if you are interested in Laura van
technology you probably have heard of
its competitor called Zig fox today we
will compare the two which one is better
really youtubers here is the guy with a
Swiss accent with a new episode and
fresh ideas around sensors and
microcontrollers
to find out we have to look at all
levels from the transceiver and the
physical protocol via the firmware the
gateways and the network up to the
application and of course we will do
some tests
viewers asked a few times for this
comparison but I always had to refuse it
because we had no seek Fox coverage here
in Switzerland since a few days this has
changed and I have coverage where I live
now it is time for a closer look
I use the Arduino maker Fox 1200 port
for my first cig Fox tests and my old
Laura van tracker for the comparison
with Laura van the first inspection
shows that Arduino uses a cig Fox module
on its board let's look at it it has two
chips on board one from Atmel and one
from skyworks
and here is a simplified diagram the ATA
8520 is a specialized SiC fox chip with
an RF front end a modulator a
demodulator and a microcontroller
including the sick fox firmware the sky
65 378 is an RF switch which connects
the receive and the transmit pin to one
antenna also it has a low noise
amplifier to increase the sensitivity of
the device interesting is the low power
consumption of the Atmel chip in sleep
mode but before we continue the theory I
want to know if it works first I go to
the cig Fox back-end on the Internet
create an account and try to register my
device it wants an ID and a pack
I did not see any individual or
handwritten numbers on or in the box
maybe I have thrown it away with all the
safety regulations fortunately I find
this small sketch which should solve my
issue with Zig Fox all numbers are
already stored on the board cool now I
can copy the two numbers into the back
end and my device is registered to the
network fast and easy
next I compile and upload the example
sketch with the name first configuration
dot Ino it looks like the blink sketch
for sick fox looking at the newest
coverage map shows that my house is not
covered yet but because of my long
distance experiments I know the power of
these LP van devices this is why I go to
our roof for my first tests I have to
enter a message into serial and hit
enter nothing happens
and after about a minute I get the
disappointing message could not get any
response from the server not exactly
what I expected so I took my car to
drive into an area with coverage but the
same crap again
I was not amused and thought that they
probably have problems with the network
because it is still in experimental mode
I called my contact and he congratulated
me for my first messages I was baffled
and we started our investigations and
found out that the Arduino sketch waits
for a downlink message and as the
default option down leaked messages are
disabled in the backend if you go to
device and then click on ID you get all
the information about your device if you
go to the device type and click on the
name you see that no callback is
available you have to enable it if you
want a response or do it like me go to
messages and see if you got mail like
make Ryan a few years ago watching this
old trailer warmed my heart and I forgot
all anger about the lousy documentation
of the Arduino sketch now we know it
works and we can continue in the warm
lap first question what is the output
power of this module let's connect it to
the spectrum analyzer here we see that
it sends three signals on three
different frequencies all about 12.5 DB
M this is a little lower than the 15 to
17 DBM of a Laura module but inside the
specs of the chips second question is
the Arduino antenna any good
it depends in Freire it is definitely
for the us frequency range above 900
megahertz if you put it on the table
it's better but still it's not an ideal
antenna
I hope Arduino is purchase
Department at least got a reasonable
price for this antenna next let's have a
look at the spectrum the SDR receiver
shows three short and very narrowband
signals one after the other each on a
different frequency this is precisely
what we expect from a sig Fox device for
the uplink it uses phase shift keying or
PSK with only 100 Hertz bandwidth and
transports hundred bits per second but
why three signals I just sent one
message as we all know sig Fox and Laura
both work in the 868 megahertz is M band
and can even interfere with each other
as we will later see to reduce the
effect of interference we have two
possibilities transfer the same
information on several frequencies or
transfer the same information at
different times or both together these
methods are called
frequency diversity or time diversity
and this is precisely what happens here
sig Fox transfers the same information
three times and on different frequencies
the Gateway tries to combine the three
packets and find the best information a
third method space diversity would use
two antennas at different locations to
get a better signal this method is not
used here the sig fox module can use any
frequency inside a 192 kilohertz band
there are no distinct channels defined
and PSK is an open and widely used
modulation technology 6 Fox so-called
link budget is around 155 DBM this is
very high and can only be reached by a
very low transmission speed this link
budget more or less defines the reach of
a particular signal let's now compare it
with Laura van there is only one chip on
this module and SX 1278
from Simtek or an RF 96 from hope both
are the same these chips also have an RF
front end a modulator and demodulator
but no MCU and no firmware from earlier
videos we know that these Lora modules
have an output power of 15 DBM the SDR
receiver shows an entirely different
picture a very short but extremely
