alt Hacker News"Long-Range" sensor projecs?
Is the long range in the room with us? It is I2C not very well known for long ranges. Especially with motors and electric drives and their EMI I2C is not the best decision.
From the title I was more in "Oh, what type of long range wireless they have opted for?" and didn't expect I2C.
For long range wired I would consider more a RS485 or CAN. Short ranges like in a small robot arm, a small car, and alike I2C maybe enough.
Replies
They offer some sort of booster module for runs up to 30m. Not exactly long range but it is for i2c. Although at that point, I'd rather just do something different than buying two of these extenders for super long runs.
For "long range", at least longer than wired i2c, I was expecting current gen zigbee, zwave800, or something LoRA based.
I really, really wish that CAN had caught on more for sensor networks in the hobbyist community.
It's so much nicer than I2C in so many regards: much longer range, masterless (any node can talk directly to any other node), packet prioritization built-in, deliberately designed to be more or less impossible to wedge, possible to do IC-to-IC on a board without transceivers by using a shared open-drain bus (like I2C, but with only one wire!)... and plenty more.
Really the only downside to CAN is that the spec requires timing that's tight enough that everything has to have a crystal on board. Ah, to have an alternate reality where CAN's timing requirements were relaxed enough for that not to be a requirement and it had caught on as the IC-to-IC interconnect standard instead of I2C...
There is really no good reason to ever use I2C, except if that's the only interface your peripheral supports. Debugging a stuck I2C bus, and attempting to un-brick the bus for a stuck slave (disabling ISRs, unhooking DMA, reconfiguring pins to GPIO, clocking the slave out of its coma and then doing everything in reverse) is just not worth it.
EDIT: I was hoping for HaLow WiFi!