How To Triple The Range of LoRa

© 2019 Haystack Technologies, Inc.

 Executive Summary
• Haystack is introducing a new DASH7 implementation for LoRa: XR Mode.

• Using software-only enhancements, DASH7 XR Mode for LoRa provides 2-3x range
improvements over comparable observed LoRaWAN performance at ground level while
preserving multiple year endpoint battery life.

• XR Mode utilizes 2-way LDPC Error Correction as well as Automated Receipt Response for
guaranteed message delivery. Shorter packet sizes and lower data rates than are typically
deployed with DASH7 are also utilized.

• XR Mode running at a higher data rate can achieve the same QoS as LoRaWAN running at a
much lower data rate. This translates to 10-20x the network density and 10-20x the battery
life vs. LoRaWAN, for a given QoS.

• Private beta testing for XR Mode is now underway.

2
 Background
• Some LoRa range test results make aggressive claims (“Up to 30 miles!”) which
often do not match real world customer results. These marketing claims are
typically based on “best case” outdoor testing environments and may result in
unhappy customers and harm long-term adoption.

• In comparison, testing LoRa at ground level yields very different results from
testing conducted in such ideal outdoor environments. Yet some Haystack
customer requirements include both gateways and endpoints deployed at or
near ground level.

• To improve range performance at all levels, but in particular at ground level, we

spent the last six months optimizing our OpenTag firmware stack for extended
range and reduced packet error rates over LoRa. The result: DASH7 XR Mode.

3
 DASH7™

Technical Features
‣ 2-way LPWAN networking software

‣ Works across many different LPWAN radios

OSI Layer
‣ Ultra-low power (years on coin cell)
7 Application UDP + OIC + NDEF + iOS, etc.

‣ Low latency (<2 sec.) queries

6 Presentation
‣ Broadcast, multicast, P2P messaging
5 Session DASH7 Core

‣ Two-way error correction
4 Transport low power
low latency
‣ Message delivery confirmation
3 Network low cost
‣ Real-time GPS, A-GPS support
2 Data Link
‣ Indoor location via RSSI, TDOA, others
1 Physical (Radio) LoRa, Other Options
‣ AES128 private-key + public-key crypto

‣ OTA firmware updates, key refreshes

‣ Smart contract support at endpoint

DASH7: The Most Advanced
‣ Invented by Haystack! Networking Stack for Low Power
Wide Area Networks

4
 LoRa®

Basic Attributes
‣ Popular low power, wide area networking radio
from Semtech

‣ Promises multi-year battery life and multi-

kilometer range

For more information on LoRa:

‣ Mostly intended for use in unlicensed spectrum https://www.semtech.com/lora/

(915 MHz in USA)

‣ Low cost (~$3 in volume today)

‣ Modules available from Murata, Microchip, ST

Micro, others
LoRa is a radio, not a protocol.
To exploit its true potential and performance,
it requires an advanced protocol stack

5
Today: Two DASH7 Options For LoRa
Option 1: DASH7 LAN Mode Option 2: DASH7 XR Mode
Optimal for usage with most software & business logic. 
 Optimized for delivering LPWAN pub-sub messaging at
Includes fully bidirectional data transfers, point-to-point, maximum theoretical range.
broadcasting, and real-time (asynchronous) communication.
Typ. Ground-to-Ground Range: Light-Urban 0.20 miles / 0.33 km 0.64 miles / 1 km Typ. Ground-to-Ground Range: Light-Urban
Typical Data Rate 16 kbps 1.1 kbps Typical Data Rate
Typical “Real World” Link Budget 130 dB 153 dB Typical “Real World” Link Budget
Endpoint Default Operation Event-driven (asynchronous) Periodic Msg (synchronous) Endpoint Default Operation
LDPC Error Correction (Coming Soon) Yes LDPC Error Correction
Message Delivery Confirmation Yes Yes Message Delivery Confirmation
Send Commands, Queries To Endpoint Yes Limited Functionality Send Commands, Queries To Endpoint
Real-Time Queries to Endpoint Yes No Real-Time Queries to Endpoint
Packet Size Variable: up to 256 bytes Fixed: 16 bytes Packet Size
Multi-Year Battery Life Yes Yes Multi-Year Battery Life
GPS-based Geolocation (Low Power) Yes: OTA A-GPS Yes: Preloaded A-GPS GPS-based Geolocation (Low Power)
Geofencing Real-Time, Low Power Beacon Geofencing
Broadcast, Multicast Messaging Yes No Broadcast, Multicast Messaging
OTA Firmware Updates Yes No OTA Firmware Updates

