Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 06/01/2016 in Posts

  1. 2 points
    16-May-17 is good for me if I can be of assistance. Will be a big month for IoT in Newcastle with a highly anticipated IoT Pioneers Meetup early May and the inaugural Hunter Innovation Festival IoT Workshop late May.
  2. 2 points
    Good points. The power, as it so often does, comes from combining data sources. Tyre pressure with fuel consumption by route - what is optimal? Tyre temperature with pressure, ambient temperature, vehicle speed and driver identity - who's smoking the tyres? Shock events, location on vehicle and vehicle position, aggregated over many vehicles - pothole detector! But Jason's point is a good one - sometimes you just need to start instrumenting and discover the insights later. I'll give you a recent example - the instrumented pneumatic tube vehicle counters we developed for our Smart Parking system report on various parameters that aren't critical to the core product. One started to fail recently in a way we hadn't seen before. Turns out one of the tubes had lost its springiness. But thanks to our collected data, we now have a unique data signature that alerts us to a pending "springiness" failure! We can even see the clear progression from healthy to point of failure, and combined with traffic counts and ambient temperature records, we can predict time to failure. That's really quite powerful, yet we never imagined it when we were designing it. Last thought... how do they measure vertical load from within the tyre? Maybe it's based on internal tyre height at the bottom of the tyre vs at the top to get a measure of deformation, combined with the tyre pressure to get total load on the rubber? I can't see that being particularly accurate!
  3. 2 points
    Contact information for WPLAN systems and operators in Australia: Ingenu http://www.ingenu.com/ http://www.iotoz.com.au/ LoRa https://www.lora-alliance.org/ http://meshed.com.au/ https://www.thethingsnetwork.org/ http://www.nnnco.com.au/ NB-IoT http://www.3gpp.org/http://www.3gpp.org/news-events/3gpp-news/1785-nb_iot_complete SIGFOX https://www.sigfox.com/ http://www.thinxtra.com/ Taggle http://www.taggle.com.au/
  4. 2 points
    IMHO... IOT is a user of technologies rather than a being a technology itself so there is no single set of standards governing IOT. Device developers choose technologies based on the constraints they operate under. There are two broad categories of standards in which to make choices: network access (comprising the physical and data-link layers) and application protocol. A lot of standards that have been mentioned previously have to do with network access (Bluetooth, Zigbee, wifi, etc). These standards can be used by IOT but were not designed specifically for IOT. At the application layer, there are some protocols that could come to dominate the field - whether that will be MQTT, REST API, or something else is yet to be seen. I don't see that any standards org is going to come out and dictate that IOT must use this or that particular access method. A comparable analogy would be that no one dictates to you how you access the Internet - you may have ADSL, cable, mobile broadband, or some other means. However, once you are connected, if you want to browse the web, you must have a client that speaks HTTP at the application layer. Standardisation of the application layer would make IOT devices more inter-operable, and should enable a company that runs an IOT network to move from one service provider to another.
  5. 2 points
    Please contribute to this thread by adding information about government and other support and collaboration opportunities available to startups and other developers in the IoT space. Below is a start on this. Australian Govt Support R&D tax incentive https://www.business.gov.au/assistance/research-and-development-tax-incentive Commercialisation support https://www.business.gov.au/assistance The Industry Growth Centres http://www.industry.gov.au/industry/Industry-Growth-Centres/Pages/default.aspx IoT Alliance - Collaboration http://www.commsalliance.com.au/Documents/Publications-by-Topic/IoT http://www.iot.org.au/ http://www.iot.org.au/workstreams/ Workstream 6 is on IoT Innovation
  6. 2 points
    Following are some Ideas for community outputs gleaned from our initial survey and research. The text in brackets are my interpretation of what the output could look like. Please comment below on what other things you might like. Explanatory guides/webinars An overview of the basic framework. e.g. What happens after the front end data is collected. [An overall framework of IOT, spelled out in basic technical detail, i.e. the Body of Knowledge Framework] Reference guide to common acronyms. [Glossary with simply English explanations, part of wiki?] IOT for other engineers [A plain English version assuming no ICT knowledge whatsoever] Commercial guidance - what are current models and why aren't they suitable for the new technologies. + How others justify investment towards IOT technologies and what is happening in Australia [1)How to build a business case, and 2) How to select the right technology set] Guide to IoT standards and protocols Examples/Case studies of applications [1) to spark imagination of what is possible, and 2) Demystifies IOT] Expert forums where i can get in touch with people involved in IOT rollouts [Links to more specialist forums?] Industry/discipline specific application guides (electrical dist x2, power generation x2, asset mgt, mining,civil, geotechnical, mechanical [What would this look like? What is different between industries?] Guide to relevant grants supporting innovation using IOT Advanced tools Risk assessment methodologies needed when complex technologies are integrated. [Risk engineering guide for IOT] How IOT can be secure and be accessible for public development [Guide to security issues] Rasperry Pi or Arduino interfacing to environmental monitoring sensors and ("conventional") control systems, and expanding from there. [??] IOT Testing Lab for engineers to play and test solutions Product technology selection “IoT is so varied it can be daunting finding the right thing (product or service).” + “Access to high level but also detailed information about current technologies, products and challenges. Low priced self data analytics [Guides to specific segments of the IOT framework] Guides on wireless/satellite communications and power consumption. A directory of product / service providers. [Integrated guide, showing how providers focus on different parts of the IOT framework and different industries] new product/innovation newsletter Other STEM outreach guides i.e. IOT for high school students IOT challenge for engineering students Please comment below with additional suggestions.
