Ebyte E28-2G4M12S + ESP32 + Arduino + TTN / ISM2400 /


I got me a E28-2G4M12S (should use a SX1280 = 2400ISM Lora) and I wonder if one got it to work
towards an ESP32. I wonder about the wiring in between the ESP32 and the E28-2G4M12S.

My plan is to use Arduino, and here and if there are any libraries which can be used and if one has some sample code to get it to work with the TTN open source version (I have a 2.4ghz gw here).
I found this library GitHub - StuartsProjects/SX12XX-LoRa: Library for SX12XX LoRa devices but I am not sure if/how it can be used to connect to TTN. But maybe there are alternatives.

For now it is “just” to have a learning experience. So if one sees to build an different 2.4ghz self made
node and has hardware / software suggestions, please let me know.

I dont recall seeing any recent information from TTI about active support for 2.4Ghz LoRa with TTN.

The library you mentioned should be capable of working for node software but you would need to write the node application yourself.

1 Like

2.4ghz on Lora with TTN opensource stack is not the problem. That works fine.

The other parts is what makes me wonder.

Stuart’s library is for LoRa point to point. And very useful it is too. But you need a LoRaWAN stack that can use an SX1280 for the radio. The Semtech reference code, LoRaMAC-node, does not have support for SX1280. So you’ll have to integrate one in to the other.

There is cutting edge, there is bleeding edge and there is randomly thrashing about in the dark. LoRaWAN on 2.4GHz is the latter.

1 Like

Is the use of TTN for 2.4Ghz LoRa approaved by TTI ?

1 Like

However Semtech have done demos of nodes for SX1280, so they must have software somewhere.

The official status of 2.4Ghz LoRa on TTI\TTN does seem a little unclear to me.

1 Like

Which one ?

1 Like

There is an option under TTS using the Draft 2 implementation using 3 channels… not sure if viable on TTS(CE) - TTN.

SMTC are working closely with a few key lead customers for 2.4Ghz global logistcs chain and equiment monitoring for initial 2.4Ghz development and deployment - e.g. the maritime industry for shipping (moniting vessels and for cargo use. (Note including use with TTI support - see prior TTConference sessions), large scale retail/warehousing, etc.

Some very early technology demos used 2.4GHz and also there were others where a small fpga/asic assit was used for a form of RDF/ToF p2p to assess distance between nodes (note not N-GW) using the early LoRa Development Kits based on the Eiger hand held units…

Personally would not attemp to jump into 2.4Ghz at this point unless you have engaged with SMTC and have their buy in and support, or atleast have a commercial engagement with TTI and their backing ($$'s!)/assistance…do not yet see this a community/TTN effort :wink: Not least because…

1 Like

2.4GHz LoRa does offer the potential benefit of being able to uplink and dowlink substantial amounts of data, since there are no real legal duty cycle limits in this band. The disadvantage is of course the range is reduced in practical devices by around a factor of 3.

However I cannot see TTI providing the necessary infrastructure needed to allow for more data on a free for all basis, no such thing as free really.

So in terms of ‘free’ useage, 2.4Ghz LoRa probably has no particular advantage over 868Mhz.

1 Like

And roam widely without frequency band changes or having to use different regional SKU’s hence the interest from global players and logistics type use cases, such a shipping…still need to be careful with downlink duty cycle as deaf when downlinking so limited use if not to loose those high volume uplinks! :slight_smile: if running simplex - will be interesting to see how duplex ref design(s) develops…

Higher data rate spec led to FLoRa - not the margerine brand but “Fast LoRa”! :wink:

1 Like

I wrote a minimal LoRaWAN stack and UART command firmware for 2.4g demo using the sx1280 reference kit

Some bits should easily port to arduino.


This should be fun!


Reservations about individual efforts to port to other platforms aside, nice code, very readable, I don’t suppose you’d like to lead a group effort to make a better stack?

1 Like

Fast LoRa ?

Or maybe you mean the FLRC mode of the SX1280.

I have a suspicion that FLRC may be longer range (than LoRa) at the LoRa equivalent high data rates. Been meaning to get round to test that …

1 Like

Indeed - FLRC = Fast Long Range Communications giving 260k-1.3Mb/s raw data rate depending on coding and BW if I recall = the 3rd Modem in the 1280/81… the fpga/asic assist mentioned earlier also evolved (IIRC) into the IP behind the Ranging Engine…1280 only not 1281.

1 Like

Better stack? Sure no problem.

  • Need ADR?
    ** Nope single DR

  • Need new channel?
    ** Nope 3 channels

  • Need OTA?
    ** Supported.

  • Need ABP?
    ** Supported.

I understand the fan fair, But this IS better than nothing and they asked for any existing code. Best of luck.

Yes FLRC, if it were ever used in something like TTN, and you need some monitoring tools there is a packet monitor for it in my library.

What is interesting about FLRC, is that at the same rate, 200kbps, that is the maximum rate for 2.4Ghz LoRa, FLRC mode is quoted as having 6dBm extra sensitivity, so twice the distance. One day soon I will check that out for real.

So there may be a mode that is longer distance then even LoRa.

1 Like

Not looked at datasheets/drafts details on 2.4GHz for 3 or 4 years but IIRC it was a mix of some LoRa like and gMSK implementation that pushed up close to the Shannon limit……sure I have a graph on file somewhere that show the LoRa, FSK & FLRC behaviour wrt Shannon limit and bit rate…will dig it out :wink: Note also handles basic BTLE packets/framing IIRC which is useful for some blended applications :slight_smile: Had a potential client project that could have used 2.4Ghz p2p or p2mp, a few years back but decided to hold off to see how 2.4GHz LoRaWAN might develop….but then C-19 came along and looks to killed the whole thing off :frowning: still they decided to stay with <GHz LoRaWAN :+1: :slight_smile:

Guess all getting a bit off topic now so will stop!….

1 Like

I can see that this code covers 2.4GHz just fine - I was more thinking of an LMIC replacement!

1 Like