search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
FEATURE Sensors


Direct sensor-to-satellite communications revolutionises IoT potential


Low-power satellite connectivity and low-price data will enable massive growth in IoT markets, instigating huge opportunities across multiple business verticals, including agriculture, asset tracking, logistics, utilities, energy infrastructure and maritime, writes Eric Hewitson, Business Development Manager at Wyld Networks


K


evin Ashton, the British technology pioneer who fi rst coined the phrase “the Internet of Things” to describe the network connecting objects in the


physical world to the Internet, said: “What the Internet of Things is really about is information technology that can gather its own information. Often what it does with that information is not tell a human being something, it [just] does something.” His vision was that by using data gathered without any help from humans, we would be able to track and count everything and greatly reduce waste and cost. While early predictions about the number of IoT devices were over-optimistic, IoT technology has been steadily fi nding its way into many aspects of our lives and delivering the benefi ts that Ashton foresaw. But successful IoT projects need to balance the cost of sensor, connectivity and data platforms against the value of data to end users and applications. These sometimes highly complex calculations start with determining the parameters of key elements such as distance, data rate, security and, perhaps most critically, power consumption. This is particularly the case for remote IoT, where success can be determined by the ability to deploy and leave sensors off the grid – battery- or solar-powered things that can be left in place for many years on low power, chirping data back to the cloud. But there’s the rub. It comes down to the question of connectivity. It’s no good having a low-power soil moisture sensor in a fi eld if there is no connection; estimates suggest that only 15% of the world’s surface has terrestrial connectivity. Refl ecting this,


46 July/August 2022 | Automation


Inmarsat research recently revealed that 75% of the IoT decision makers are struggling to launch their IoT projects due to connectivity issues. Additionally there is a perception that remote IoT requires high power, making it impractical for the widespread deployment of sensors needed to digitise the world, aff ordably and quickly. To establish a truly connected planet we need ubiquitous coverage for massive IoT deployments. The only way to do this practically is to complement terrestrial networks with satellite connectivity. As a result, there is an accelerating race to space, and the IoT is undergoing a shift in scale as it moves to global low-power connectivity via satellites.


Satellite connections for the IoT can be


delivered via low earth orbit (LEO), mid- earth orbit (MEO) and geosynchronous or geostationary earth orbit (GEO) satellites. With few commercial MEO constellations available, most IoT connectivity is currently provided through either GEO or LEO satellites.


GEO satellites are expensive to build, launch, operate and generally require rather expensive hardware with high power consumption – the grid, large solar installations, generators or battery equipment. In contrast, LEO satellites are more aff ordable to build, launch and maintain and can be reached with very low power, such as two AA lithium batteries or a small solar cell, and the hardware is small and inexpensive.


Cost vs benefit There is a danger that the cost of providing IoT services will be greater than the value the service it delivers. This is especially true


for the collection of small, low-value data such as temperature, humidity, water level, soil moisture, etc. Not that this data is unimportant, but that it must be more valuable than the cost of its collection and processing. End users are looking at cost per message or cost per kilobyte and making decisions on the most commercially-viable models. GEO satellites have a place in delivering higher data volumes and faster more-actionable data, but there is a new opportunity for LEO satellites to off er low data rate IoT connectivity for 100% of the Earth’s surface at low cost. Perceptions of satellites as a costly, luxury connectivity method are changing as the cost per kilobyte decreases in line with the increased need to digitise. So, whether data is nice to have or crucial, and needed for long-term analysis or short-term critical functions, satellite IoT is radically expanding the possibility of options. From identifying leakage of an oil pipeline to


the impact of low soil moisture levels, collecting data from remote locations is delivering compelling value propositions. On a day-to- day basis, knowing that a system is working and gathering its critical data points via satellite could eliminate the need for site visits and “truck roll” by a maintenance engineer. From that perspective, satellite IoT clearly provides good value and return on investment. Low-power satellite connectivity and low-price data will enable massive growth in IoT markets, instigating huge opportunities across multiple business verticals, including agriculture, asset tracking, logistics, utilities, energy infrastructure and maritime. Satellite IoT is an important step in the global expansion of the IoT. Direct sensor-to-satellite communications revolutionises IoT potential through this aff ordable ubiquitous connectivity for remote areas.


automationmagazine.co.uk


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64