  7. 2 points
    Hi Geoff Three of us at MEA listened to your inaugural talk this morning on the IoT and thoroughly enjoyed it. You handled question time with panache and told us a few things we didn't know (SigFox - whatever that is - heading the list...) You also mentioned that folks likely to field a 'top-to-bottom' solution for an IoT application were still in the future, and likely to need a team of about 20 good folks to pull it off. Even counting our sales, marketing and administration folk - plus external industrial design and manufacturing support - brings us no-where near that number of staff. Yet we have built and are operating over a thousand on-farm IoT nodes across Australia, moving soil moisture and climate data to the cloud (our 'Green Brain' web app) with data available 'any time, anywhere' on an irrigator's mobile. But your point is valid - the IoT is a multi-disciplinary field requiring a very broad approach to engineering, product development and customer support. To end on a lighter note, one of our engineers found this IoT quote somewhere on-line: - “IoT is like teenage sex: Everyone talks about it, nobody really knows how to do it. Everyone thinks everyone else is doing it, so everyone claims they are doing it too.” Andrew (at MEA in Adelaide)
  8. 2 points
    Hi Andrew, the topic you raise is spot on, and is a core item I will address in my webinar on 5th July. The IoT when considered top-to-bottom - ie from the Cloud down to deloyed Things - encompasses just about every facet of ICT, software engineering and and electronics engineering. There are at least a dozen technology elements, each of which has a steep learing curve. And add to that the required knowledge of the system where IoT is to be applied. That said, many aspects of IoT technology are not new - just used in and integrated manner, often by engineers who are expert in the field where they wish to use IoT, but not in the actual IoT technologies themselves. One of the primary drivers for forming this community was the need to provide a means for those involved in IoT - both technology providers and technology adopters - to come together to help build critical mass.
  9. 2 points
    New community site is online!
  10. 1 point
    When all is said and done, there has usually been more said than done! This is surely true of the IoT. I agree with IoT’s promise, but see few of its practitioners. Much of the IoT hype talks about connecting the fridge to the stove, although why, I can’t imagine. Business cannot thrive without customers, and who are they in IoT land, once the Early Adopters have tired of its promise? I can claim some small expertise in this area, having successfully launched an On-Farm Internet-of Sensors system called Plexus three years ago, moving soil moisture and climate data using solar-powered mesh networks across the farm and up to a web-application in the cloud that allows farmers to access their irrigation data from anywhere, at any time. To break into this field required a huge investment of funds over three years, a multi-disciplinary approach that hauled together electronic, mechanical, communications and software engineers, plus external industrial design skills, a manufacturing link into China, all sorts of technical skills to set up the production line, and some thirty years of previous environmental measurements in the bush merely to battle-harden the troops. Then you have to sell it and keep it working until you’ve crossed the ‘valley of death’ between early adopters and the early majority. So the hard reality is that breaking into the whole IoT technological arena is non-trivial; it’s no place for the faint-of-heart or the weak-of-purse or the inexperienced-yet-hopeful. But it is fun, and at last, slightly lucrative. Dr Andrew Skinner FIEAust CPEng NER South Australian Professional Engineer of the Year, 2015
  11. 1 point
    18 Oct "Apple and GE today announced a partnership to deliver powerful industrial apps designed to bring predictive data and analytics from Predix, GE’s industrial Internet of Things (IoT) platform, to iPhone and iPad. The two companies unveiled a new Predix software development kit (SDK) for iOS, which gives developers the tools to make their own powerful industrial IoT apps." More info https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2017/10/apple-and-ge-partner-to-bring-predix-industrial-apps-to-iphone-and-ipad/
  12. 1 point
    As part of my efforts in STEM outreach, I recently ran a workshop for Year 9 and 10 IT students at a local high school. I wanted to present something that would be interesting and different from what they would normally have from their school classes so I settled on doing a simple IoT demonstration involving Raspberry Pi, Sense-HAT, and Node-RED. The Raspberry Pi is a great way to introduce students to computing and electronics engineering. The students I was presenting to had little or no programming experience so a visual system such as Node-RED enabled them to program simple tasks. Within 5 minutes of me presenting them the basics of Node-RED, they were quite comfortable using Node-RED and modifying the examples that I gave them. The workshop exercise was to extract sensor data (accelerometer, temperature, humidity, etc) and send it to an IoT platform. They could then view the data that was sent in a web browser in real time. Since we were using accelerometers, I encouraged the students to move the Raspberry Pi around while viewing the graph on the IoT platform to see how the values changed. I think having a computing system with physical sensors providing real time feedback made the workshop more interesting than just a programming exercise on a computer. The students seemed to enjoy it and I got a lot out of seeing their enthusiasm. IoT demonstrations are a great way to get the next generation interested in building things.
  13. 1 point
    Yes, agree with pretty much all that. I would tend not to be too dismissive of the value of learning the principles of coding. At my daughter's age, the concepts of IF/THEN constructs and all the other coding principles are all very new and worthwhile I think. And primarily at this stage, I think my aim is just to get her enthusiastic about learning, so the scratch level programs have been great and she still has some way to run with it. However, I take your point that she will pretty quickly run out of runway to learn with just coding which is why I am already thinking about what next. Your point about teachers asking what will you drop is very valid. They don't teach this stuff in normal school time for that very reason. However, as a parent I have oodles of after school time and holidays to fill which I would like to be as enriching as possible, hence my interest in this. I'm not actually particularly focused on coding or even STEM. However, I did attend a DATA 61 event where one of the keynote speakers was 9 years old and was a little blown away by the potential of young people to create a future using data. As you say, its what you do with the data rather than coding as a skill that will make the difference. However, I think understanding how to manipulate data via coding will be \ a modern day skill that should sit alongside other skills like literacy and mathematics. But how to develop it over time in a reasonable fashion? I put up a proposal in EA about a year ago to launch a STEM Outreach Community, whereby deliverers of STEM education services such as yourself could collaborate and learn from each other. It hasn't got traction yet but I remain hopeful. Cheers Tim
  14. 1 point
    Love it. All the idle cash in the world is desperate to not miss out on the next Airbnb, and has done a sensational job of monopolising the narrative of business success. Rocket speed growth, a trail of destruction, laptops in cafeterias, and more talking than doing. Let the trends be trends. There's no replacement for authenticity.
