An Experimental Field Comparison of Wi-Fi HaLow and LoRa for the Smart Grid
<p>The flow of device management traffic without security measures.</p> "> Figure 2
<p>The flow of device management traffic with VPN security measures.</p> "> Figure 3
<p>Map of Minnippi Park located in the eastern suburbs of Brisbane, Australia, where the performance experiments were conducted on Wi-Fi HaLow, Wi-Fi n, and LoRa. Each measurement location is plotted as a distance from the stationary access point.</p> "> Figure 4
<p>Network architecture diagram for the evaluation of Wi-Fi HaLow.</p> "> Figure 5
<p>Network architecture diagram for the evaluation of Wi-Fi n.</p> "> Figure 6
<p>Network architecture diagram for the evaluation of LoRa.</p> "> Figure 7
<p>Packet structure adopted from our previous study [<a href="#B36-sensors-23-07409" class="html-bibr">36</a>] to support secure LoRa communication.</p> "> Figure 8
<p>The throughput of Wi-Fi HaLow OWE vs. WPA3-PSK throughput.</p> "> Figure 9
<p>The throughput of Wi-Fi HaLow at various distances and bandwidths.</p> "> Figure 10
<p>The packet loss percentage of Wi-Fi HaLow by distance, packet type, and bandwidth.</p> "> Figure 11
<p>The throughput of Wi-Fi n at various distances.</p> "> Figure 12
<p>The throughput of LoRa (Kbps), no security vs. ChaCha20-Poly1305-based AEAD scheme at Spreading Factor 7 at various bandwidths and code rates.</p> "> Figure 13
<p>The average packet loss of LoRa at varying distances and packet sizes.</p> "> Figure 14
<p>Map of Woody Point, located north of Brisbane, Australia, where the second validating performance experiments were conducted on Wi-Fi HaLow. Each measurement location is plotted as a distance from the stationary access point.</p> "> Figure 15
<p>The throughput of Wi-Fi HaLow at a second location was used to verify the significant and sudden performance drop observed in the original performance experiments.</p> ">
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Research Scope
1.2. Research Questions and Objectives
- How can we securely conduct authentic performance testing of IoT technologies at varying distances with minimal resources?
- How does Wi-Fi HaLow perform in a real-world setting, compared with alternative technologies, and do increased security measures impact performance adversely?
- Is Wi-Fi HaLow a suitable technology choice for smart grid applications?
- Design and implement a network performance evaluation architecture for Wi-Fi HaLow, Wi-Fi n, and LoRa.
- Conduct experiments on the selected technologies to determine their real-world performance in terms of throughput and packet loss across various distances.
- Examine the requirements of applications in the smart grid and determine if Wi-Fi HaLow meets those requirements.
1.3. Our Contribution
- 1.
- The currently available performance figures for Wi-Fi HaLow are theoretical in nature, creating a clear gap in the research. This work provides real-world performance data of the new Wi-Fi HaLow technology obtained using newly available Wi-Fi HaLow hardware. Researchers and network designers can use these data to determine the suitability of Wi-Fi HaLow for various applications.
- 2.
- Secure network architectures that can be used to evaluate IoT devices so that data can be collected and settings can be remotely changed without needing specialised hardware or software and with minimal human resources.
- 3.
- An analysis of newer IoT transmission technologies, compared and contrasted with each other and Wi-Fi n, with a focus on Wi-Fi HaLow and its suitability in smart grid applications.
1.4. Paper Structure
- Section 2: Provides critical background information on Wi-Fi HaLow, LoRa, and the smart grid. A survey of the previous work related to Wi-Fi HaLow performance evaluation will then be presented.
- Section 3: Presents the three secure network architectures used to conduct this study’s performance measurement experiments. The methodology is outlined, including the hardware and software resources needed to reproduce the experiments.
- Section 4: Demonstrates the results obtained from each of the conducted performance experiments as they relate to Wi-Fi HaLow, Wi-Fi n, and LoRa.
- Section 5: Discusses the interesting and insightful observations taken from the performance experiments. Smart grid use cases for the evaluated technology are then discussed.
- Section 6: Summarises this work’s key findings, the study’s limitations, and some key areas for future work.
2. Related Work
2.1. Wi-Fi HaLow
- 1.
