Hi tsalve,
An other thing to keep in mind is that the TX power should be calibrated in the final product so the TX power does not exceed regulatory limits. See our application notes on regulation and certification: Application Notes - Qorvo
This means that you typically have to dial down the TX power, which limits the link budget and thus the range. If the data frames can be kept short (< 1 ms) and the interval large enough (> 1ms), as is the case for most TWR transactions, it is possible to apply gating gain, which allows to boost the TX power. This can be a reason to choose a shorter preamble or faster data rate in some conditions.
Correct, thanks Andy!
The DW1000 was able to operate at UWB channels 1- 5 and channel 7. The DW3000 only operates at UWB channel 5 and 9, with channel 9 becoming the more “de facto standard” channel now that WiFi 6 is threatening to interfere with UWB CH5.
The free space path loss is proportional to the frequency of the signal, i.e the higher the frequency, the higher the free space losses and thus the lower the link budget.
While the DW1000 supports channel 1 (3.5 GHz), I recommend sticking to UWB channel 2 (4 GHz) because it is more widely supported. I believe the quoted 300m range of the DWM1000 is based on channel 2, 110 kbps.
Using the non-standard (DecaWave) 8-symbol binary SFD will also be better (stronger) than using the standard (IEEE) 8-symbol ternary SFD. For 110 kbps operation we even recommend using a 64-bit SFD.
For optimal range, I suggest using 110 kbps with a 64-symbol SFD.
Lastly, the ceramic antenna on the DWM1000/DWM3000 is very wideband. This makes it great for usage at different channels, but it’s performance isn’t as good as an antenna fine-tuned to operate at a specific frequency. Using a chip-down solution with an antenna fine-tuned for CH 2 (4GHz) performance could allow to increase the antenna gain.