Classification
Anjielo Wi-Fi HaLow Long-Range Field Test Report: 40KM Line-of-Sight Communication Validated
Time:
2026-09-07
Release Date: September 7, 2026
Test Location: Majiawu Observation Deck (200m elevation) & Wangwei Mountain (700m elevation), Hangzhou, China
Keywords: Wi-Fi HaLow, Long-Range Communication, IoT Wireless Module, Sub-1GHz, LPWAN Alternative, 40KM Range Test
1. Test Background
As IoT (Internet of Things) and LPWAN (Low-Power Wide-Area Network) applications continue to expand, there is a growing market demand for long-range, medium-to-low data rate, and low-power wireless communication solutions. Wi-Fi HaLow (IEEE 802.11ah), operating in the Sub-1GHz band, offers distinct advantages including superior penetration capability, extended coverage, and native IP protocol stack compatibility.
To verify the extreme-range communication performance of our self-developed Wi-Fi HaLow modules under real-world geographic conditions, we conducted a 40-kilometer line-of-sight (LOS) range test in December 2025 between Majiawu and Wangwei Mountain in Hangzhou. The test focused on evaluating packet throughput stability and environmental interference resilience across modules with different transmit power levels.
2. Test Environment & Equipment
Test Sites (Straight-line distance: approximately 40 km)
| Location | Elevation | Environmental Characteristics |
|---|---|---|
| Majiawu Observation Deck | 200m | Suburban area, high RF noise floor, multiple interference sources |
| Wangwei Mountain | 700m | Open highland, relatively clean electromagnetic environment |
Modules Tested (Model & Quantity)
FZ7020-27 (Tx Power 27dBm) — 3 units
FZ7020-30 (Tx Power 30dBm) — 2 units
FZ7020-33 (Tx Power 33dBm) — 2 units
FZ7030-35 (Tx Power 35dBm) — 2 units
(Devices were deployed at both sites to establish point-to-point and multi-node concurrent test links.)
3. Test Methodology
Fixed-end equipment was placed at Wangwei Mountain (higher elevation), while mobile-end equipment was placed at Majiawu (lower elevation). The path between the two sites had no significant obstructions, satisfying line-of-sight conditions.
All modules operated at maximum transmit power, performing continuous packet injection with fixed packet size and fixed intervals for over 30 minutes per session.
Recorded metrics included PHY rate, actual application-layer throughput, and packet loss rate, with performance comparisons made between the two environmental conditions.
4. Key Test Conclusions
4.1 All Communication Links Established Successfully
Under 40km line-of-sight conditions, all tested modules (27dBm to 35dBm) successfully established stable connections with zero disconnections or re-association failures, fully demonstrating Wi-Fi HaLow's exceptional coverage capability in open scenarios.
4.2 Throughput Performance Positively Correlated with Transmit Power
Higher-power modules (FZ7030-35, FZ7020-33) consistently achieved higher MCS rates in favorable environments.
Lower-power modules (FZ7020-27) still maintained usable throughput at the same distance, sufficient for typical IoT applications such as sensor data backhaul and image transmission.
4.3 Environmental Noise Floor Impact — System Robustness Confirmed
The Majiawu site, being in a suburban area, exhibited a significantly higher RF noise floor compared to Wangwei Mountain, resulting in an overall throughput drop of approximately one MCS level (e.g., from MCS 4 to MCS 3). Despite this unfavorable condition, all modules maintained zero or extremely low packet loss, demonstrating excellent interference resistance and link adaptation capabilities.
5. Data Summary (Highlights)
| Test Metric | Best Environment (Wangwei Mt.) | Noisier Environment (Majiawu) | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|
| Max Stable Throughput | Higher (≥XX Mbps) | Moderate (~1 MCS level lower) | Rate auto-adjusted due to noise floor |
| Link Setup Success Rate | 100% | 100% | No notable difference |
| Packet Loss Rate (30 min) | <0.1% | <0.5% | Well below typical application tolerance |
Note: Specific MCS index and corresponding throughput values can be provided in detailed appendices upon request.
6. MCS Rate Reference Table (Wi-Fi HaLow 802.11ah)
The table below shows theoretical PHY rates (in Mbps) for different Modulation and Coding Schemes (MCS) under single spatial stream operation. Actual throughput will be slightly lower due to protocol overhead and environmental factors.
| MCS Index | Modulation | Coding Rate | 1MHz Channel | 2MHz Channel | 4MHz Channel | 8MHz Channel |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | BPSK | 1/2 | 0.30 | 0.65 | 1.35 | 2.93 |
| 1 | QPSK | 1/2 | 0.60 | 1.30 | 2.70 | 5.85 |
| 2 | QPSK | 3/4 | 0.90 | 1.95 | 4.05 | 8.78 |
| 3 | 16-QAM | 1/2 | 1.20 | 2.60 | 5.40 | 11.70 |
| 4 | 16-QAM | 3/4 | 1.80 | 3.90 | 8.10 | 17.55 |
| 5 | 64-QAM | 2/3 | 2.40 | 5.20 | 10.80 | 23.40 |
| 6 | 64-QAM | 3/4 | 2.70 | 5.85 | 12.15 | 26.30 |
| 7 | 64-QAM | 5/6 | 3.00 | 6.50 | 13.50 | 29.30 |
| 8 | 256-QAM | 3/4 | 3.60 | 7.80 | 16.20 | 35.10 |
| 9 | 256-QAM | 5/6 | — | 8.67 | 18.00 | 39.00 |
Recommended Visualization: A line or bar chart with MCS index on the X-axis, throughput (Mbps) on the Y-axis, and four curves/bars for 1/2/4/8 MHz channel bandwidths.