  15. 1 point
    Some good points made there. Probably won't surprise any engineers to find that not all screwdrivers fit all screws. But yes, in the hype-driven business decision making world we live in, there are many examples of trying to use a screwdriver to hammer a nail. I'd go as far as to say the challenge is not to "figure out ways around these problems", because that assumes the fallacy that, for example, "edge" computing is a novel invention from the cloud era. In reality, processing has always been done at the edge, and cloud computing paradigms simply mean we need a term to describe the adoption of legacy paradigms. I'd prefer to frame the challenge as doing our due diligence on the applicability of new tools. If cloud does not provide net benefit, then the solution is not to adopt it. In reality, there are likely to be aspects that can benefit from new technology, and so the challenge is to astutely adopt aspects of new technology that provide net benefit. I get a little tired of the one-size fits all hype, that then hyper-hypes accommodations that are simply existing techniques wrapped up in new lingo. You see this a lot, for example, in web development frameworks. Every few years all the problems are re-solved, only to reveal a different set of issues that had already been solved.
  16. 1 point
    Nice video of the difference between point-to-point and mesh-networked radios; thanks for posting.
  17. 1 point
    Fascinating. Quite an achievement. This is certainly a promising way to get started building a blockchain based application. Time will tell how effective it is in practice - currently the user base is heavily dominated by those with a vested interest in giving it the thumbs up! I'm encouraged by their approach to scalability and confidentiality. These are well known problems in the blockchain that underpins Bitcoin and to some extent Ethereum. Sounds like they've taken a few pages out of the Monero playbook, which I personally think is likely to be the cryptocurrency of choice for discerning traders! IOTA seems to have similar goals, though has a different approach to the challenges. To me Fabric feels a bit more professional/cohesive/supported but the proof will be in the pudding. In either case, the applicability to IoT is, like most things hanging off the IoT bandwagon, tangential at best. Like any distributed ledger technology, anything that requires a trustworthy exchange of value could potentially benefit. The bog-standard application is financial transactions, but it's not hard to think of more IoT related applications: trading electricity micro generation and consumption; data consumption by device; pay-by-the-listen music; insurance adjustments based on location/activity/etc. But it's those pesky implementation details that will really bring to life just what problems this solution solves. I'd love to have a (paid!) project to put this stuff to work on, but alas, I await for vicarious outcomes!
  18. 1 point
    I suspect you forgot to hit submit! Certainly I have not deleted any posts to date.
  19. 1 point
    Did my post get deleted or did I forget to hit the submit button? Teksmobile, Hussain Fakhruddin and Romit Kumar are very prolific on LinkedIn on this topic, and I don't think they're doing the industry a favour. Their articles are misleading, confusing and full of errors. This is another example. I'm sick of charlatans confusing the public and making the job of the practitioners even harder. Dealing with a confused public that doesn't know who to trust makes it hard to make progress. Thus, I was motivated to reply. Here it is:
  20. 1 point
    Hello, I have performed this presentation a few times before and I thought I would share it with the online communities. I will be talking about managing uncertainty and internet of things systems with machine vision as the example. Leave any comments, suggestions and subscribe to follow the series. Link: https://youtu.be/etrZdyP0BYM
  21. 1 point
    South Australian company recognised at major international IoT Summit South Australian IoT company, Myriota, has been awarded Best Industrial IoT Start Up Company at the world’s largest IoT summit, held in Silicon Valley. Myriota was one of over 100 start up companies from around the globe, who pitched to a panel of Silicon Valley and International IoT experts at Internet of Things World 2017. Myriota has developed a low power, low cost, satellite IoT communications platform, making transmission of small data from remote locations economically viable for a whole new class of sensors and machines. See the full story here: http://myriota.com/myriota-wins-at-iot-summit/
  22. 1 point
    If you had $50 million to spend on making your city "smarter" what would you do. How do you think IoT could actually help make cities smarter? Just what is a smart city anyway? If you have a great idea, please share it. And maybe you should apply for funding. The deadline is 30 June 2017. See https://www.business.gov.au/assistance/smart-cities-and-suburbs-program
  23. 1 point
    Hello all, I noticed this press release from HCL announcing a "Three stage IOT Maturity Framework". The three stages focus on process efficiency, then building new revenue streams and finally "business transformation". I get concerned when I read these kinds of things because we seem to be getting ahead of ourselves. Most organisations I know are still grappling with what it is, or how it is different from M2M/SCADA. I worry that seeing such frameworks can put IOT firmly in the fad camp. However, I do see boundless opportunity for IOT, but slow approach to maturity will have more to do with mastery of integration across a whole range of technology and realizing the synergistic benefits of doing them in an integrated smart way. I would have thought a better framework had to do with highlighting the different elements that contribute to maturity. Having said that, I wonder what they are. Judging by other kinds of frameworks they might be something along the lines of: Technical mastery - ability to integrate multiple technologies.... the levels might start with connecting sensors to cloud, and progress through to machine learning etc. Innovative culture - ability to recognise business and customer led opportunities for IOT lead innovation - that could start with the process improvements and progress through to the change of business models. Leading with data - Actually doing something useful with data as most organisations are pretty bad at this. Partnerships - ability to create partnerships with the multiple players in the industry. Different levels could relate to in-house capability and how this is linked to research organisations and technology leaders. These are just a few ideas slapped down quickly. Perhaps you have a completely different view or would like to add to the list of factors. What are they?
