1
\$\begingroup\$

We are building a wearable device for low resource settings and are trying to figure out a way to be able to send the data collected over a long range say 5-6 miles at a base station/hospital. What would be the best protocol to use in this case? Also, since this is a wearable device we will have to take into account any possible effects on the body on using a particular kind of communication protocol. Apologies if this is vague. We are still fleshing out the final details and data transmission is a very critical piece which we are grappling with.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellular_network \$\endgroup\$ – Dampmaskin Jun 2 '17 at 7:07
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Bluetooth from body to larger device with cellular connection (and larger battery and/or AC power supply) for the long range to the hospital. SMS or use TCP/IP to transfer data to a server process. \$\endgroup\$ – JRE Jun 2 '17 at 7:53
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ look into LORA, it's built for these types of applications. \$\endgroup\$ – dandavis Jun 2 '17 at 8:05
  • \$\begingroup\$ @JRE Thanks! We are working off of the assumption that in low resource settings the user may not necessarily have a smart phone. Although that's becoming history now with cheaper smartphones flooding the market and the average aspirational person wanting to be connected through facebook and whatsapp. \$\endgroup\$ – serendipity Jun 5 '17 at 12:20
  • \$\begingroup\$ I didn't mean a smartphone. I meant one of the smaller GSM modem type things. A smartphone could work if your subject/patient has one and you can write a program to run on it. But, since you will have to supply your device (whatever it is) and you would have to supply what ever custom RF device you might come up with, you might just as well supply your device and a commercially available GSM modem and have one less thing to design, test, and get approval for. \$\endgroup\$ – JRE Jun 5 '17 at 13:11
3
\$\begingroup\$

Standard solutions are just few: the Nordic packet-data transmitter, it cost about 1 USD and is capable UNDER 1 km;

the LORA(tm) product, packet data also, capable for 3 km yet costs 10x more;

the ordinary most prost transmitter, yet for 5-6 km You will need at least 5...15 Watts;

The WiFi, yet such is the maximum maximorum ever gained between two very high cost machines with large sharp-directed antennas;

and cellular phone networks, where Arduino phone sub-module costs few USD.

I would vote for the last solution, and if dislike, then for 15W prost radio.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Thanks! I am wondering if the LORA could transmit from several sensors? I'll look into this. It would make sense to use more expensive equipment if it was used as a common base station for all transmitting sensors in a location and then further transmit to the receiving station which would be a hospital. \$\endgroup\$ – serendipity Jun 5 '17 at 12:14
3
\$\begingroup\$

You have a collection of options:

Mobile phone networks: any of the options, GPRS upto 4G depending on cost your willing to pay and data you need to transfer. Probably the easiest and most reliable, assuming that the mobile networks are available in the operational area.

Some analogue radio communication. I'm pretty sure that all of the frequencies that will give you the range are license controlled (in Europe, Asia and N America), but it might be worth investigating depending on how much you can work with the countries you plan to operate in. High power consumption, license fees and large antenna are all issues with that.

Satellite phone: lots of low level data communication takes place over satellite phones already, so I'm sure you could add something to that. Advantage is they cover all the world (depending on you provider) as long as you're outside (some work inside, sometimes). Power consumption is high, as is the required equipment cost.

Mesh network: if you have enough of these sensors spread from where you need the data to the furthest node, you could use a mesh network of nodes, one every 20 metres or so, and link one to another to get to the data centre. Clearly this is lots of nodes, lots of cost, and each node needs it's own power supply.

No doubt there are other methods, but looking at miles, you are best to use existing networks; mobile phones or satellite phones.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Thanks! Mesh Network sounds very interesting! I have worked on Berkeley motes and this could potentially be one of the solutions we consider. I do realize the associated costs for each dot or Mica mote we use. I'm sure there must be cheaper options for these as well. Will look into this. I hope someone invents low powered long range communication that could be used in body area networks. Would be so useful in developing countries where there is hardly any medical infrastructure in rural areas. \$\endgroup\$ – serendipity Jun 5 '17 at 12:09
  • \$\begingroup\$ @serendipity I'm afraid there are lots of low powered long range communication options, the problem is getting people to agree on a standard, which is kept clear from other things. If you look up flooding events in the UK, there was lots of work done by HAM enthusiasts for the rescue operation, as the standard communication networks were all down. \$\endgroup\$ – Puffafish Jun 5 '17 at 12:17
1
\$\begingroup\$

A mobile phone network seems the most practical way.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Yes, you can use implementations like Particle Photon \$\endgroup\$ – Jeroen3 Jun 2 '17 at 9:00

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.