Products Reference Guide

Interference Identification Guide. Table of Contents

Demystifying Wireless for Real-World Measurement Applications

communication over wireless link handling mobile user who changes point of attachment to network

Wireless Ethernet LAN (WLAN) General a/802.11b/802.11g FAQ

Chapter 2 Configuring Your Wireless Network and Security Settings

LTE-Advanced Carrier Aggregation Optimization

Bluetooth voice and data performance in DS WLAN environment

Wireless Medical Telemetry Laboratory

Optimizing Wireless Networks.

ALLION USA INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDER WIRELESS GATEWAY COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS

Wi-Fi and Bluetooth - Interference Issues

Municipal Mesh Network Design

CS263: Wireless Communications and Sensor Networks

Nigerian Communications Commission

EKT 331/4 COMMUNICATION NETWORK

Cloud-based Wireless LAN for Enterprise, SMB, IT Service Providers and Carriers. Product Highlights. Relay2 Enterprise Access Point RA100 Datasheet

LoRaWAN. What is it? A technical overview of LoRa and LoRaWAN. Technical Marketing Workgroup 1.0

Wharf T&T Limited Report of Wireless LAN Technology Trial Version: 1.0 Date: 26 Jan Wharf T&T Limited. Version: 1.0 Date: 26 January 2004

Interference Measurements on Performance Degradation between Colocated IEEE g/n and IEEE Networks

Spring Final Project Report

From reconfigurable transceivers to reconfigurable networks, part II: Cognitive radio networks. Loreto Pescosolido

VOICE OVER WI-FI CAPACITY PLANNING

Best Practices Guide for Obvius Data Acquisition Products

WI-FI VS. BLUETOOTH TWO OUTSTANDING RADIO TECHNOLOGIES FOR DEDICATED PAYMENT APPLICATION

Site Survey and RF Design Validation

Guide for wireless environments

Wireless Power for Remote Monitoring Applications

Radio Frequency (RF) Survey

Designing and Deploying. High Capacity ac Wi-Fi

Guide for Performing a Wireless Site Survey. 2.4 GHz IEEE g/802.11b/

LTE, WLAN, BLUETOOTHB

Site Survey Report MAH

Ultra Wideband Signal Impact on IEEE802.11b Network Performance

MIMO Antenna Systems in WinProp

High-Density Wi-Fi. Application Note

Monitores Equipos Móviles Especificaciones de Producto

Spectrum and Power Measurements Using the E6474A Wireless Network Optimization Platform

CHAPTER 1 1 INTRODUCTION

Application Note AN-00126

The influence of Wi-Fi on the operation of Bluetooth based wireless sensor networks in the Internet of Things

A survey on Spectrum Management in Cognitive Radio Networks

Joint Optimization of Routing and Radio Configuration in Fixed Wireless Networks

Logitech Advanced 2.4 GHz Technology With Unifying Technology

DT3: RF On/Off Remote Control Technology. Rodney Singleton Joe Larsen Luis Garcia Rafael Ocampo Mike Moulton Eric Hatch

Understanding Range for RF Devices

Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum (FHSS) vs. Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum (DSSS) in Broadband Wireless Access (BWA) and Wireless LAN (WLAN)

Introduction to Z-Wave. An Introductory Guide to Z-Wave Technology

is the power reference: Specifically, power in db is represented by the following equation, where P0 P db = 10 log 10

LTE Evolution for Cellular IoT Ericsson & NSN

End-to-end Cognitive Radio Testbed (EECRT ) current state and proposal for continuation TEKES TRIAL program

Understanding and Optimizing n

AN Application Note: FCC Regulations for ISM Band Devices: MHz. FCC Regulations for ISM Band Devices: MHz

APPLICATION NOTE. Atmel AT02845: Coexistence between ZigBee and Other 2.4GHz Products. Atmel MCU Wireless. Description. Features

Wireless Technology and RF Standard in Medical Device Development

The cost and performance benefits of 80 GHz links compared to short-haul GHz licensed frequency band products

Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)

Tri-Band RF Transceivers for Dynamic Spectrum Access. By Nishant Kumar and Yu-Dong Yao

USB 3.0* Radio Frequency Interference Impact on 2.4 GHz Wireless Devices

Expert Reference Series of White Papers. Wireless Bandwidth Not Necessarily as Advertised COURSES.

Antenna Deployment Technical Brief

Logitech Advanced 2.4 GHz Technology

WHITE PAPER. WEP Cloaking for Legacy Encryption Protection

IEEE n Enterprise Class Wireless LAN?