- Centralised Authentication Control—The number of end devices that can send authentication requests at any one time is limited. The access point broadcasts a message that contains a threshold value. When end devices want to authenticate with the access point, they generate a random number. If this number is smaller than the threshold value received from the access point, it will wait until the next broadcast message is received.
- 2.
- Distributed Authentication Control—The access point maintains various beacon intervals that contain numerous control slots. An end device can randomly select a beacon and slot. If the end device is unsuccessful in its attempt to authenticate, it will attempt authentication later using a different beacon interval and slot.
2.2. LoRa
2.3. Smart Grid
- 1.
- Home Area Network (HAN): The network that is used to manage and control smart devices within the home. These smart devices may also interface with the smart meter to enable more accurate and meaningful usage data. These networks are typically wireless in nature.
- 2.
- Neighbourhood Area Network (NAN): This network is commonly formed by a group of smart meters within a close geographical area. This network transmits metering data and control information to and from the provider. These networks are typically wireless but can be wired.
- 3.
- Wide Area Network (WAN): The WAN provides the connection from the HAN and NAN to the provider. The data transferred through the WAN can include the metering data from the NAN and monitoring and control data from substations. This network also facilitates the stability and functionality of the wider power grid. These networks have high bandwidth and low latency requirements, with wired solutions being favoured.
2.4. ChaCha20-Poly1305 AEAD
2.5. Wi-Fi HaLow Performance Evaluations
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Required Resources
3.1.1. Hardware Requirements
- 2 × laptops (one with an Ethernet interface and cable). The laptops used in this study were Dell Latitude 7400 laptops with an Intel Core i7-8665U processor, 16 GB DDR-4 2666 MHz RAM, and 512 GB NVMe SSD.
- 2 × LTE Modem with SIM card and carrier subscription and USB cables
- 2 × Silex SX-NEWAH-EVK-US IEEE 802.11ah Evaluation Kits (includes a Raspberry Pi and the Wi-Fi HaLow chipset, SD cards and drivers).
- 2 × Mini-USB B to USB-A cables to power 802.11ah radios.
- 2 × ESP32-based microcontroller devices with attached SX1276 LoRa sub-GHz chipsets and USB cables.
- 2 × 900 MHz half-wave dipole antennas with a gain of 0 dBd (0 dB over a dipole). These antennas were used with the Wi-Fi HaLow and the LoRa devices.
- 2 × Geecol Realtek 8812BU-based USB Wi-Fi adapters. These adapters are dual-band IEEE 802.11 ac. The adapter was set to IEEE 802.11 b/g/n mode, and the 5 GHz band was disabled. Testing of 5 GHz Wi-Fi was out of the scope of this study. External 2.4 GHz dipole antennas with a 2.8 dBi gain were attached to the adapters. The adapters’ transmission power was left at its default setting of 22 dBm.
- 1 × portable power bank with USB-C to USB-C cable
- Wi-Fi HaLow: Section 3.4.
- Wi-Fi n: Section 3.6.
- LoRa: Section 3.8.
3.1.2. Software Requirements
- Microsoft Windows 10/11.
- Raspberry Pi OS 32-bit (preinstalled on the SX-NEWAH-EVK-US).
- Visual Studio Code v1.81 with the PlatformIO extension.
- SSH (Secure Shell) client software.
- OpenVPN clients for Linux and Windows.
- Cloud services for Virtual Private Network (VPN) deployment (Amazon Web Services was used for this study).
3.2. Test Bench General Security Concept
3.3. Location
3.4. Wi-Fi HaLow Test Bench Architecture
3.5. Wi-Fi HaLow Experiments and Methods
3.6. Wi-Fi n Test Bench Architecture
3.7. Wi-Fi n Experiments and Methods
3.8. LoRa Test Bench Architecture
3.9. LoRa Experiments and Methods
Algorithm 1 Process for Sending a Plaintext LoRa Packet |
|
Algorithm 2 Encryption and Tagging Process for Sending a LoRa Packet |
|
4. Results
4.1. Wi-Fi HaLow
4.2. Wi-Fi n
4.3. LoRa
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Kabalci, Y. A survey on smart metering and smart grid communication. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 57, 302–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wi-Fi Alliance. Wi-Fi Alliance Introduces Low Power, Long Range Wi-Fi HaLow. Available online: https://www.wi-fi.org/news-events/newsroom/wi-fi-alliance-introduces-low-power-long-range-wi-fi-halow (accessed on 31 May 2023).
