# A Survey of LoRaWAN for IoT: From Technology to Application
## 3 Applications and Deployments
### Deployments  
A performance evaluation of a new technology can be done either by simulations or by empirical measurements. For the latter case, networks need to be deployed. In this area, there exist a number of LoRa and LoRaWAN performance studies based on deployed setups in real environments [18; 24; 32; 33; 34; 35; 36; 37; 38; 39]. Table 3 lists each of the studies that made use of a real LoRaWAN setup to study the network performance. It also includes the performance indicators that were measured. The last column of the table shows an example of a measured result and tries to give a comparison between different deployments for the same parameter usage. Note that the RSSI values shown here consider differences in transmit powers used in each study, in order to make values comparable. In [32], a coverage study for LoRaWAN was presented. A coverage of up to 15 km using SF12 was found based on empirical measurements. At a distance of 2 km from the gateway, the RSSI value \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Study** & **Filed of Application** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Studied LoRaWAN Performance Indicators**} \\ \hline  & & **Path Loss** & **PLR** & **Power Consumption** \\ \hline
[12] & Medical & \(\bullet\) & \(\bullet\) & & \\
[13] & Medical & \(\bullet\) & \(\bullet\) & & \(\bullet\) \\
[14] & Agriculture & & & & \\
[15] & Agriculture & \(\bullet\) & & & \\
[16] & Agriculture & & & & \(\bullet\) \\
[17] & Agriculture & & & & \(\bullet\) \\
[18] & Sensor Networks & \(\bullet\) & \(\bullet\) & & \\
[19] & Sensor Networks & \(\bullet\) & & & \\
[20] & Traffic Monitoring & & \(\bullet\) & & \(\bullet\) \\
[23] & Localization & \(\bullet\) & & & \\
[26] & Tele-metering & \(\bullet\) & \(\bullet\) & & \\
[28] & Smart Grid & & & & \\
[24] & Smart City & \(\bullet\) & \(\bullet\) & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: LoRaWAN applications. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Study** & **Environment** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Studied LoRaWAN Performance Indicators**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Comments**} \\ \hline  & & **Path Loss** & **PLR** & **Throughput** & **Delay** & \\ \hline
[32] & Outdoor & Yes & Yes & No & No & @2 km distance using SF12 \\  & & & & & RSSI \(>-\)90 dBm; PLR = 12\% \\ \hline
[33] & Outdoor & Yes & No & No & No & @2 km distance \\  & & & & & coverage only using SF12 \\ \hline
[34] & Outdoor & Yes & Yes & Yes & No & @2 km distance using SF12 \\  & & & & & & PLR = 3\% \\ \hline
[18] & Outdoor-Indoor & Yes & Yes & No & No & @2 km distance \\  & & & & & RSSI \(>-\)100 dBm AXX K rep = 42\% \\ \hline
[35] & Indoor & Yes & Yes & Yes & Yes & @60 m distance with SF12 \\  & & & & & RSSI \(>-\)100 dBm PLR = 2\% \\ \hline
[36] & Indoor & Yes & Yes & No & No & @60 m distance with SF12 \\  & & & & & RSSI \(>-\)100 dBm PLR = 2\% \\ \hline
[37] & Indoor & Yes & No & No & No & @-32 m distance \\  & & & & & RSSI \(>-\)75 dBm \\ \hline
[39] & Industrial & Yes & Yes & No & No & @-190 m distance \\  & & & & & RSSI \(>-\)100 dBm PLR \(<\) 1/\% \\ \hline
[24] & City Outdoor & Yes & No & No & No \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: LoRaWAN deployed setups. was higher than \(-\)90 dBm, showing a good coverage in a city environment for all SFs. In [34], packet losses for SF12 at \(\sim\)2 km were around 3%, while reliability tests in [18] showed that, for a distance of 1.9 km, only 42% of ACKs from the end node could be received. In [36], a LoRaWAN deployment for indoor environment was evaluated. The gateway was positioned outside, while measurement points were chosen inside the building. For all measurements points, the packet success rate was above 95%, while the path loss ranged from 97 dB to 146 dB, which brings the signal at the bottom level of the receiver sensitivity (tx power 14 dBm), but still acceptable for good reception. In [37], the indoor propagation performance of LoRaWAN has been studied.