6
Today: Two DASH7 Options For LoRa
Option 1: DASH7 LAN Mode Option 2: DASH7 XR Mode
Optimal for usage with most software & business logic. 
 Optimized for delivering LPWAN pub-sub messaging at
Includes fully bidirectional data transfers, point-to-point, maximum theoretical range.
broadcasting, and real-time (asynchronous) communication.
Typ. Ground-to-Ground Range: Light-Urban 0.20 miles / 0.33 km 0.64 miles / 1 km Typ. Ground-to-Ground Range: Light-Urban
Typical Data Rate 16 kbps 1.1 kbps Typical Data Rate
Typical “Real World” Link Budget 130 dB 153 dB Typical “Real World” Link Budget
Endpoint Default Operation Event-driven (asynchronous) Periodic Msg (synchronous) Endpoint Default Operation
LDPC Error Correction (Coming Soon) Yes LDPC Error Correction
Message Delivery Confirmation Yes Yes Message Delivery Confirmation
Send Commands, Queries To Endpoint Yes Limited Functionality Send Commands, Queries To Endpoint
Real-Time Queries to Endpoint Yes No Real-Time Queries to Endpoint
Packet Size Variable: up to 256 bytes Fixed: 16 bytes Packet Size
Multi-Year Battery Life Yes Yes Multi-Year Battery Life
GPS-based Geolocation (Low Power) Yes: OTA A-GPS Yes: Preloaded A-GPS GPS-based Geolocation (Low Power)
Geofencing Real-Time, Low Power Beacon Geofencing
Broadcast, Multicast Messaging Yes No Broadcast, Multicast Messaging
OTA Firmware Updates Yes No OTA Firmware Updates

7
 DASH7 XR Mode for LoRa
• XR: “eXtended Range” DASH7 protocol dBm
- 140 How is this gain possible? 

• Runs concurrently with DASH7 LAN Mode XR Mode algorithms come from very
recent technology for communicating
with probes in deep space.
• Improves real-world signal propagation over
-132.5
LoRaWAN by 10-13 dB (10-20x)
• Retains essential features like real-time GPS
location and multi-year battery life -125

• Software-based approach:

No HW or antenna modifications required -117.5

• XR Mode delivers the longest range

connectivity for battery-powered LoRa
- 110
devices in the world today LoRaWAN DASH7 LAN DASH7 XR
Observed Sensitivity @ 1kbps

8
 XR Mode: Shorter Packet Lengths
• We reconfigured DASH7 frame
from the conventional, variable size XR Mode 16 Byte Frame
(up to 256 bytes), to a fixed size of
16 bytes. Subnet Forward
Info CRC8
• Most LPWANs use small packets, Encrypted
Link
so we picked a size that gives the Info
Tokenized ID
best efficiency for our deep space Data
 Data Payload Data

ID CRC8
error correction algorithm.
• The packet is small, but it is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
sufficient for geolocation or sensor
data, and it can support strong
cryptography.
9
 XR Mode: Lower Data Rate, Greater Range
• Basic Truth 1: lower data rate = more energy per bit = longer range
• Basic Truth 2: lower data rate = longer transmission = device drains more power
• We observed that roughly 1 kbps is the best data rate trade-off (using LoRa) for achieving
maximum range in an LPWAN device with multi-year battery requirement.
‣ DASH7 LAN Mode uses 16 kbps (LoRa SF7, 500 kHz)
‣ XR Mode uses 1.1 kbps (LoRa SF11, 500 kHz, + Haystack LDPC encoding)
• We observed a range improvement of XR Mode vs LAN Mode
‣ 3x: Ground-to-Ground with obstacles (extreme non-line-of-sight)
‣ 6x: Elevated antenna to ground endpoint, with obstacles (moderate non-line-of-sight)
‣ >20x: Line of Sight

10
 XR Mode: More Efficient than LoRaWAN
• Basic Truth 1: lower data rate = more energy per bit = longer range EMSG = TPKT (PTX + PRX) * XC
TPKT Packet Time-on-Air
PTX TX Power
• Basic Truth 2: lower data rate = longer transmission = device drains PRX RX Power
more power XC Cumulative probability of error
EMSG Energy of message
• In order to determine energy use to send a message, we need to
LoRaWAN DR0
establish a baseline QoS. In this case, it is 1% PER (packet loss) at 
 TPKT 1254 ms
146 dB link budget. PTX 412.5 mW (@ 20 dBm)
PRX 42.9 mW
XC 1.42
• We observed that XR Mode performs significantly better than LoRaWAN EMSG 811 mJ
at any data rate. As result, if we set equal QoS, XR Mode is 22 times DASH7 XR Mode
more energy efficient than the longest-range LoRaWAN Mode. TPKT 194 ms
PTX 145.2 mW (@ 14 dBm)
‣ “LoRaWAN DR0” | 150 bps | -126 dBm @ PER 30% | 811 mJ per msg PRX 42.9 mW
XC 1.0
‣ XR Mode | 1074 bps | - 132 dBm @ PER 1% | 36.5 mJ per msg EMSG 36.5 mJ

11
The greatest advancement

DASH7 XR Mode brings is its


error correction technology.

