Geolocation Without GPS? How LoRaWAN is Changing the Game for IoT Tracking

While most people think of LoRaWAN as the go-to for long-range IoT communication, its potential for geolocation is often overlooked. Imagine tracking assets, vehicles, or even livestock across vast areas—all without draining your device’s battery or relying on costly hardware.

In this first part of our three-part series, we dive into the fascinating world of LoRaWAN geolocation. We’ll break down why it’s becoming the preferred choice for many IoT applications, what methods are available (which to use), and how it works seamlessly in both indoor and outdoor settings. Spoiler alert: It’s not about replacing GPS—it’s about offering a smarter option where GNSS might not be the best fit.

Curious to know why more IoT developers are turning to LoRaWAN for geolocation? Let’s explore this hidden gem of a technology and discover how it’s making geolocation more accessible, scalable, and practical for real-world applications.

Why Geolocation with LoRaWAN?

“LoRaWAN for geolocation? That sounds like using a screwdriver to hammer in nails!”

That might be your first thought—but stick with me. LoRaWAN, traditionally viewed as just a low-power communication protocol for IoT devices, is now pulling off something pretty unexpected: geolocation. And not just any geolocation, but the kind that’s light on your devices’ batteries, light on your budget, and heavy on versatility.

So, why exactly would you consider using LoRaWAN for geolocation?

Let’s break it down:

1. Low Power, High Longevity: Most tracking solutions require a lot of power, leading to frequent battery replacements or recharges. LoRaWAN flips the script—your device can last for years on a single battery. That’s a game-changer for long-term deployments like environmental monitoring or agricultural tracking.
2. Cost-Effective Coverage: LoRaWAN’s ability to operate on unlicensed frequency bands means no costly spectrum licenses. Plus, with just a handful of gateways, you can cover a wide area—think entire factory floors or sprawling farmlands. This makes it perfect for IoT applications that don’t need centimeter-level precision but do need reliable coverage.
3. Indoor and Outdoor Versatility: GPS and GNSS struggle inside buildings or urban canyons. LoRaWAN, however, can navigate through these obstacles with relative ease, giving you location data even in places where traditional systems choke.
4. Multiple Geolocation Methods: LoRaWAN isn’t a one-trick pony. You can choose from multiple geolocation methods like RSSI, TDoA, or even advanced techniques like fingerprinting. That means you get to decide what works best for your specific application—more on that later!

In short, LoRaWAN is like a Swiss Army knife for IoT geolocation: versatile, reliable, and ready for action in a variety of environments.

Limitations and Challenges of LoRaWAN Geolocation

“Okay, sounds good… but what’s the catch?”

Let’s be real—every technology has its limitations, and LoRaWAN is no exception. While it’s a robust tool for geolocation in many contexts, it does come with a few caveats:

• Accuracy Trade-Off: If you’re looking for pinpoint accuracy down to a few centimeters, LoRaWAN might not be your go-to solution. Depending on the environment, expect accuracy to range between 50 and 200 meters. Perfect for tracking a herd of cattle across a ranch, but not for navigating a drone through a dense forest.
• Environmental Interference: Signals bouncing off walls, trees, or even weather conditions can distort measurements. This means that in cluttered or rapidly changing environments, your location data might not be as precise.
• Gateway Density Matters: Unlike GNSS, which only requires a clear view of the sky, LoRaWAN’s performance depends on having a sufficient number of gateways. Fewer gateways mean lower accuracy—so for high-precision needs, you’ll need to invest in more infrastructure.
• Synchronization Requirements: For methods like TDoA, precise time synchronization between gateways is crucial, adding another layer of complexity to the deployment.

But here’s the good news: these limitations aren’t deal-breakers. They simply mean that LoRaWAN is best suited for applications where broader accuracy is acceptable, and cost and power efficiency are priorities.

Overview of Geolocation Methods Using LoRaWAN

“Hold up—did you say multiple methods? How does that even work?”

Yes, you heard right! One of the coolest things about using LoRaWAN for geolocation is that you’re not locked into just one way of doing things. Depending on your specific use case—whether you’re tracking vehicles, monitoring wildlife, or keeping tabs on valuable assets—there’s likely a geolocation method that fits your needs.

Let’s take a closer look at the primary methods, and what makes each one unique:

Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI)

RSSI is like the "lite" version of geolocation. Imagine you’re at a concert, trying to figure out where your friend is by listening to how loud their voice is. The louder they sound, the closer they probably are. That’s RSSI in a nutshell—measuring signal strength to estimate distance.

