LoPy Super Twin Pack not working
-
Hello,
I have a LoPy Super Twin Pack fom Pycom, but until now it isn't very super.
I am a beginner in LoRaWan, so I followed all the instructions (I guess), but I'm afraid I do something wrong..I have connected the external antenna to the LoRa antenna connector next to the LED.
I haven't changed anything else (no dipswitches, no jumper cables, nothing), so everything is in the original state and properly built in the PyCase.
Until now, I haven't been able to sucsesfully communicate between the two devices.The only successfull things were:
- firmware-upgrade to 1.6.7.b1
- connection to my home router with the scripts on https://docs.pycom.io/pycom_esp32/library/network.WLAN.html
- many file transfers and soft reboots :-(
The things I have tried and did not work are:
LoPy to LoPy; connect two nodes via LoRa:
(https://docs.pycom.io/pycom_esp32/pycom_esp32/tutorial/includes/lopy-to-lopy.html)LoRa Nano-Gateway; connect 2 LoPys (nodes) to 1 LoPy in Nano-Gateway mode:
(https://docs.pycom.io/pycom_esp32/pycom_esp32/tutorial/includes/lora-nano-gateway.html)LoPy Nano-Gateway Extended (Timeout and Retry)
https://forum.pycom.io/topic/526/lopy-nano-gateway-extended-timeout-and-retryLoRaWAN Nano Gateway with TTN example:
(https://forum.pycom.io/topic/810/new-firmware-release-1-6-7-b1-lorawan-nano-gateway-with-ttn-example)
(https://github.com/pycom/pycom-libraries/tree/master/examples/lorawan-nano-gateway)The LoRaWAN Nano Gateway with TTN example results in infinite reboots and a crashdump all the time.
I have posted this in the forum on: https://forum.pycom.io/topic/810/new-firmware-release-1-6-7-b1-lorawan-nano-gateway-with-ttn-example/79With all those example scripts, I haben't been able to:
- communicate over LoRa between 2 devices (message failed, nothing at all, etc.)
- connetc a lopy nano gateway to TTN (error messages, crashdump, reboot)
Can anyone please help me?
Gerke
-
@stef
Hi Stef,
This is working. Thanks
-
lora.init(mode=LoRa.LORA, frequency=868000000, power_mode=LoRa.ALWAYS_ON , tx_power=14, bandwidth=LoRa.BW_125KHZ, sf=7, preamble=8, coding_rate=LoRa.CODING_4_5, tx_iq=False, rx_iq=False)
try with sf=7 - 8 -9 , nothing change
the code for sending is really simple :
string='123.....4' (64 char)
s.send(string)
-> Okstring='123.....5' (65 char)
s.send(string)
-> nothing on the other side ( just 'b' )
-
@stef said in LoPy Super Twin Pack not working:
Hi all ,
This trick saved my day ..By the way , got another problem .
When sending Data , i cannot send more than 64 characters at once . (don't know if they are not sent or not received..)
Try changing parameters in Lora.init , but nothing is working.
Is there something I missed ??thank's in advance.
It depends on SF value. What is the Spreading Factot you are using?
-
Hi all ,
This trick saved my day ..By the way , got another problem .
When sending Data , i cannot send more than 64 characters at once . (don't know if they are not sent or not received..)
Try changing parameters in Lora.init , but nothing is working.
Is there something I missed ??thank's in advance.
-
@bucknall
Great. I'll be lookinh forward to the new LoRaWAN Nano-Gateway TTN example
-
@Clemens & @gerkez apologies for the confusion here, there was a bug in the last firmware release, where the spread factor (sf) was not being initialised by default unless it was passed into the constructor as an argument;
lora.init(mode=LoRa.LORA, sf=7)
I will also be doing a LoRaWAN Nano-Gateway TTN example next week with my fortnightly "Alex's Corner", hopefully that should get you up and running!
Thanks!
-
Hi Clemens,
Thanks a lot for your reply. It helped me a lot.
I have implemented the solution in https://forum.pycom.io/topic/770/lora-receiving-only-b/ and now communication between 2 lopy's (LoPy to LoPy and LoRa Nano-Gateway) works great.
Now I can focus on getting the nano-gateway to TTN working.Thanks again
Gerke
-
I fear the documentation is not up to date after one of the last firmware releases, see https://forum.pycom.io/topic/770/lora-receiving-only-b/ I stumbled on the same probmes amd must say it's an absolute no go to to change such elementary things without adjusting documentation afterwards.