  24. 1 point
    Interesting but its so first generation for me. So they can measure Pressure, temperature, wear, vertical load and distance travelled. However, all they are doing with it is telling you when you need to change your tyre, connect you with their local dealer and maybe order online via your smart phone. Many consumers will be totally underwhelmed by this because what this is NOT doing is changing the business model. For example, I already know where and how to get my tires change. I get the impression that some engineer has said, let's instrument these tyres because we can and some marketing person said "we need to lock customers into our brand". That turns me off more than inspires me. It doesn't make me want to have a relationship with this brand. What companies like this need to be doing is using their imagination to create new relationships and business models. First thing that springs to mind is safety - let say around learner drivers and teenage boys in particular - a known high risk category.. Maybe some metrics and real-time feedback on better cornering techniques and advanced driver training. A tyre company providing driver training? Why not. Parents would probably pay anything to get their teenage boys through their hormonal years safely. So now the tyre company has a relationship and new service offering to concerned parents. I really believe that we have to skip the whole first generation phase in IOT and let our imagination run wild. What other things can you think of, that we could do with an instrumented tyre?
  25. 1 point
    There was some discussion about defining maturity at the last meeting of IoTAA Work Stream 6 (Startups). While this example wasn't mentioned, there was a general acknowledgement that it's a difficult task. I'm pleased there also tends to be a general understanding that there is a chicken-and-egg challenge in that the IoT market is quite immature, so proudly claiming one's own maturity is misleading at best. I think you're getting at the same thing - until customers are informed enough to write confident purchase orders, any one claiming a level of maturity is just waving their peacock feathers. With so much still subject to debate, perhaps a framework with more quantifiable aspects might be attractive: dollars saved via the IoT; regions covered by LPWANs; density of things; hours of uptime; number of IoT startups; percentage of active participants in an IoT association. But you might be on to something - while there might be a heap of technical capability ready to come online, the IoT can't be considered mature unless people are actually paying for Smart Parking installations, or autonomous farming equipment, or Smart meters or whatever.
  26. 1 point
    Telstra has selected Ericsson to support its “Network of the Future” transformation program, using Cat-M1 to support an IOT capability, More at: https://www.telstra.com.au/aboutus/media/media-releases/telstra-and-ericsson-lay-foundation-for-network-of-the-future.xml
  27. 1 point
    Hi Jason Thanks for your thoughtful advice on this matter. We have discussed this internally and believe that you have shown us a way forward. MEA will approach the various parties who own our weather station networks and discuss Creative Commons licences with them, while talking about how the data can be more broadly used for the good of all. No doubt there will be much discussion about 'fairness' and 'impartial' dealings between commercial competitors and so forth. We're OK with that. This is very fundamental issue for manufacturers of IoT technology, so your interest is appreciated. Best Regards Andrew at MEA
  28. 1 point
    The Dilemma of Data Ownership For more than three decades, MEA has built weather stations for wind, solar and agriculture applications within Australia. In the past decade, there has been a shift from private to public ownership, with many hundreds of MEA weather stations being deployed within networks across whole agricultural regions in southern Australia. These stations give farmers up-to-date access to local weather data via websites hosted by various Government or statuary authorities interested in water use efficiency in irrigated areas and among many other applications outside of agriculture. Here’s an example from Western Australia: - DAFWA weather station network Other small private weather networks have begun to be rolled out in the last few years by cashed up agricultural companies whose mission is not to build weather stations, but to sell ‘decision support’ to farmers. For this to work, they have to fund the installation and maintenance of these imported automatic weather stations, then sell their agronomic services and seed and fertiliser products to recoup that cost. This is a very different model to that of a manufacturer such as MEA. We simply sell the hardware and maintenance services. While MEA may host public websites and data processing for such weather station networks, we have no ethical right to siphon off the data and feed it to others, such as farmers using Plexus on-farm IoT soil moisture systems. So we find ourselves on the horns of a dilemma; we know that farmers could extract extra benefit from all this wide-area climate data that our own systems are generating. But we don’t own the data because our business model has always been to simply sell and support the hardware. Yet another dilemma to be resolved in a world where data has more valuable than engineered products…
  29. 1 point
    Hi Reuben When Sigfox (Anat) visited us in Adelaide last year she had with her a little Sigfox-enabled temperature measurement device that she used to demonstrate connectivity to the Thinkstra base station on top of a tall building in the CBD. Our factory is in the foothills, so the transmission path was in clear air across the Adelaide plains to a high point in the city. So my message is that a) Sigfox can probably help you with a transmitter that will allow you to scout the terrain and assure yourself that you will get the needed coverage. (We always did this before installing our Sigfox-like radio systems more than a decade ago. No transmission path, no sale) b) this only works if the Sigfox base stations are already in place, and c) you can't beat the physics; look up the meaning of the "Fresnell Zone" Regards Andrew
  30. 1 point
    Afterword What will be the fate of the early innovators in the IoT arena? Are they a doomed species, to be pushed into oblivion when the big money turns its attention to grabbing market share and blowing away or gobbling up all the small fry who have been trying to create differentiated toe-holds as markets mature? This is a question that bites pretty close to home for MEA. MEA is a 5-year old start-up with 33 years of experience. Any company with some sort of longevity is by definition one that has re-invented itself again and again over the course of its history - markets and technologies pop in and out of existence like quantum particles, and good companies ride the growth of these waves and slip across to new waves as they collapse. What is clear – after a five-year effort to invent and stabilise Plexus Mark I as our latest on-farm IoT offering – is the need to do it all over again, simply because technology has moved rapidly onwards and we can drive down costs and increase performance by updating our technology. So here we are – down at the bottom of the world – and leading many other international agricultural IoT players by a full generation. That’s an edge we will lose if we don’t keep moving and advancing. To be a market leader, we will have to export Plexus beyond Australia’s shores. That will require a whole new generation of ‘smarts’ to make the technology simple and seamless. The MEA Law of Exponential Aggravation (known to a previous generation as ‘the Tyranny of Distance’) will see to that. So, stepping up to become an exporter will be a really tough call for our engineering, marketing, management and service folk. We’ll