Field testing of Halowlink2 with MM6108 or MM8108

[yuhan]

We intend to implement remote control using Wi-Fi HaLow, which requires a specific operating range. We are targeting a range of at least 1 km; however, actual measurements have consistently fallen short of this distance.

We would like to explore methods to improve this range, as well as analyze the extent to which environmental noise and interference are contributing to the current performance limitations.

Morse Micro HaLow — Executive Summary (Indoor vs Outdoor).pdf (424.3 KB)

[yuhan]

We are currently preparing for the second round of field testing.

For this upcoming test, we plan to incorporate parameters—specifically SNR, temperature, background noise, and Tx_Power—into our software to measure service range in the field.

We believe that including a few additional parameters would provide a more comprehensive assessment of the field environment. Could you let us know if there are any other factors we should consider?

If you have any further requirements regarding the TAG, please provide them by 10:00 AM on October 20th; this will allow us enough time to integrate them into the software for the test.

Thank you for your assistance.

Best regards,
Yuhan

[yuhan]

Attached is the screen layout for the field test, which incorporates the parameters you specified. In addition to temperature, SNR, and Tx_Power, the output now also includes “morse_rssi = 0.”

[ajudge]

@yuhan I’m a little confused. This thread is about HaLowLink2. Stats for the HaLowLink2 can be retrieved from morse_cli stats directly or through iw tooling (eg iw dev wlan0 info)

---

Regarding your original question - you are right to measure the environment. While 1km is very possible, environmental factors such as noise, interference, objects or the ground in the fresnel zone can all impact your link quality. Focus on your link budget

For best results, generally aiming to increase antenna height will benefit you.

[yuhan]

Thank you for your valuable input.
The conditions for my measurements are as follows:

1. Same location // for relative comparison (note that surrounding obstacles and the Fresnel zone are variables).
   => Assumed to be consistent.
2. Same antenna height.
3. System budget.

For the current measurements, I am looking at RSSI, SNR, and the distance.
I am currently in the process of organizing the data.

I will compile and post the results from both the first and second rounds of testing, but I have to say, the outlook doesn’t look very promising.

[yuhan]

================================================================================

MM8108 Field Test Observation Report

■ Test Overview

• Objective: Measure the Maximum Communication Range (Max Range) via Ping Test under AP-fixed, STA-moving conditions.
• Environment: 1 MHz bandwidth, Outdoor environment.
• Comparison: 1st Test (Oct 8, 2026) vs. 2nd Test (Oct 20, 2026).

■ Observed Phenomena (Observations)

1. Paradox of Distance

   • In the 1st test, a 50% Ping success rate (limit point) was recorded at 900m.
   • In the 2nd test, 100% success was maintained up to 870m, but a 100% Ping failure occurred beyond that point.
   • As a result, the maximum range in the 2nd test was 30m shorter than in the 1st test.

2. Environmental Factors

   • 1st Test (Reached 900m): The Noise Floor (BGR) was around -90dBm, indicating a highly noisy environment.
   • 2nd Test (Reached 870m): The Noise Floor (BGR) was -100dBm or lower, indicating a very clean environment with minimal noise.
   • Despite the 2nd test having a much more favorable RF environment, the achievable communication range was measured to be shorter.

3. Received Signal Strength (RSSI)

   • 1st Test: Achieved 50% success even at a low signal strength of -95dBm (excellent RX sensitivity).
   • 2nd Test: Maintained 100% success at around -87dBm, but abruptly transitioned to 100% failure starting at a specific point (870m).

4. Software/System Changes

   • 1st Test: Lower log output volume and short Ping Timeout (approx. 1 second).
   • 2nd Test: Significantly increased log output items for statistics (e.g., 18 items) and extended Ping Timeout (approx. 2 seconds).

■ Summary of Observed Phenomena

• In the 2nd test, despite a cleaner RF environment (BGR) compared to the 1st test, the maximum communication range decreased by 30m (900m → 870m).
• Beyond 870m, the Ping success rate abruptly transitioned to 100% failure despite the RSSI still having some margin.
• Increased software log output and extended Ping Timeout were observed in the 2nd test compared to the 1st test.

================================================================================

[yuhan]

It appears that the chip temperature and Tx_Power are factors that need to be investigated. An RSSI of -107 dBm suggests that the device is transmitting at maximum power.

Could you please explain the reason for this?

Thank you.

Yuhan Dream