broadband signal this is an SF 7 signal
which is used in good conditions and SF
12 signal looks like that it takes much
longer and has the same bandwidth and
you can imagine that this signal is more
resistant to interference but it blocks
a channel for a long time and consumes
much more power what happens if a Laura
and a sick fox note are located in the
same area and send the message at the
same time here you see it they interfere
but the sick fox ground station would be
able to use the first message and the
Laura Gateway easily would be able to
eliminate this very narrow band sigfigs
signal both can detect the message this
is diversity technology at works
as we all know Laura gateways support 8
channels and the notes randomly select
one channel for the transmission of each
message its link budget is very similar
to the one of sig Fox so should be the
range you can watch my videos about the
range of Laura including a world record
attempt if you are interested the next
topic is firmware as we saw the cig fox
module already has a firmware inside the
chip for Laura our Arduino or ESP has to
execute all tasks fortunately you get an
Arduino library for Laura one as well as
for cig Fox and as expected the lore of
our library is bigger
because the transmission protocols are
different the gateways or ground
stations are also different laura1
gateways all use the gateway chips from
same tech and the SiC Fox stations are
STR radios similar to my hack RF are
used before Laura bomb gateways monitor
all eight channels in parallel cig fox
ground stations monitor all frequencies
in a range and do not need channels
interestingly is the situation of
openness Laura ban uses proprietary
chips on both sides and an open source
firmware and thick fox uses an open
transmission protocol but proprietary
firmware and private gateway Hardware
both are not really open source if you
have no sig Fox coverage you usually can
forget it
maybe you can purchase a $500 micro note
gateway and place it where you need it
with Laura ban you can build and deploy
your own gateway you even can start with
a $15.00 single channel Laura van get
way you find the video on how to build
it on this channel the next layer is the
network here sick fox has two different
competitors the things network or TTN
with the community network and in a few
countries operators which build their
own laura network let's first compare it
with TT ends community network both
operate a seamless global network TT n
of course is free of charge and sig fox
charges for its service sig fox biggest
asset is its network and they place the
ground stations for maximal coverage TT
n only connects gateways which are built
by the community this is why we have a
lot of gateways in Amsterdam and Zurich
but none in many other places TT n
gateways are not professionally
monitored and can be offline if the
owner decides to do so sig Fox offers a
service level 4
the whole network a few telco companies
built a Laura ban in their countries
they offer a similar service to seek Fox
the only real difference is that sig Fox
is a global company and the telcos
operates in their countries
maybe pricing and coverage are also
different if everything went okay our
message reaches the application layer
this area is not under the control of
sig fox or laura van it is the users
turf both platforms offer services where
we can get the messages either by our
infrastructure or by cloud services the
allowed message volume of both platforms
is minimal laura van offers 25 to 730
uplink messages per day depending on the
speed sig fox offers 140 uplink messages
the numbers for downlink messages are 10
respective for messages per day a small
hint for Laura van users here you can
calculate the transmission time a
message needs the airtime of all
messages in total must not exceed 30
seconds every 24 hours security is
handled differently by both platforms
Laura van is better in this respect if
you need it
I link a video about sig Fox security if
you are interested summarized sig Fox
and Laura van use similar technologies
however the transmission protocols are
entirely different their performance is
very similar sig Fox is designed as a
simple system for simple devices Laura
man tries to be more sophisticated
it offers longer loads default
encryption different spreading factors
eventually even software update
over-the-air laura van is a technology
and sig fox is a network both cannot be
compared directly only TTN or national
riders of a network using the Laura van
technology and can be compared to sick
fox sick fox has one network in 60
countries consisting of strategically
placed ground stations and network
monitoring no roaming is needed national
players like kpn or Swisscom also have
strategically placed gateways and
network monitoring but only local
coverage
ttn has global coverage but no
strategically placed gateways and also
no monitoring both sick fox and laura
van are european concepts the coverage
of other continents is small TTN is the
only community network without any
subscription cost which one is better
for makers who are interested in
low-power van technology TTN is the
right choice
especially if you have no sick Fox
coverage for all others sick fox or the
national players are a good choice
because they offer a service level here
coverage often will be the deciding
factor one more thing we did not talk
about a new killer technology narrowband
IOT which is preferred by telecom
operators because it is only an upgrade
to their current infrastructure of
course as soon as I get coverage here in
Switzerland I will test it I hope this
video was useful or at least interesting
for you if true please consider
supporting the channel to secure its
future existence you find the links in
the description thank you bye
you