How It Works:

When it comes to determining a device’s location using LoRaWAN, one of the simplest approaches is to use Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI). This method relies on measuring the strength of the signal at various gateways and using this data to estimate how far the device is from each gateway. While RSSI-based geolocation is easy to implement, it comes with its own set of challenges, especially in environments with obstacles or signal interference.

?

Curious about how to turn signal strength into precise distance calculations? In our next publication, we’ll break down the exact steps, explain the theory behind the path loss model, and walk you through the process of implementing RSSI-based geolocation with practical examples and code snippets.

Pros:

RSSI is relatively simple to implement and doesn’t require fancy hardware or complicated setups. You can get started with just a single gateway and a few nodes. It’s perfect for scenarios where rough estimates are good enough—think tracking goods within a warehouse or monitoring sensor locations in open fields.

Cons:

However, signal strength can be affected by many factors like walls, weather, and even the density of the air. This means that RSSI-based geolocation can be a bit “jumpy,” making it less reliable in complex or cluttered environments.

Use Case:

One of the most common and practical applications of this method is to confirm whether an object is located within a specific area or at its designated site or facility.

Time Difference of Arrival (TDoA)

Now, TDoA is where things get more sophisticated. Think of it as the Sherlock Holmes of geolocation—it’s all about timing and deduction.

How It Works:

For applications that demand higher accuracy, Time Difference of Arrival (TDoA) is a powerful geolocation method. TDoA measures the time a signal takes to reach multiple gateways and calculates the differences in arrival times to triangulate the device’s position. With advanced techniques like Fine Timestamping, TDoA offers a level of precision that’s difficult to achieve with simpler methods like RSSI.

?

Want to know how TDoA works and how you can implement it? Stay tuned for next article on this topic, where we’ll dive into the theory and technical details of TDoA geolocation, explore Fine Timestamping, and guide you through the implementation with step-by-step instructions and code examples.

Pros:

TDoA offers much higher accuracy than RSSI, typically down to tens of meters. It’s ideal for tracking vehicles, equipment, or other high-value assets where precision matters.

Cons:

The catch? You need multiple gateways that are precisely synchronized—something that requires specialized hardware or access to GNSS time synchronization. This adds complexity and cost but results in significantly better accuracy.

Other Methods Worth Mentioning

While RSSI and TDoA are the most commonly used methods, there are a few other tricks up LoRaWAN’s sleeve:

Angle of Arrival (AoA):

This technique uses the angle at which signals arrive at the gateway to estimate location. It’s highly accurate but needs specialized antennas and is generally more expensive.

Note: It's important to note that, to date, there are very few practical applications that rely exclusively on the Angle of Arrival (AoA) method. While it may not be particularly effective on its own, it can serve as a valuable complement to other approaches, potentially enhancing overall accuracy.

?

Fingerprinting:

A bit like creating a “signal map” of an area, fingerprinting involves recording RSSI values at known locations and then using this database to estimate unknown positions. It’s great for indoor environments but requires a lot of upfront work and maintenance.

With multiple options at your disposal, you’re free to choose the method that best suits your application. But how do you decide which one to go for? That’s where the next section comes in!

Choosing the Right Geolocation Method

“So, which one should I use?”

Glad you asked! Choosing the right method depends on a few factors—your desired level of accuracy, budget, environmental conditions, and infrastructure. Here’s a quick comparison to help you make an informed choice:

Note: If you need rough positioning with minimal investment, RSSI is a solid starting point. If accuracy is key, TDoA is your go-to—but be prepared for a bit more complexity. And if you’re feeling adventurous (or have deep pockets), explore AoA or fingerprinting for even better precision.

Remember, no method is a one-size-fits-all solution. Consider the trade-offs, and choose what best aligns with your project’s requirements!

Limitations and Challenges of LoRaWAN Geolocation

“LoRaWAN geolocation sounds amazing—what’s the catch?”

Good question! While LoRaWAN brings a lot of perks to the table for geolocation, it’s not without its quirks and constraints. Understanding these limitations upfront will help you set realistic expectations and design your system accordingly. Here’s a closer look at what to watch out for:

Accuracy vs. Cost Trade-Off

LoRaWAN can’t promise sub-meter precision like some GNSS systems, but it offers something else: the ability to geolocate without breaking the bank or draining your batteries. Expect location accuracy to typically range from 50 to 200 meters, depending on factors like the environment, gateway placement, and method used. For some applications, that’s more than enough. For others, it might feel like trying to find a needle in a haystack.