need all of our combined years of experience to carry that off… and a bunch of new investment. Can we do it? I’ve no answer to that; the future in a small business always seems perilous, but we’ve survived and gained a solid reputation. What I haven’t mentioned in this series of IoT essays is the over-arching need for sound company management. And that’s not me; I’m a starter, not a runner. Inventive folk such as myself are highly trained to jump sideways, circumventing problems with new off-the-wall solutions. This makes for a chaotic management style; all my moves appear to originate in left-field. MEA is a partnership, and my business partner is the solid methodical detail guy who runs our management and marketing and financial and strategic departments, while I have been allowed to focus on the engineering I love. Yet he and I will both reach retirement age in the next few years, and there’s a real need to re-invigorate the company with young people and fresh ideas. We can find those here on our doorstep. And my own fate? I’ve pretty-much lost interest in owning a company, but I find my hunger to develop new products burns more strongly with each passing year. I’d like to retire gracefully to the lab, to teach and to mentor young engineers, to learn new skills, and to create all those environmental sensors that fill my notebooks. I can be the Colonel Sanders on the Kentucky Fried Chicken bucket, but I don’t need to fry all the chicken myself.
  31. 1 point
    It's almost self-fulling. From my interactions with the world of big data of the last year I've noticed a willingness to sacrifice quality for quantity. It's almost as if instead of thinking about the value of the data at the record level, the approach now is to gloss over details like accuracy, relevance and valid representation. Just turn the firehose on and let the big machines with their magical AI sort it out. So now anyone trying to extract meaning from little data finds that there's nothing of value because the data is crap. Eventually you might get enough crap pilling up so that one pile of crap is a bit bigger than another pile of crap and eureka - the big data machine has found something! I like to temper my enthusiasm for this amazing big data device with the cautions of Cathy O'Neil:
  32. 1 point
    Amazon Web Services (AWS) has announced AWS Greengrass, "software that lets you run local compute, messaging & data caching for connected devices in a secure way [snip], keep device data in sync, and communicate with other devices securely, [and] operate with intermittent connections, and minimize the cost of transmitting IoT data to the cloud. The aim of AWS Greengrass is to allow IOT devices to "act locally on the data they generate, while still using the cloud for management, analytics, and durable storage". The announcement is at https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/whats-new/2016/11/announcing-aws-greengrass-now-in-limited-preview/ and the product page is at: https://aws.amazon.com/greengrass/
  33. 1 point
  34. 1 point
    To Mesh or Not Mesh – that’s the question! The burgeoning technology base beneath the Internet-of-Things (IoT) offers a plethora of possible technologies for shifting data (in MEA’s case) from on-farm monitoring systems to users. One of the central questions facing product developers in this field is whether or not to operate using ‘meshing’ technology. Within a meshed radio network, you get all these smart IoT-enabled devices to help each other out by passing data along a self-healing mesh network to get better coverage and more reliable data delivery. According to a rough look at our competitors’ products, the choice made has largely been ‘not’ to form IoT sensor mesh networks. They have chosen instead to force each measurement node to find its way directly to the Cloud or a local PC. So what are the arguments either way? Sensor Mesh-Networks have a number of solid advantages for on-farm monitoring. They work well in complex terrain with multiple sites, especially if cellular coverage is poor and line-of-site radio doesn't work. Mesh networks can solve connectivity problems through the use of repeaters, and can fill in data gaps if farm operations require field stations to be down for any reason. Measurement siting can be optimised to the crop, rather than to the availability of radio connectivity. Mesh-network field stations can run at lower power levels than single-point cellular field stations, allowing more frequent data updates, useful if farmers are tracking irrigation or frost activity. Mesh networks allow optimal siting of a single hub on the property for cellular gateways, which is advantageous at the periphery of the cellular coverage areas. Only a single SIM card per farm is necessary, reducing on-going costs. Potential use of ZigBee end-point technology would allow wireless sensors from below canopy within crops, reducing mounting costs while simplifying obstruction issues. The disadvantages of mesh networks are the expense of the base station for small systems and the more complex installation procedures needed to bind stations to networks (‘installation mode’). Typically, these devices need to be above the crop for solar and radio access, necessitating more expensive mounting hardware in comparison to below-canopy systems such as cellular, and potentially hindering farm operations. Such networks are mostly based on 2.4 GHz technology – rather than the longer-range sub-GHz technologies - limiting the distance between ‘hops’ to about 1 km over flat country. Single-point monitoring sites – by comparison – are typically better suited to small systems of a few stations, or widely distributed systems. Because they have largely been based on cellular phone technology (prior to the arrival of Sigfox and similar technologies), they are allowed to transmit at higher radio-frequency power levels, allowing long distances between field stations and cell towers. These high power transmissions and cellular towers located on tall structures allow them to be located below the crop canopy out of harm’s way, while simultaneously reducing the cost of mounting hardware. Higher bandwidths associated with normal cell phones makes possible such heavy data payloads as images or high-density data. The disadvantage of single-point monitoring sites is that they typically operate from long-life non-rechargeable batteries because of poor solar access below crop canopies. This limits data upload and viewing rates to once per day. They cannot be contacted for most of the day, because they are powered down, so system testing is problematic (they need to pick up messages and then act on them when they wake and contact the remote server). They need a clear line between measurement sites and cellular towers, and are poor performers where cellular coverage is patchy or in hilly country. Power consumption is higher for cellular modems than for other radio technologies, reducing energy efficiencies. Radios located at ground level have reduced range. In summary The technology dilemma facing IoT product developers is being recognised by the silicon manufacturers who are responding by creating ‘dual technology’ systems for field stations, such as Bluetooth and more advanced versions of ‘ZigBee’-style technologies that can form mesh networks. Narrow-band cellular networks will also arrive within the next two years, allowing lower data rates over the far-reaching Telco networks, pushing cellular modems aside in single-point applications. Single-point networks such as Sigfox will continue to operate effectively in areas with a high-density of users and good base-station coverage, but will struggle in far-flung highly dispersed environments. A satellite system such as Myriota is the ‘disruptive technology’ in the mix if the engineers at Myriota can pull off. These are small low power low cost data points can be located anywhere. They require no base stations – those are already orbiting the earth.
