Looking for information/details on WL55JC1 and B-L072Z LRWAN1.

[Yuvi]

Hello @STTwo-32  @ST Community 

Looking for information and details on this.

1) Currently I'm using B-L072Z LRWAN1 and I'm looking forward to using WL55JC1, using WL55JC1 CLASS B will increase my data rate?

2) Does WL55JC1 support CLASS B and as well as CLASS C? 

3) I got to know that a GPS-based gateway is required for CLASS B devices. So there can be specific requirements for CLASS C also?

Thank you.

[STTwo-32]

Hello @Yuvi 

1) The Data Rate depend on two parameters, bandwidth & spreading factor and not the board. This link give a simple explanation on that.

2) The LoRaWAN embedded in STM32WL is LoRaWAN L2 V1.0.3 compatible. The supported class are:

• Class A for Unicast.
• Class B synchronous transmission (thanks to beacon) for Unicast or Multicast.
• Class C for continuous transmission for Unicast or Multicast.

3) For details about different Class requirements, take a look at the following link.

Best Regards.

STTwo-32 

[Yuvi]

Thank you for your reply @STTwo-32 

1) I'm in Indian region(865-867), So the maximum bandwidth is 125KHZ and even when I'm operating at SF7 I'm getting maximum data rate of 768bps(24 frames of 240bytes payload). Please refer to this link for more details https://community.st.com/t5/stm32-mcus-wireless/not-getting-mention-speed-of-lorawan/m-p/639245#M17888

Some people suggested that I use paid bands instead of free bands to get a better data rate(out of 8 India has 7 free bands), and other people suggested I take the v1.0.4 node to get more frames per minute.

2) Can you suggest node v1.0.4.

3) I have seen a few queries and questions on class B but no one has tried class C.

[STTwo-32]

Hello @Yuvi 

1) I Think that paid bands may help getting better data rate. But the V1.0.4 will not give big difference.

2)Our STM32WL is LoRaWAN L2 V1.0.3 compatible.

3) I suggest you post on the Forum of our Third party.

Best Regards.

STTwo-32

[Andrew Neil]

Again, LoRaWAN is not  designed as a high-speed network.

If high speed is your requirement, then LoRaWAN is probably not the correct protocol for you.

Why do you think that Class C would give you any higher data rate?

The differences between the classes are not about data rates - they are about how easy it is for the remote device to receive downlinks from the network.

Are you working on the same project as @Yash_want - who seems to be fixated on the same thing:

https://community.st.com/t5/stm32-mcus-wireless/not-able-to-disable-receiving-window-of-l072z-lrwan1/m-p/657145

[Tesla DeLorean]

You understand that LoRa radios can operate in point-to-point modes that's independent of LoRaWAN, its just another modulation scheme.

If you've got to share resources, and connect to existing LoRaWAN infrastructure that comes with limitations and other users. It's designed for brief interactions, of small data packets, not continuous blasting of data at your sole convenience.

Example, electric, gas or water meters reporting readings once or twice a day (perhaps 20-30 bytes, but thousands of meters), parking meters when cars arrive/depart a handful of times during the day, say for billing, or free space management/reporting.

How much data do you have to move? At what speed? And for how long? What's the actual application?

I'm not familiar with India's band licensing, but it other places it allows for a much more limited number of users/owners to provide some level of exclusivity, management and responsibility. And presumably policing of those offending the rules.

GPS in gateways allows for accurate timing and synchronization, say TDM