Wireless Troubleshooting

WiLink 8 Solutions. Coexistence Solution Highlights. Oct 2013

IEEE ac in Service Provider Wi-Fi Deployments: Consider More Than Speed

Whitepaper. Next Generation Gigabit WiFi ac

Basic Wireless Configuration and Security

White Paper. An Analysis of Active RFID for Asset Tracking

Wi-Fi Why Now? Exploring New Wireless Technologies for Industrial Applications

Omni Antenna vs. Directional Antenna

An Algorithm for Automatic Base Station Placement in Cellular Network Deployment

Design Considerations for RF Energy Harvesting Devices

Wireless Technology. Network+ Exam Key Points. Network+

Wireless The answer to all our communications needs?

TEST REPORT FROM RFI GLOBAL SERVICES LTD

ACRS 2.0 User Manual 1

BMW Universal Bluetooth TM Hands-Free System (ULF) Owner s Manual

How To Manage An Wireless Network At A University

Defining the Smart Grid WAN

Spectrum Analysis How-To Guide

Attenuation (amplitude of the wave loses strength thereby the signal power) Refraction Reflection Shadowing Scattering Diffraction

Document ID: Contents. Introduction. Prerequisites. Requirements. Components Used. Related Products. Conventions. 802.

What is the Real Cost of Poor Quality Antennas?

High Speed Multi Media Mesh Networking Using Commercial Off the Shelf Equipment. John Clements WB5SAL Corpus Christi

WIRELESS INSTRUMENTATION TECHNOLOGY

ZIGBEE ECGR-6185 Advanced Embedded Systems. Charlotte. University of North Carolina-Charlotte. Chaitanya Misal Vamsee Krishna

LTE BACKHAUL REQUIREMENTS: A REALITY CHECK

The future of mobile networking. David Kessens

Tektronix RSA306 USB Spectrum Analyzer

What s so smart about Smart-hopping?

White Paper. Wireless Network Considerations for Mobile Collaboration

A comparison of low-voltage and overlay lighting control systems. White Paper

NEW WORLD TELECOMMUNICATIONS LIMITED. 2 nd Trial Test Report on 3.5GHz Broadband Wireless Access Technology

Transcription:

SmartDiagnostics Application Note Wireless Interference Publication Date: May 27, 2015 KCF Technologies, Inc. Background The SmartDiagnostics wireless network is an easy to install, end-to-end machine health monitoring solution. The network enables quick setup, low cost installation, flexibility to reconfigure and expand the network, and the ability to locate nodes in difficult to access areas. The SmartDiagnostics wireless network uses the DARTwireless TM protocol to communicate between the sensor nodes and wireless receivers. This application note describes the impact of SmartDiagnostics wireless on a coexisting WiFi network and the impact of the WiFi on the SmartDiagnostics communications.

2

SmartDiagnostics in the 2.4 GHz ISM Band SmartDiagnostics uses the 2.4 GHz ISM Radio Frequency (RF) band for the sensor communication because it is ideally suited for balancing energy efficiency and transmission range in industrial facilities. In contrast, the 915 MHz ISM band offers too low a data throughput to transmit large data sets efficiently and the 5.8 GHz band offers too short a range to practically apply in most industrial machine condition monitoring applications. SmartDiagnostics uses 5 channels shown in the following figure. For reference, these channels are overlaid on WiFi spectral usage, which typically operates on the 1, 6, or 11 channels. SmartDiagnostics Channel A B C D E Center Frequency (MHz) 2429 2436 2443 2450 2457 Notice that SmartDiagnostics channel D does not overlap with primary WiFi channels 1, 6, and 11, which allows them to coexist without interfering. In the case where WiFi Channel 6 is used, SmartDiagnostics channels D and E can be used. Similarly, if WiFi channels 1 and 11 are used, SmartDiagnostics channels A, B, C can be used without interfering. SMAR SmartDiagnostics can use one or more of its 5 channels, depending on the particular application. Each channel typically supports 50 sensor nodes within a wireless coverage region defined by a perimeter roughly 200 feet from the receiver (PRN). Within a ~200 foot region, typically 250 sensors can be supported with a single Collection Server. Most industrial facilities can be logically broken into regions where Collection Servers are distributed to cover each region. SmartDiagnostics uses a transceiver that is similar to ones used by Bluetooth. The SmartDiagnostics wireless protocol, called DARTwireless TM, is different than Bluetooth because it is focused on ultralow power, low bandwidth consumption and supporting hundreds of devices. It uses a channel adaptations scheme to pick the best channels to use based on interference and internetwork load balancing across multiple receivers, but unlike Bluetooth, it does not use frequency hopping. The basic characteristics of the RF traffic generated by SmartDiagnostics are as follows: Modulation GFSK (same as Bluetooth) Over the air rate - 2 Mbps Channel half-power bandwidth 2 MHz Peak RF power 15 dbm Typical range: 800 line-of-site, 100-300 industrial indoor The SmartDiagnostics primary sensor node, the SD-VSN-2 (Vibration Sensor Node), acquires data sets that contains 1650 data points. These data sets are transmitted to receivers immediately after the data is acquired. This occurs on a user 3