12
Two Types of LPWAN Error Correction
1. Forward Error Correction (FEC), where sender encodes the data using an error-
correcting code prior to transmission. The additional information (redundancy) added
by the code is used by the receiver to recover the original data in the case of
corruption.

2. Automatic Repeat Request (ARQ), which uses acknowledgements (messages sent by

the receiver indicating that it has correctly received a packet) and timeouts (specified
periods of time allowed to elapse before an acknowledgment is to be received) to
achieve reliable data transmission over an unreliable service. If the sender does not
receive an acknowledgment before the timeout, it usually re-transmits the packet until
the sender receives an acknowledgment or exceeds a predefined number of
retransmissions.

13
 LPWANs & Forward Error Correction
LPWANs operating in unlicensed radio spectrum contend with high levels of noise,
unpredictable network congestion, or ground-level gateway deployments where
terrain and other objects negatively impact range.

Packet Error Rate (PER)
 Forward Error Correction (FEC)


Percentage of packets not successfully received by a
gateway.
If we can find a way to reduce PER, we can increase the
range and/or Quality of Service (QoS) of the network.
FEC is a common remedy to high PER in virtually all
contemporary wireless networking technologies, however
it is strangely crude or non-existent in most LPWAN
standards.

PER = Range QoS

14
LoRa HW Built-in Forward Error Correction
• The LoRa radio includes a forward error correction (FEC) feature in
the radio hardware.

• The downside is that it is an outdated implementation, and it actually

does more harm than good in most usages (including LoRaWAN)

• The technical details of why it’s a poor design are beyond the scope DASH7 XR

of this presentation, but the basics are: FEC

PER
‣ It is 1950’s-era technology. Better technology is available.
‣ LoRaWAN and all known usages of LoRa, apart from DASH7, use
suboptimal configurations of the built-in error correction.
‣ The actual implementation in HW seems to have some bugs that
result in occasional false positives. LoRa HW FEC

No FEC (Best config)
LoRaWAN
• We have replaced LoRa’s HW FEC with our software implementation
of the most advanced FEC technology known to man (as of 2019)
Range

15
 Mobile LPWANs Require Better PER
Robust FEC flattens the PER
We can see that robust error correction not only
Environmental
 curve, making XR Mode more
makes range greater, but it improves the shape of reliable than LoRaWAN when the
Variables
the PER curve. environment is unpredictable
Terrain
• For LPWANs of fixed-position endpoints, the
Diversity
endpoints can be adjusted at time-of-deployment DASH7 XR

Multipath/
to achieve acceptable PER. FEC
Fading

PER
• Mobile LPWAN solutions must contend with Distance from
changing or unpredictable variables. PER must be gateway
acceptable for worst-case scenarios. Distance
• If the environmental variables are unpredictable, traveled/day
you want a PER curve that is as flat as possible. Frequency of LoRa HW FEC

(Best config)
Movement LoRaWAN

Elevation

Range

16
 XR Mode Error Correction

DASH7 XR Mode uses the most advanced FEC in conjunction with ARQ
Forward Error Correction (FEC)
• Haystack proprietary implementation of CCSDS “Orange
Book” Non-binary LDPC coding
‣ Bidirectional: full decoder implemented on cheap ARM
Cortex M0+ endpoint, as well as gateway.
‣ Performance is very close to theoretical limit
(Shannon)
• Engineering challenge was to get it working in such a
RAM & CPU constrained environment.
• Similar tech is used to enable communication with space
probes out in deep space, and also in 5G Cellular.
Automatic Repeat Requests (ARQ)
• Operates via DASH7 Networking Layer
‣ Devices know to retransmit incorrectly received
frames.
‣ Devices will automatically reduce transmission power
to suit the required link budget (saves energy and
creates less interference for others)
• DASH7 ARQ process operates until:
‣ Packet is corrected
‣ Time-out is reached
‣ Shannon limit reached
17
 Important Note:


2
DASH7 Error Correction is Fully Bidirectional
• FEC Encoders are relatively simple to implement. 

FEC Decoders are much harder to implement.
‣ For example, Sony Eltres implements uplink LDPC, but does not
implement a downlink to the endpoint.
‣ SigFox also has optional uplink FEC (Convolutional code)

Way • In order to have guaranteed message delivery, the gateway needs to be

able to send ARQ messages to the endpoint.
‣ Very important for broadcast-with-acknowledgement, which (for
example) Haystack uses to do real-time queries.