- Silex Technology. SX-NEWAH—Industry’s First 802.11ah Wi-Fi Solution for IoT Devices. Available online: https://www.silextechnology.com/connectivity-solutions/embedded-wireless/sx-newah (accessed on 31 May 2023).
- Tian, L.; Santi, S.; Seferagić, A.; Lan, J.; Famaey, J. Wi-Fi HaLow for the Internet of Things: An up-to-date survey on IEEE 802.11ah research. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2021, 182, 103036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ISO/IEC/IEEE. ISO/IEC/IEEE 8802-11:2018/Amd.2:2019(E); International Standard–Information technology–Telecommunications and information exchange between systems—Local and Metropolitan Area Networks—Specific Requirements—Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications Amendment 2: Sub 1 GHz License Exempt Operation; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ali, M.Z.; Mišić, J.; Mišić, V.B. Performance evaluation of heterogeneous IoT nodes with differentiated QoS in IEEE 802.11ah RAW mechanism. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2019, 68, 3905–3918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rayes, A.; Salam, S. IoT Protocol Stack: A Layered View. In Proceedings of the Internet of Things from Hype to Reality; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 93–138. [Google Scholar]
- Domazetović, B.; Kočan, E.; Mihovska, A. Performance evaluation of IEEE 802.11ah systems. In Proceedings of the 24th IEEE Telecommunications Forum (TELFOR), Belgrade, Serbia, 22–23 November 2016; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar]
- Farhad, A.; Pyun, J.Y. Resource Management for Massive Internet of Things in IEEE 802.11ah WLAN: Potentials, Current Solutions, and Open Challenges. Sensors 2022, 22, 9509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kwon, S.; Choi, H.K. Evolution of Wi-Fi protected access: Security challenges. IEEE Consum. Electron. Mag. 2020, 10, 74–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chatzoglou, E.; Kambourakis, G.; Kolias, C. How is your Wi-Fi connection today? DoS attacks on WPA3-SAE. J. Inf. Secur. Appl. 2022, 64, 103058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reddy, B.I.; Srikanth, V. Review on wireless security protocols (WEP, WPA, WPA2 & WPA3). Int. J. Sci. Res. Comput. Sci. Eng. Inf. Technol. 2019, 5, 28–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Semtech. LoRa Technology Overview. Available online: https://www.semtech.com/lora (accessed on 19 May 2023).
- Sanchez-Iborra, R.; Cano, M.D. State of the art in LP-WAN solutions for industrial IoT services. Sensors 2016, 16, 708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Campo, G.D.; Gomez, I.; Calatrava, S.; Martinez, R.; Santamaria, A. Power distribution monitoring using LoRa: Coverage analysis in suburban areas. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Embedded Wireless Systems and Networks, Madrid, Spain, 14–16 February 2018; pp. 233–238. [Google Scholar]
- Sanchez-Gomez, J.; Sanchez-Iborra, R.; Skarmeta, A. Transmission technologies comparison for IoT communications in smart-cities. In Proceedings of the GLOBECOM 2017—IEEE Global Communications Conference, Singapore, 4–8 December 2017; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Seye, M.R.; Gueye, B.; Diallo, M. An evaluation of LoRa coverage in Dakar Peninsula. In Proceedings of the 8th IEEE Annual Information Technology, Electronics and Mobile Communication Conference (IEMCON), Vancouver, BC, Canada, 3–5 October 2017; pp. 478–482. [Google Scholar]
- De Almeida, I.B.F.; Chafii, M.; Nimr, A.; Fettweis, G. Alternative chirp spread spectrum techniques for LPWANs. IEEE Trans. Green Commun. Netw. 2021, 5, 1846–1855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thomas, A.; Eldhose, N. Performance evaluation of chirp spread spectrum as used in LoRa physical layer. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International Conference on System, Computation, Automation and Networking (ICSCAN), Pondicherry, India, 29–30 March 2019; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Magrin, D.; Centenaro, M.; Vangelista, L. Performance evaluation of LoRa networks in a smart city scenario. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on communications (ICC), Paris, France, 21–25 May 2017; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Zorbas, D.; Papadopoulos, G.Z.; Maille, P.; Montavont, N.; Douligeris, C. Improving LoRa network capacity using multiple spreading factor configurations. In Proceedings of the 25th IEEE International Conference on Telecommunications (ICT), Saint-Malo, France, 26–28 June 2018; pp. 516–520. [Google Scholar]
- The Things Network. Spreading Factors. Available online: https://www.thethingsnetwork.org/docs/lorawan/spreading-factors/ (accessed on 19 May 2023).
