Research Article
BLE or IEEE 802.15.4: Which Home IoT Communication Solution is more Energy-Efficient?
@ARTICLE{10.4108/eai.1-12-2016.151713, author={Xenofon Fafoutis and Evgeny Tsimbalo and Wenrui Zhao and Haowen Chen and Evangelos Mellios and William Harwin and Robert Piechocki and Ian Craddock}, title={BLE or IEEE 802.15.4: Which Home IoT Communication Solution is more Energy-Efficient?}, journal={EAI Endorsed Transactions on Internet of Things}, volume={2}, number={5}, publisher={EAI}, journal_a={IOT}, year={2016}, month={12}, keywords={IEEE 802.15.4, Bluetooth Low Energy, physical layer, energy-e\"{y}ciency, smart homes, Internet of Things}, doi={10.4108/eai.1-12-2016.151713} }- Xenofon Fafoutis
Evgeny Tsimbalo
Wenrui Zhao
Haowen Chen
Evangelos Mellios
William Harwin
Robert Piechocki
Ian Craddock
Year: 2016
BLE or IEEE 802.15.4: Which Home IoT Communication Solution is more Energy-Efficient?
IOT
EAI
DOI: 10.4108/eai.1-12-2016.151713
Abstract
IEEE 802.15.4 (used by Zigbee, 6LoWPAN and Thread) and Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) are two widely used wireless standards for ultra low power IoT (Internet of Things) technologies and smart home applications. In this article, we present the first comparison of the physical layer of the two protocols, focusing on two performance metrics: energy eÿciency and wireless coverage. The comparison uses the first radio that seamlessly supports both protocols; therefore, the protocols are compared on identical hardware and software. By combining the two metrics, we quantify the performance, and identify in which types of links it is preferable to use one protocol or the other, thus providing practical guidelines to developers of short-range energy-constrained wireless networks and smart home applications.
Copyright © 2016 X. Fafoutis et al., licensed to EAI. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/), which permits unlimited use, distribution and reproduction in any medium so long as the original work is properly cited.