7. Recommended Charts for Test Data
Figure 1: Throughput Comparison by Module & Environment
A grouped bar chart comparing FZ7020 series vs. FZ7030-35 performance between Wangwei Mountain (low noise floor) and Majiawu (high noise floor):
X-axis: Module model (FZ7020-27 / -30 / -33 / FZ7030-35)
Y-axis: Measured throughput (Mbps)
Each group: Two bars — left = Wangwei, right = Majiawu
Annotation: Mark the ~1 MCS level drop observed at the Majiawu site
Figure 2: RSSI vs. Distance (if full path data available)
A line chart showing RSSI (Received Signal Strength Indicator) variation over the 40km link, or a simple bar comparison of average RSSI values between the two sites.
8. Vertical Application Deep-Dives
8.1 UAV/Drones — Beyond-Visual-Line-of-Sight (BVLOS) Control & Video Transmission
Key Requirements:
Control link: Low latency, high reliability (flight safety critical)
Video link: Medium data rate (several Mbps for real-time video streaming)
Coverage: Several to tens of kilometers, especially in LTE dead zones
Wi-Fi HaLow Advantages:
Sub-1GHz band provides significantly longer range than 2.4GHz/5.8GHz Wi-Fi
Dynamic MCS adjustment ensures link continuity under signal fading
Native IP stack eliminates additional gateway translation, reducing system complexity
Real-World Reference:
In 2024–2025, EY Japan and NEC conducted UAV logistics trials in the mountainous region of Kamo Highlands, Hiroshima Prefecture. In LTE-blind zones, Wi-Fi HaLow successfully maintained continuous communication between drones and ground stations, enabling real-time onboard data transmission and remote landing command issuance, validating HaLow's practicality for mountainous logistics. In 2025, academic research further explored combining Wi-Fi HaLow with Wi-Fi 6 for multi-hop video streaming in UAV swarm architectures.
8.2 Smart Agriculture — Large-Scale Sensor Networks
Key Requirements:
Wide coverage: Single farm spans tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of square meters
Obstacle penetration: Must traverse greenhouse glass, walls, and crop foliage
High device density: Soil sensors, weather stations, pest monitors, irrigation controllers, etc.
Wi-Fi HaLow Advantages:
Single AP covers 50,000+ m² of farmland without requiring mesh networking, drastically reducing deployment costs
Field-verified to maintain several Mbps throughput even through 5 layers of greenhouse glass in worst-case scenarios
Supports hundreds of concurrent devices per AP, meeting large-scale sensor deployment needs
Real-World References:
Ohio Smart Farm (USA): A single Wi-Fi HaLow AP covered 14 acres (~56,700 m²), successfully connecting 24 IoT devices both indoors and outdoors. Even at the farthest greenhouse location (multiple glass layers), UDP throughput remained at 4.1 Mbps.
BeatCraft (Japan): In cabbage cultivation trials, Wi-Fi HaLow enabled real-time field environmental data collection and transmission, optimizing crop cycle management.
8.3 Industrial Energy & Smart Cities
Key Requirements:
Long-range data backhaul (oil fields, solar farms, wind power plants)
High-density device access (smart city sensor networks)
High reliability and low power consumption (battery-powered long-life devices)
Wi-Fi HaLow Advantages:
Native support for WPA3 encryption and Wi-Fi Easy Connect, ensuring security and ease of provisioning
Low-power design extends battery life for remote sensors
Already deployed in Japanese railway tunnels and public infrastructure projects
9. Vertical Application Summary Table
| Application Scenario | Key Requirements | Wi-Fi HaLow Advantages | Verified Case Studies |
|---|---|---|---|
| UAV Control & Video Link | Long range, low latency, LTE-free operation | Sub-1GHz wide coverage, dynamic rate adaptation | Kamo Highlands (Japan) logistics trial |
| Smart Agriculture | Large area, penetration, high device density | Single AP covers 50,000+ m², works through multiple glass layers | Ohio Smart Farm, BeatCraft cabbage trial (Japan) |
| Industrial Monitoring | Remote, low power, high reliability | Supports hundreds of nodes, battery-friendly long life | WAC building inspection robot (Japan) |
| Smart Cities | Dense nodes, wide coverage, easy deployment | Single AP covers sq. km without mesh | WBA urban & rural field tests (USA & Japan) |
10. Conclusion
This 40km range test thoroughly validates the stability and practical viability of our Wi-Fi HaLow modules in real long-distance, non-ideal electromagnetic environments. Even in suburban areas with high noise floors, the system maintained reliable communication through dynamic rate adaptation, demonstrating superior coverage performance compared to conventional 2.4GHz Wi-Fi and certain LPWAN alternatives.
We will continue to optimize our algorithms and RF designs to accelerate large-scale adoption of Wi-Fi HaLow across more long-range, low-power IoT scenarios.
For complete test data, samples, or technical inquiries → [Contact Us / Link]
Follow us for the latest Wi-Fi HaLow white papers and application case studies.
Relevant cases