- Sendra, S.; Parra, L.; Jimenez, J.M.; Garcia, L.; Lloret, J. LoRa-based network for water quality monitoring in coastal areas. Mob. Netw. Appl. 2022, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, D.K.; Sobti, R.; Jain, A.; Malik, P.K.; Le, D.N. LoRa based intelligent soil and weather condition monitoring with internet of things for precision agriculture in smart cities. IET Commun. 2022, 16, 604–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Odongo, G.Y.; Musabe, R.; Hanyurwimfura, D.; Bakari, A.D. An efficient LoRa-enabled smart fault detection and monitoring platform for the power distribution system using self-powered IoT devices. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 73403–73420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- LoRa Alliance. What Is LoRaWAN Specification. Available online: https://lora-alliance.org/about-lorawan/ (accessed on 1 June 2023).
- Semtech. Semtech SX1280 Datasheet Rev3.2. Available online: https://www.semtech.com/products/wireless-rf/lora-24ghz/sx1280#download-resources (accessed on 1 June 2023).
- Andersen, F.R.; Ballal, K.D.; Petersen, M.N.; Ruepp, S. Ranging Capabilities of LoRa 2.4 GHz. In Proceedings of the 6th IEEE World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT), New Orleans, LA, USA, 2–16 June 2020; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
- Shafiullah, D.; Vo, T.; Nguyen, P.; Pemen, A. Different smart grid frameworks in context of smart neighborhood: A review. In Proceedings of the 52nd IEEE International Universities Power Engineering Conference (UPEC), Heraklion, Greece, 28–31 August 2017; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Ahmed, S.; Gondal, T.M.; Adil, M.; Malik, S.A.; Qureshi, R. A survey on communication technologies in smart grid. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE PES GTD Grand International Conference and Exposition Asia (GTD Asia), Bangkok, Thailand, 19–23 March 2019; pp. 7–12. [Google Scholar]
- Bernstein, D.J. ChaCha, a Variant of Salsa20. In Proceedings of the Workshop Record of SASC; Citeseer: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2008; Volume 8, pp. 3–5. Available online: https://www.google.com.hk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiDtbLb4_aAAxWoaPUHHf19AG8QFnoECA8QAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcr.yp.to%2Fchacha%2Fchacha-20080120.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1JHg0bKSsK9puKtgCN5GQr&opi=89978449 (accessed on 25 July 2023).
- Bernstein, D.J. The Poly1305-AES message-authentication code. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Fast Software Encryption; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2005; pp. 32–49. [Google Scholar]
- Langley, A.; Chang, W.; Mavrogiannopoulos, N.; Strombergson, J.; Josefsson, S. RFC 7905: ChaCha20-Poly1305 Cipher Suites for Transport Layer Security (TLS); Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF): Fremont, CA, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Bursztein, E. Speeding Up and Strengthening HTTPS Connections for Chrome on Android. Available online: https://security.googleblog.com/2014/04/speeding-up-and-strengthening-https.html (accessed on 17 August 2023).