  35. 1 point
    Hi Adam, Thanks for joining and commenting. It's always great to see people getting in to this space. We host year 10 students for work experience, and they are all over it. Bodes well for the future, but also a bit of a kick for more experienced guys to stay current. Re you questions. "In the short term, what would be a good place to start to learn how to get data from a Thing to a cloud?" Yes - and vice-versa. I would suggest AWS as the simplest entry to the cloud space, and then initially getting a feel for comms transport via some basic PC or mobile device app. There are many options for comms and transport. Choose one that has library support for your mobile device and AWS and use it. Better to know one REALLY well than 10 superficially. Don't forget the downlink - you'll want to be able to actuate you mobile device app from the cloud (presumably via a web GUI). You could make your own thing, or buy a thing, but a mobile device is a highly capable and transparent dev tool for things. That said, you may want to branch out to more things, say BLE-connected to your app, and then sub-squently available on the IoT. Again, at the local wireless network level, there are many options. Choose the ones that are best supported and learn them from end to end. BLE and WiFi are easy entry points. WiFi is possibly the simplest but is power hungry(er). Re Image gathering, and AR, certainly it is a hugely cool topic. It's not my particular area although we do do image recognition stuff & triggering of abstracted logic based on that. Yes the video is also more data and processing hungry. If you had a good data plan to play with you could upload to the cloud and process there if you thing was not up to the task. Check out https://artoolkit.org/. Cheers! Jon
  36. 1 point
    There are a few new market reports out on the state of the global IOT industry. 360 Market Updates is forecasting the IOT market to "grow at a CAGR of 35.97% during the period 2016-2020". I didn't purchase the report but the exec summary has an interesting list of the key vendors. More at: http://www.360marketupdates.com/global-internet-of-things-market-2016-2020-10290207 IDTechEx has an interesting discussion on the market. It says: "We do not repeat the mantra about tens of billions of nodes being deployed in only a few years. The many analysts sticking to such euphoria ignore the fact that, contrary to their expectation, very little IoT was deployed in 2016. They are "bubble pushing" with their forecasts, predicting ever steeper takeoff, now a physical impossibility. However, our ongoing global travel, interviews, conferences and research by our multi-lingual PhD level analysts located across the world does lead us to believe that a large market will eventually emerge." In particular, it argues that IOT "nodes" (being the devices themselves) are being rapidly comoditised and that "the money will lie in the systems, software and support." Read more at: http://www.idtechex.com/research/reports/internet-of-things-iot-2017-2027-000499.asp
  37. 1 point
    This is indeed the general approach we are working on. However, I have to wait for EEA to deliver the capability sorry. They have had a bit of staff turnover recently that I think is hampering finalization.
  38. 1 point
    This post describes the core processes of the community, as illustrated in the following flow chart. The core functions of each role are as follows: a. Community Leader: i. Hosts core member meetings and sends meeting invites ii. Takes minutes and copies to Community Agenda Forum iii. Approves all webinars and other events iv. Champions any special community projects and obtains any resources required to deliver them v. Ensures good variety of activities and coordination of all other roles vi. Backs up the other roles as required vii. Recruits and appoints new core members to roles as required. viii. Approves major changes to the wiki b. Body of Knowledge Manager: i. Responsible for Wiki structure ii. Evolves wiki page templates to best capture useful knowledge iii. Identifies gaps and requests the Webinars Program coordinator to find speakers on these topics iv. Works with volunteers to get webinar transcriptions into a good format for the wiki. v. Uploads final content into the wiki. vi. Identifies opportunities for practice notes and other special projects. c. Webinar Program Coordinator: i. Works with other core members to identify potential speakers ii. Makes initial contact and organises/confirms date, iiii. Updates webinar management list and ensures there is a speaker every week. iii. Sends speakers guidelines and assigns/confirms a volunteer host for each webinar iv. Updates the event calendar d. Community volunteers (x6) i. Works with assigned speakers to get webinars description and bio min two week prior to meeting ii. Hosts meetings (one per month) iii. Edits transcriptions ready for upload to wiki. iv. Leads Practice Note projects as required e. Forums facilitator i. Monitors Google Alerts and adds appropriate news items to Industry News Forum ii. Stimulates discussion threads on Engineering Forum (methods to be determined) iii. Ensures all posts are responded to by appropriate community members f. EA Liasion– EA staff member(s) i. Recruit/approve the community leader ii. Creates webinars in webinar system iii. Reminds Community volunteers of upcoming content deadlines for promotion of webinars. iv. Organises input of webinar descriptions into EA’s Event Alert system v. Organises transcriptions of webinars vi. Uploads webinar recordings to MyCPD vii. Manages email inbox (iotengineering@engineersaustralia.org.au) and resolves member issues. viii. Develops and delivers support and training materials (process maps and instructions for new core members) ix. Develops and maintains community platform x. Coordinates promotion of community to the public xi. Identifies and pursues sponsorship opportunities.