configurable interval that depends on the particular application. Data sets are typically acquired and transmitted as frequently as once per minute to once per hour. In addition to the data transmissions, the SmartDiagnostics network also sends a heartbeat packet on a fixed 4 second interval. This heartbeat sustains the network and allows commands to be sent to the nodes on a timely basis. All communication between the sensor nodes and the receiver is acknowledged with a confirmation packet sent by the receiving transceiver. This enables the node to recognize if it should retransmit the data packet. While the network is being setup or reconfigured, sensor nodes will automatically search for a receiver channel that is active. During this process, the nodes will send small notification packets every few seconds, consuming a small amount of bandwidth, which is much lower than typical operation. The bandwidth consumed by a 100 sensor SmartDiagnostics network is shown in the following figure. Bandwidth in this case is defined as the total percent on-air time used by the sensors. The range of bandwidth usage shown by the two curves represent a typical case (red line) where the sensors are not retransmitting data and an extreme case (black dot line) where every piece of data is retransmitted a maximum number of times. The figure shows that 100 nodes transmitting large (1650 point) data sets every 30 minutes consumes between 0.5-3.4% of a single, narrow band, channel (only one of the 5 channels shown in the frequency spectrum). In the following figure, the same data is shown for the case where the sample set transmission interval is fixed at 30 minutes and the number of nodes in a given wireless coverage region is varied. 4

Impact of SmartDiagnostics on WiFi The impact of SmartDiagnostics wireless bandwidth usage on the function of other wireless devices is difficult to universally assess analytically. To examine this in a meaningful way, a case where SmartDiagnostics is operated in an active WiFi channel concurrently was evaluated. In particular, SmartDiagnostics channel A (shown in yellow in the frequency spectrum plot) was configured to overlap with WiFi channel 6 (green area) in the following experimental test. A worst case condition was chosen to examine how well WiFi and SmartDiagnostics coexistence. In this test, 60 sensor nodes were set to transmit data sets every 1 minute and were located in the proximity of a WiFi network. 60 sensor with 1 minute collection interval (test condition) 650 sensors with 30 minute collection interval 5

The WiFi network used IEEE 802.11g CISCO access points (Q87-E800). The access point was specified to output a maximum power of 23 dbm. The SmartDiagnostics power level was set at its default of 15 dbm with a 3dBi dipole antenna. The impact of SmartDiagnostics on WiFi was assessed by evaluating the transmission speed of a large file that was sent over the WiFi network. This file transfer forced the WiFi network to attempt to transmit nearly continuously over the evaluation period. The ratio of the baseline speed (without the SmartDiagnostics network) to the speed while coexisting with SmartDiagnostics is shown in the following figure. This assessment was made for a case where the separation distance between the WiFi Access Point (transmitter location) was 12 and 26 away from the SmartDiagnostics network. The horizontal axis shows SmartDiagnostics total sample sets transmitted per minute, which can be roughly calculated as the number of sensors in a wireless coverage area divided by the average data set transmission interval (e.g., 650 sensors/30 minutes = 22 total sample sets transmitted per minute). SmartDiagnostics sensor bandwidth is primarily consumed by the data acquisitions rather than the heartbeat to sustain the network for acquisitions more frequently than an acquisition every 30 minutes. In this case, the above total sample sets transmitted per minute generalization is valid. The same test was done with WiFi using channel 1, which doesn t overlap with SmartDiagnostics channel A. The nonoverlapping case is shown by the orange line the figure above. Notice that the separation distance between the WiFi transmitter and the SmartDiagnostics sensors makes a large difference in the WiFi performance. This is shown in further detail in the following figure. 6

Impact of WiFi on SmartDiagnostics WiFi can have an impact on throughput of the SmartDiagnostics network. This was assessed experimentally using the same setup as was described for examining the impact of SmartDiagnostics on WiFi. The same generalization for the horizontal axis is used, which is given in the following plot as the total sample sets transmitted by all the sensor nodes per minute. 7

Again, notice that locating the WiFi transmitter at a distance of 12 from SmartDiagnostics network, the SmartDiagnostics throughput was 94%. Also note that in this example case, the SmartDiagnostics transmission interval has little impact on the SmartDiagnostics throughput. This is expected considering that WiFi was attempting to transmit continuously over the evaluation period. Impact of Microwave Ovens on SmartDiagnostics Considering that microwave ovens use the 2.4 GHz band and can potentially impact the throughput of SmartDiagnostics, a test was done to examine potential interference. The test consisted of locating an 1100 Watt microwave oven next to (within 4 feet of all nodes) the SmartDiagnostics test setup. The oven was run continuously at full power during the test. The throughput of the SmartDiagnostics network with the oven ON and OFF is shown in the figure below. In this extreme case, the throughput of SmartDiagnostics was reduced by 13%. 8