- Kane, L.; Chen, J.J.; Thomas, R.; Liu, V.; McKague, M. Security and performance in IoT: A balancing act. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 121969–121986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kane, L.; Liu, V.; McKague, M.; Walker, G.R. Network Architecture and Authentication Scheme for LoRa 2.4 GHz Smart Homes. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 93212–93230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Verhoeven, R.; Kempinski, S.; Meratnia, N. Performance Evaluation of Wi-Fi Halow, NB-IoT and LoRa for Smart City Applications. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM International Symposium on Performance Evaluation of Wireless Ad Hoc, Sensor, & Ubiquitous Networks, Montreal, QC, Canada, 24–28 October 2022; pp. 17–24. [Google Scholar]
- Taramit, H.; Camacho-Escoto, J.J.; Gomez, J.; Orozco-Barbosa, L.; Haqiq, A. Accurate Analytical Model and Evaluation of Wi-Fi Halow Based IoT Networks under a Rayleigh-Fading Channel with Capture. Mathematics 2022, 10, 952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taramit, H.; Orozco-Barbosa, L.; Haqiq, A.; Escoto, J.J.C.; Gomez, J. Load-Aware Channel Allocation for IEEE 802.11ah-Based Networks. IEEE Access 2023, 11, 24484–24496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Raeesi, O.; Pirskanen, J.; Hazmi, A.; Levanen, T.; Valkama, M. Performance evaluation of IEEE 802.11ah and its restricted access window mechanism. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Communications Workshops (ICC), Sydney, Australia, 10–14 June 2014; pp. 460–466. [Google Scholar]
- Šljivo, A.; Kerkhove, D.; Tian, L.; Famaey, J.; Munteanu, A.; Moerman, I.; Hoebeke, J.; De Poorter, E. Performance evaluation of IEEE 802.11ah networks with high-throughput bidirectional traffic. Sensors 2018, 18, 325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aleksandrovs-Moisejs, D.; Ipatovs, A.; Grabs, E.; Rjazanovs, D. Evaluation of a Long-Distance IEEE 802.11ah Wireless Technology in Linux Using Docker Containers. Elektron. Elektrotechnika 2022, 28, 71–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brenes, J.A.; Marín-Raventós, G. When one wireless technology is not enough: A network architecture for precision agriculture using LoRa, Wi-Fi, and LTE. In Proceedings of the Intelligent Sustainable Systems: Selected Papers of WorldS4 2021; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2022; Volume 1, pp. 103–112. [Google Scholar]
- Badihi, B.; Del Carpio, L.F.; Amin, P.; Larmo, A.; Lopez, M.; Denteneer, D. Performance evaluation of IEEE 802.11ah actuators. In Proceedings of the 83rd IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring), Nanjing, China, 15–18 May 2016; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
- Ahmed, N.; Rahman, H.; Hussain, M.I. A comparison of 802.11ah and 802.15.4 for IoT. Ict Express 2016, 2, 100–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soares, S.M.; Carvalho, M.M. Throughput analytical modeling of IEEE 802.11ah wireless networks. In Proceedings of the 16th IEEE Annual Consumer Communications & Networking Conference (CCNC), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 11–14 January 2019; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar]
- Dugan, J.; Elliott, S.; Mah, B.A.; Poskanzer, J.; Prabhu, K. iPerf—The Ultimate Speed Test Tool for TCP, UDP and SCTP. Available online: https://iperf.fr/ (accessed on 2 May 2023).
- ISO/IEC 11770-2:2018 IT; Security Techniques—Key Management—Part 2: Mechanisms Using Symmetric Techniques. International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018.