  39. 1 point
    Hi All, A colleague and I have produced a paper for an International Conference next year. We work in the power engineering domain and the control thereof and see the IoT as a key to the future of this practice. Regards Ian Boake Boake Rijgersberg A proposal for real-time monitoring and control of the reticulation grid with photo-voltaics electrical vehicles and batteries em_fin.pdf
  40. 1 point
    The Chasm between Australian Industry and Science Much public hand-wringing has occurred in the past few years about Australia’s poor international rating when it comes to collaboration between our industry and our scientific bodies. During our IoT webinars, this curious snake-in-the-grass has reared its head in the same old way, suggesting that there remains a fundamental misunderstanding between the two camps. What really gets my goat are steamy statements from academia about how the growth of the IoT is dependent upon industry driving the cost of sensors and hardware down to just a few dollars each. I’ve watched in dismay over the last decade as CSIRO, NICTA and Sense-T have all promulgated a message that their clever research will make this happen, bypassing the clunky technology of existing industrialists and heading straight for grateful farmers. This inanity reached a peak some years back with statements that these new ultra-cheap IoT devices would be ‘scattered like confetti from helicopters, link up automatically and feed data back’ to the Big Data folks, seemingly forever. That the helicopters never took off is just a self-evident footnote to my grumblings. The reality on the ground is that the deployment of technology and the building of profitable markets that can feed further development is a long hard grind. That’s why technology doesn’t just skip merrily ahead like a spring lamb once the research funding is used up. It will cost money to sell service and support IoT gear – just like everything else. So my gut feeling is that the disconnect between Australian industry and academia is somehow fuelled by this hype and a general failing to understand each other’s very different currencies. More on that later… Perhaps this webinar series will tentatively open some doors between us all and lift our collaboration ratings?
  41. 1 point
    Here is an interesting low cost low energy LPWAN technology competing with SigFox, which is being rolled out by Dutch Telco KPM. An interesting aspect is it has a location function, which could be used to track transported item.
  42. 1 point
    The standards activity under way within ISO/IEC JTC1 WS10 is focussing on defining reference architectures, standardising nomenclature etc. The objective is not to restrain what is done in the IoT space - but rather to provide a platfrom to foster interoperablity between devices and systems. Indeed, there is a desire to encompass open source and public domain standards. The regulatory compliance aspect of IoT devices is addressed by existing regilatory standards - EMC, radiocommunications, electrical safety etc.
  43. 1 point
    Question from 5-Jul Webinar: Can you please briefly outline the pros and cons of the competing wireless protocols for IoT application. Answer: This topic is the subject of a webinar on 9-Aug-16 "The future of narrowband communication technologies enabling the IOT" The webinar will address technologies for Wide Area Networking (3G/4G/5G/NB-IOT, Sigfox, LoRa, Ingenu), local area networking (WiFi, 6LoWPAN, Zigbee) and personal Area Networking (Bluetooth, BLE).
  44. 1 point
    Question from 5-Jul Webinar: Do you feel it's more likely that enterprise will look to develop IoT development capabilities in house or rely on external consultancy? Answer: The technologies and engineering skills require to implement IoT system top-to-bottom are extensive, and it is unlikely that typical engineering teams using IoT in their systems or developing IoT-capable products will have the full range of required capabilities. Additionally, these skills are different from the core skills required to design and develop the primary functions of the system or product. It is likely that most organisations will require the services of external consultancies, or full service providers such as the large industrial automation and building management system providers.