• If the endpoint cannot decode FEC, the gateway needs to compensate by

transmitting messages to endpoint with much greater power.
‣ In rare cases this is OK, but most of the time there are regulatory limits
that make it impossible for a gateway to compensate with enough
power to reach the endpoint.

18
We have begun range testing 


XR Mode in the SF Bay Area

and have some results to share

19
 XR Mode Range Test #1
Hardware STMicro Discovery Kit (SX1276) with external dipole

TX Power 17 dBm

Environment Light-Urban (San Mateo, CA), mostly flat

Gateway Elevation 1 m / 3.3 feet

Endpoint Elevation 1 m / 3.3 feet

Results best range: 1 km / .64 miles

Gateway Endpoint

(1m) (1m)

Propagation Fading Profile for Test #1

< 1% LOS (line of sight)
74% NLOS (non-line of sight)
25% Obstructed

20
 XR Mode Range Test #2
Hardware STMicro Discovery Kit (SX1276) with external dipole

TX Power 17 dBm

Environment Light-Urban (San Mateo, CA), subtle rolling terrain

Gateway Elevation 5 m / 16.4 feet

Endpoint Elevation 1 m / 3.3 feet

Results best range: 1.77 km / 1.1 mi

Gateway
(5m) Endpoint

(1m)

Propagation Fading Profile for Test #2

13% LOS (line of sight)
62% NLOS (non-line of sight)
25% Obstructed

21
 XR Mode Range Test #3
Hardware STMicro Discovery Kit (SX1276) with external dipole

TX Power 17 dBm

Environment Hilltop, then over SF bay, then suburban

Gateway Elevation 360 m / 1181 feet

Endpoint Elevation 1 m / 3.3 feet

Results best range: 27.5 km / 17.03 miles

Gateway
(360m)
Endpoint

(1m)

Propagation Fading Profile for Test #3

80% LOS (line of sight)
10% NLOS (non-line of sight)
10% Obstructed

22
 XR Mode Range Test #4
Hardware STMicro Discovery Kit (SX1276) with external dipole

TX Power 17 dBm

Environment Mountain and Valley

Gateway Elevation 1170 m / 3838 feet

Endpoint Elevation 1 m / 3.3 feet

Results best range: 57 km / 35.9 miles

Gateway
(1170m)
Endpoint

(1m)

Propagation Fading Profile for Test #4

93% LOS (line of sight)
6% NLOS (non-line of sight)
1% Obstructed

23
 XR Mode Range Test Conclusions
Gateway Endpoint
 • Increasing gateway elevation has a major
(1m) (1m)
impact in improving range, because it increases
1 km the amount of the link that is Line of Sight.

Gateway • LOS (Line of Sight) portions are shown in green.

(5m) Endpoint

(1m) • The ground itself is a major cause of signal
1.77 km fading (attenuation). This is NLOS (Non-line-of-
Sight) and is shown in orange.
Gateway
(360m) ‣ Visible light (~566,000 GHz) is a much higher
Endpoint

(1m) frequency than LoRa (0.9 GHz).

27.5 km ‣ Lower frequencies can travel further, but they

have a larger wavefront that is more effected
Gateway by the ground.
(1170m)
Endpoint
 • Obstructions cause even more attenuation of
(1m)
the link. Obstructions are shown in red.
57 km

24
 Antenna Design & Placement
• Gateway antenna placement makes a huge difference when optimizing for range.

• Nearly all LPWAN range tests with very long range claims (e.g., 10 miles+) use a
combination of:
1.High-gain antennas located very high above the ground,
2.Data rates that are too low to be suitable for low-power devices
3.Very sophisticated receiver hardware.
‣ Haystack XR Mode outperformed these systems despite being tested with higher data
rate, simple antennas, and low cost, low-power receivers

• Even a small increase in gateway height can make a significant difference in range Option A Option B
performance. In recent testing, the average difference between 2 meters and 5 meters was
nearly 200%. Guess which gateway option results in
better range?
• At these extreme sensitivities, it becomes very important to minimize electromagnetic
noise generated in the electronics. This is an engineering challenge. STMicro’s LoRa dev
kit, for example, is way too noisy. We needed to isolate the antenna in order to conduct
the tests.

25
 Final Thoughts
• Haystack enables not just the longest range LoRa connectivity available today, but also the most
reliable and the lowest power.

• Few LPWAN networking stacks appear to have been designed for mobile use cases as most are
only found being applied to fixed use cases and leave developers to “hack” mobile solutions or
ignore them altogether. LoRa’s utility in mobile use cases is limited without robust two-way error
correction and other features like multicast. Haystack XR Mode is directly targeted to mobile
developers.

• Haystack is offering XR mode demo software to a limited number of beta testers. Register here:
http://bit.ly/XRModebeta.

• Contact us: info@haystacktechnologies.com

26