- IEEE Std 802.11ah-2016 (Amendment to IEEE Std 802.11-2016, as Amended by IEEE Std 802.11ai-2016); IEEE Standard for Information technology–Telecommunications and information exchange between systems—Local and metropolitan area networks–Specific requirements—Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications Amendment 2: Sub 1 GHz License Exempt Operation; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2017; pp. 1–594. [CrossRef]
- Petajajarvi, J.; Mikhaylov, K.; Roivainen, A.; Hanninen, T.; Pettissalo, M. On the coverage of LPWANs: Range evaluation and channel attenuation model for LoRa technology. In Proceedings of the 14th IEEE International Conference on its Telecommunications (ITST), Copenhagen, Denmark, 2–4 December 2015; pp. 55–59. [Google Scholar]
- Seye, M.R.; Ngom, B.; Gueye, B.; Diallo, M. A study of LoRa coverage: Range evaluation and channel attenuation model. In Proceedings of the 1st IEEE International Conference on Smart Cities and Communities (SCCIC), Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, 24–26 July 2018; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar]
- Sanchez-Iborra, R.; Sanchez-Gomez, J.; Ballesta-Viñas, J.; Cano, M.D.; Skarmeta, A.F. Performance evaluation of LoRa considering scenario conditions. Sensors 2018, 18, 772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuzlu, M.; Pipattanasomporn, M.; Rahman, S. Communication network requirements for major smart grid applications in HAN, NAN and WAN. Comput. Netw. 2014, 67, 74–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tightiz, L.; Yang, H. A comprehensive review on IoT protocols’ features in smart grid communication. Energies 2020, 13, 2762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gungor, V.C.; Sahin, D.; Kocak, T.; Ergut, S.; Buccella, C.; Cecati, C.; Hancke, G.P. A survey on smart grid potential applications and communication requirements. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2012, 9, 28–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
1 MHz | 2 MHz | 4 MHz | |
---|---|---|---|
50 m | 10.16 | 8.74 | 8.38 |
100 m | 10.20 | 8.66 | 8.66 |
200 m | 10.40 | 11.16 | 9.50 |
500 m | 60.63 | 56.15 | 75.52 |
700 m | 116.62 | 96.05 | 71.98 |
1000 m | 95.53 | N/A | N/A |
50 m | 100 m | 200 m | |
---|---|---|---|
UDP | 0 | 0 | 0.21 |
ICMP 64 Bytes | 0 | 0 | 10 |
ICMP 128 Bytes | 0 | 0 | 0 |
ICMP 255 Bytes | 0 | 0 | 5 |
Packet Size: | 64 Bytes | 128 Bytes | 255 Bytes | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Security: | AEAD | No Sec | AEAD | No Sec | AEAD | No Sec | |
SF7 | 500-4/5 | 17.067 | 17.067 | 18.963 | 18.963 | 20.400 | 20.400 |
500-4/6 | 15.059 | 15.059 | 16.000 | 16.000 | 17.143 | 17.143 | |
500-4/7 | 13.128 | 13.128 | 13.838 | 14.027 | 14.783 | 14.783 | |
500-4/8 | 11.636 | 11.636 | 12.337 | 12.337 | 12.994 | 12.994 | |
250-4/5 | 8.678 | 8.678 | 9.481 | 9.481 | 10.200 | 10.200 | |
250-4/6 | 7.420 | 7.420 | 8.063 | 8.063 | 8.571 | 8.571 | |
250-4/7 | 6.481 | 6.564 | 6.966 | 6.966 | 7.391 | 7.391 | |
250-4/8 | 5.818 | 5.818 | 6.169 | 6.169 | 6.497 | 6.497 | |
125-4/5 | 4.339 | 4.339 | 4.741 | 4.763 | 5.100 | 5.100 | |
125-4/6 | 3.710 | 3.737 | 4.031 | 4.031 | 4.286 | 4.286 | |
125-4/7 | 3.261 | 3.261 | 3.495 | 3.495 | 3.696 | 3.696 | |
125-4/8 | 2.909 | 2.909 | 3.084 | 3.084 | 3.248 | 3.254 | |
SF8 | 500-4/5 | 9.481 | 9.481 | 10.779 | 10.779 | 11.525 | 11.525 |
500-4/6 | 8.127 | 8.127 | 9.143 | 9.143 | 9.668 | 9.714 | |
500-4/7 | 7.211 | 7.211 | 7.938 | 7.938 | 8.361 | 8.361 | |
500-4/8 | 6.400 | 6.400 | 7.014 | 7.014 | 7.365 | 7.365 | |
250-4/5 | 4.741 | 4.741 | 5.389 | 5.389 | 5.763 | 5.763 | |
250-4/6 | 4.096 | 4.096 | 4.571 | 4.571 | 4.846 | 4.846 | |
250-4/7 | 3.580 | 3.580 | 3.969 | 3.984 | 4.189 | 4.189 | |