Pro Tip: Use TDoA if you need higher accuracy and can afford a few more gateways. For less critical applications or indoor use, RSSI is a good middle-ground that keeps costs in check.

Environmental Sensitivity

Imagine trying to have a conversation with someone across a crowded room—that’s what LoRaWAN signals experience when navigating through dense urban areas or thick walls. Signal strength and timing can be affected by reflections, obstructions, and even the weather, leading to inaccuracies.

Impact: RSSI-based methods are more prone to these issues because they rely on signal strength, which fluctuates with every obstacle. TDoA, while less affected, still faces challenges when signals take multiple paths to reach a gateway (multipath effect).

Pro Tip: Conduct a thorough site survey before deploying your network to identify potential problem areas, and consider hybrid methods that combine TDoA and RSSI for better results.

Gateway Density and Placement

LoRaWAN’s geolocation accuracy depends heavily on how many gateways are listening in. More gateways mean better triangulation and higher precision, but they also mean more investment and infrastructure complexity.

Impact: For TDoA to work effectively, at least three gateways need to receive the signal. If only one or two gateways catch the signal, you’ll be left guessing.

Pro Tip: Place gateways at high points like rooftops or towers for better line-of-sight coverage. If indoor, use a mesh-like arrangement to reduce blind spots and signal blockages.

Synchronization and Timing

For TDoA-based geolocation, precise synchronization between gateways is a must. Even tiny differences in timing can lead to significant errors in calculated positions. This requires specialized hardware or GNSS synchronization to achieve the necessary timing accuracy.

Impact: If you’re deploying TDoA in a large area, you’ll need to factor in the cost and complexity of maintaining this level of synchronization. It’s not a deal-breaker, but it does add another layer of considerations.

Pro Tip: Leverage fine timestamping features if your gateways support it, or consider using a dedicated synchronization node as described in advanced LoRaWAN deployment guides.

Choosing LoRaWAN Geolocation for Your Project: Key Considerations

“Alright, so how do I know if LoRaWAN geolocation is right for my project?”

Choosing LoRaWAN for geolocation isn’t just about ticking the accuracy or cost boxes. It’s about aligning the technology’s strengths with your project’s needs. Here are a few scenarios where LoRaWAN geolocation really shines:

1. Asset Tracking in Warehouses and Industrial Sites: You don’t need pinpoint precision to know where your forklifts or equipment are within a large warehouse. LoRaWAN’s low-power nature ensures that your tracking devices won’t need constant recharging.
2. Agriculture and Wildlife Monitoring: Battery life is critical when tracking herds or monitoring crop fields that span kilometers. With LoRaWAN, devices can last for months or even years, giving you consistent data without frequent interventions.
3. Environmental and Infrastructure Monitoring: Monitoring remote or hazardous locations like pipelines or wind turbines? LoRaWAN’s long-range capabilities let you keep an eye on things without frequent maintenance or hefty deployment costs.
4. Indoor Navigation in Large Facilities: While not as precise as Bluetooth-based systems, LoRaWAN can give you a general sense of where things are in large facilities like airports or shopping centers—especially when traditional GPS just won’t cut it.

But if you’re looking to replace a GNSS-based navigation system in a car or drone, you might want to think twice. For such high-precision requirements, traditional GNSS or hybrid systems that combine GNSS with LoRaWAN might be a better fit.

Conclusion and What’s Next

“Okay, LoRaWAN isn’t just for data transmission—it can find stuff too!”

That’s right! Whether you’re looking for a cost-effective solution for rough geolocation or want to explore innovative ways to track assets without draining batteries, LoRaWAN has a lot to offer. It’s not just about choosing a method—it’s about choosing the right tool for the job.

This article is part of a three-part series on LoRaWAN geolocation. Next up, in Article 2, we’ll break down the technical nitty-gritty of RSSI-based geolocation, showing you how to set it up, the math behind it, and how to overcome its challenges. Expect flow charts, pseudo-code, and real-world examples to get you started.

After that, Article 3 will tackle TDoA-based geolocation. We’ll explore why it’s the method of choice for high-accuracy applications, how to implement it with fine timestamping, and what pitfalls to avoid.

Stay tuned, follow us, comment, and let’s keep exploring how LoRaWAN is redefining geolocation—one signal at a time!