  45. 1 point
    Hello all, Here is a starting point for ways to measure value addition by the community. Please comment and offer suggestions so we can finalise and turn it into a matrix. Value Measurement-IoT Practice Community (Draft).docx
  46. 1 point
    IOT data management company Buddy Platform will add to its Australian presence by acquiring device management provider Zentri, which has an office in Sydney. Buddy already has an office in Adelaide, the home of one of the company's founders. Buddy said: "The addition of Zentri brings together Buddy’s powerful IoT Data Graph to manage, process, and visualize IoT data coming from embedded chipset solutions managed and powered by ZentriOS and Device Management Service." See more at https://buddy.com/blog/buddy-announces-intent-acquire-zentri-inc/
  47. 1 point
    Folks - I've lifted this 'sidebar' about our Plexus IoT development story from an application note I'm writing about powering IoT devices using solar energy. We named the product (in the photos above) - after the 'Solar Plexus' in the human body - two puns intended - is a mesh network delivering data from across the farm (where cellular access is not always present or reliable) via 2.4 GHz ZigBee radio. Hope you enjoy the story Andrew (at MEA) ‘Plexus’ - an On-farm Internet of Things Designing and operating an ‘Internet of Things’ on-farm requires a multi-disciplinary approach to product development involving electronics, firmware, software, mechanical engineering and industrial design, web design, communications engineering, manufacturing skills, good field people and a deep understanding of just how tough an environment it really is when trying to keep measurement technology running year-round for a decade despite the hazards of weather, farm machinery and the occasional rogue human. That we came into this business with thirty years of data-logging experience and environmental measurements helped, but we needed to learn new skills on all fronts to pull this off, innovating our business model as we switched from a custom engineering base to that of a manufacturer. Driving this development was a sense that the old days of storing data in data loggers - then unloading it the farm computer - were at an end, and that modern farmers needed access to their sensor data at any time and from anywhere. This required the power of the Internet to move, store and present this data on PCs, tablets and smart phones without any proprietary software in the mix. It was a new world. Data needed to be collected using energy gathered on-site, ‘hopped’ by cooperative radios across the property to some master controller then automatically fed via a modem to an Internet server that would store data and serve it up to the farmer whenever he logged in. Temporary data storage was needed all along the chain to patch over the usual in-field outages, automatically playing catch-up when network elements were restored. The IEEE 804.15.4 ‘ZigBee’ standard was the obvious starting place to develop such technology because of the deep underpinning developed by the standards people and implemented by big IC manufacturers who made radio systems-on-chip, including the internal software ‘stacks’ that operate the various layers of networked radios. This created an immediate problem for the development team, as each node on the Plexus on-farm network needed to be a ‘router’ under the design brief, forwarding data across a self-healing mesh network with the minimum of set up fuss. However, ZigBee routers are typically ‘always on’, and the solar-powered energy budget simply did not allow for this. The eventual compromise was to re-fashion the whole network for a solid minute every fifteen minutes, then go into complete power-down mode for the remaining 14 minutes to conserve energy. Plexus systems guarantee a maximum 1000 m spacing between any field station in flat country. Given a 5-deep parent-child router arrangement, this allows coverage of most on-farm applications up to 1000 hectares. Radios, solar panels and batteries have to be light-weight and streamlined to live safely about two metres above the top of the crop for clean solar and radio access. Over-row machinery in permanent row crops such as grapes means that the whole Plexus field station pod needs to be ‘knock-down-spring-back’ so that on-farm operations are unaffected by the presence of the radio system. All this geometrical confinement forces a limit on the energy budget that is physical; it only becomes possible if the solar panel is small and light enough to fit inside a tough polycarbonate streamlined enclosure. 5V 400mW solar panels measuring 50m x 50mm fitted the bill but limit field station average operating current to a maximum of 8 mA, distributed between radio, sensor and system elements. Plexus product development took over three years of intensive effort, including seemingly endless returns to the field to be beaten up and humiliated yet again as we tried to understand what was going on – or was not. All this before we even let customers near the data that was being produced. The usual engineering compromises were reached in an effort to meet the deadlines imposed on us by the need to get to market and get a return on investment. Needless to say, we are still unwinding some of these ‘frozen-in-stone’ decisions in an effort to build a more flexible system capable of handling sensors and systems we’ve not even heard of yet. Yet the original concepts proved robust, and more than two years of field data from hundreds of sites across a broad range of crops and climates has vindicated the design decisions made. Like all new game-changing technologies, the Internet of Things is in danger of being over-hyped. Yet it can be made to work by a highly disciplined and experienced engineering team, given sufficient focus and across-company support. But it’s not a game for the faint-hearted or the weak-of-purse.
  48. 1 point
    Hi, After today's webinar by Geoff Sizer "How the Internet of Things will affect every engineer", one of the questions by an attendee prompted me to look into what is happening around the world with regards to the rollout of networks and the support for the 50 billions of IoT devices to be connected by 2020. ref: http://www.statista.com/statistics/471264/iot-number-of-connected-devices-worldwide/ So I've started this thread to provide a central spot for this community to share or add links to news about the rollout of IoT networks around the world. So please feel free to add and grow the following list: South Korean telco SK Telecom recently claimed it was rolling out the world's first nationwide Internet of Things (IoT) network, but it looks like the Netherlands has beaten it to the punch. http://www.gizmag.com/netherlands-nationwide-iot-network/44134/ http://www.gizmag.com/samsung-south-korea-nationwide-iot-network/43518/ Exclusive SigFox network operator for A/NZ, Thinxtra, has started the deployment of the live SigFox public network, with installations of antennas on top of the tallest buildings in Australia – Sydney Tower Eye and Melbourne Eureka Tower. http://www.arnnet.com.au/article/598439/thinxtra-starts-iot-deployments-australia/ http://www.mobileworldlive.com/featured-content/home-banner/sigfox-iot-network-heads-to-australia-new-zealand/ Arqiva plans mobile rollout to underpin IoT project in 10 major cities, including London, Manchester, Glasgow and Birmingham http://www.v3.co.uk/v3-uk/news/2345068/uk-internet-of-things-network-rollout-to-make-nation-smarter Ingenu has announced the initial rollout of its Machine Network that will rise in Phoenix and cover 30 US cities by the end of 2016. http://telecoms.com/452612/ingenu-to-roll-out-iot-connectivity-to-30-us-cities-by-2017/
  49. 1 point
    Welcome to the Applied IOT Engineering community. The community does not officially start operating till after our first webinar on 5 July. However feel free to initiate conversations or introduce yourself in the comments below. DO please take the time to optimise your profile.
  50. 1 point
    Hi Andrew, You and Geoff raise important points about successful IoT enterprises. Because this is an engineering and not a IOT business forum, my response is brief. I agree it is necessary: to understand the application and the underlying IoT technology have access to multidisciplinary skills, including engineering and design to focus on sales and marketing have a route to manufacture have a route to market involve capital partners if necessary The following may also be needed: a great business plan supported by a network of business advisers strategic intellectual property planning, including freedom to operate patent filing strategies (which may be to file nothing) I've started a blog on this site about IoT intellectual property strategy. Justin
  • Create New...