250-4/8 | 3.200 | 3.200 | 3.519 | 3.519 | 3.682 | 3.682 | |
125-4/5 | 2.370 | 2.370 | 2.695 | 2.695 | 2.881 | 2.885 | |
125-4/6 | 2.048 | 2.048 | 2.291 | 2.291 | 2.426 | 2.426 | |
125-4/7 | 1.796 | 1.796 | 1.988 | 1.988 | 2.094 | 2.094 | |
125-4/8 | 1.600 | 1.600 | 1.759 | 1.759 | 1.843 | 1.843 | |
SF9 | 500-4/5 | 5.224 | 5.224 | 6.059 | 6.059 | 6.518 | 6.518 |
500-4/6 | 4.531 | 4.531 | 5.146 | 5.146 | 5.499 | 5.499 | |
500-4/7 | 4.000 | 4.000 | 4.472 | 4.472 | 4.744 | 4.744 | |
500-4/8 | 3.556 | 3.556 | 3.954 | 3.969 | 4.180 | 4.180 | |
250-4/5 | 2.626 | 2.626 | 3.021 | 3.021 | 3.259 | 3.259 | |
250-4/6 | 2.265 | 2.265 | 2.573 | 2.573 | 2.749 | 2.749 | |
250-4/7 | 1.992 | 1.992 | 2.241 | 2.241 | 2.375 | 2.375 | |
250-4/8 | 1.784 | 1.784 | 1.981 | 1.981 | 2.090 | 2.090 | |
125-4/5 | 1.313 | 1.313 | 1.513 | 1.513 | 1.631 | 1.631 | |
125-4/6 | 1.133 | 1.133 | 1.286 | 1.286 | 1.375 | 1.375 | |
125-4/7 | 0.998 | 0.998 | 1.119 | 1.119 | 1.187 | 1.187 | |
125-4/8 | 0.890 | 0.890 | 0.991 | 0.991 | 1.046 | 1.046 | |
SF10 | 500-4/5 | 2.926 | 2.926 | 3.325 | 3.325 | 3.548 | 3.554 |
500-4/6 | 2.547 | 2.547 | 2.837 | 2.837 | 2.996 | 2.996 | |
500-4/7 | 2.246 | 2.246 | 2.473 | 2.473 | 2.589 | 2.592 | |
500-4/8 | 2.008 | 2.016 | 2.188 | 2.188 | 2.282 | 2.282 | |
250-4/5 | 1.467 | 1.467 | 1.662 | 1.662 | 1.777 | 1.777 | |
250-4/6 | 1.270 | 1.274 | 1.418 | 1.418 | 1.499 | 1.499 | |
250-4/7 | 1.123 | 1.123 | 1.235 | 1.235 | 1.296 | 1.296 | |
250-4/8 | 1.006 | 1.006 | 1.095 | 1.095 | 1.142 | 1.142 | |
125-4/5 | 0.734 | 0.734 | 0.832 | 0.832 | 0.889 | 0.889 | |
125-4/6 | 0.636 | 0.636 | 0.709 | 0.709 | 0.749 | 0.749 | |
125-4/7 | 0.562 | 0.562 | 0.618 | 0.618 | 0.648 | 0.648 | |
125-4/8 | 0.503 | 0.503 | 0.548 | 0.548 | 0.571 | 0.571 | |
SF11 | 500-4/5 | 1.556 | 1.556 | 1.781 | 1.781 | 1.950 | 1.950 |
500-4/6 | 1.354 | 1.354 | 1.522 | 1.522 | 1.646 | 1.648 | |
500-4/7 | 1.199 | 1.199 | 1.328 | 1.328 | 1.426 | 1.426 | |
500-4/8 | 1.076 | 1.076 | 1.177 | 1.177 | 1.256 | 1.256 | |
250-4/5 | 0.778 | 0.779 | 0.891 | 0.891 | 0.975 | 0.976 | |
250-4/6 | 0.677 | 0.677 | 0.761 | 0.761 | 0.824 | 0.824 | |
250-4/7 | 0.600 | 0.600 | 0.664 | 0.664 | 0.713 | 0.713 | |
250-4/8 | 0.538 | 0.538 | 0.589 | 0.589 | 0.628 | 0.628 | |
125-4/5 | 0.328 | 0.328 | 0.378 | 0.378 | 0.408 | 0.408 | |
125-4/6 | 0.283 | 0.283 | 0.322 | 0.322 | 0.344 | 0.344 | |
125-4/7 | 0.250 | 0.250 | 0.280 | 0.280 | 0.297 | 0.297 | |
125-4/8 | 0.223 | 0.223 | 0.248 | 0.248 | 0.261 | 0.261 | |
SF12 | 500-4/5 | 0.830 | 0.831 | 0.960 | 0.960 | 1.058 | 1.058 |
500-4/6 | 0.724 | 0.724 | 0.821 | 0.821 | 0.895 | 0.895 | |
500-4/7 | 0.642 | 0.642 | 0.717 | 0.717 | 0.775 | 0.775 | |
500-4/8 | 0.577 | 0.577 | 0.637 | 0.637 | 0.683 | 0.684 | |
250-4/5 | 0.366 | 0.366 | 0.416 | 0.416 | 0.452 | 0.452 | |
250-4/6 | 0.318 | 0.318 | 0.355 | 0.355 | 0.382 | 0.382 | |
250-4/7 | 0.281 | 0.281 | 0.309 | 0.309 | 0.330 | 0.330 | |
250-4/8 | 0.251 | 0.251 | 0.274 | 0.274 | 0.291 | 0.291 | |
125-4/5 | 0.183 | 0.183 | 0.208 | 0.208 | 0.226 | 0.226 | |
125-4/6 | 0.159 | 0.159 | 0.177 | 0.177 | 0.191 | 0.191 | |
125-4/7 | 0.140 | 0.140 | 0.154 | 0.154 | 0.165 | 0.165 | |
125-4/8 | 0.126 | 0.126 | 0.137 | 0.137 | 0.145 | 0.145 |
SF7 | SF8 | SF9 | SF10 | SF11 | SF12 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
64 Bytes | 125-4/5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
125-4/6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
125-4/7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | |
125-4/8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
250-4/5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | |
250-4/6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
250-4/7 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
250-4/8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
500-4/5 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
500-4/6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
500-4/7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
500-4/8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
128 Bytes | 125-4/5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
125-4/6 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | |
125-4/7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | |
125-4/8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | |
250-4/5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 0 | |
250-4/6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | |
250-4/7 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | |
250-4/8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | |
500-4/5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | |
500-4/6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | |
500-4/7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
500-4/8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | |
255 Bytes | 125-4/5 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 10 | 0 | 0 |
125-4/6 | 15 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | |
125-4/7 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | |
125-4/8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | |
250-4/5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 0 | |
250-4/6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 0 | |
250-4/7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 0 | |
250-4/8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | |
500-4/5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 | |
500-4/6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | |
500-4/7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | |
500-4/8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
Bandwidth | MCS | Modulation | Theoretical Data Rate (Kbps) [49] | Actual Data Rate (Kbps) | Actual vs. Theoretical Data Rate % |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 MHz | 7 | 64-QAM | 3000 | 2140 | 71% |
2 MHz | 7 | 64-QAM | 6500 | 4393 | 68% |
4 MHz | 7 | 64-QAM | 13,500 | 4680 | 35% |
Use Case | Bandwidth | Payload Size | Latency | Wi-Fi HaLow | Wi-Fi n | LoRa |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Advanced Metering Infrastructure including Electricity Meter Reading and Pricing Updates [53,54] | 10–500 Kbps | 100–2400 bytes | 15 s–4 h | Suitable | Unsuitable | Suitable |
Firmware Updates [53] | Unspecified | 400–2000 kB | <2 min–7 days | Suitable | Unsuitable | Suitable |
Distribution Automation [53] | 100 Kbps–10 Mbps | 25–1000 bytes | <4 s | Unsuitable | Unsuitable | Unsuitable |
Home Energy Management System/Home Automation [53,54,55] | 9.6–56 Kbps | 10–100 bytes | 2–15 s | Suitable | Suitable | Suitable |
Electric Vehicle to Grid and Charging [53,54,55] | 9.6–56 Kbps | 100–255 bytes | <2 s–5 min | Suitable | Suitable | Suitable |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Kane, L.; Liu, V.; McKague, M.; Walker, G. An Experimental Field Comparison of Wi-Fi HaLow and LoRa for the Smart Grid. Sensors 2023, 23, 7409. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23177409
Kane L, Liu V, McKague M, Walker G. An Experimental Field Comparison of Wi-Fi HaLow and LoRa for the Smart Grid. Sensors. 2023; 23(17):7409. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23177409
Chicago/Turabian StyleKane, Luke, Vicky Liu, Matthew McKague, and Geoffrey Walker. 2023. "An Experimental Field Comparison of Wi-Fi HaLow and LoRa for the Smart Grid" Sensors 23, no. 17: 7409. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23177409