• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 3 replies
  • Subscribers 30 subscribers
  • Views 464 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

Why the awr1843 can detect the objection further than awr1642?

user6392473
Intellectual 300 points
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: AWR1642, AWR1843

Hi! TI!

 

We’d been testing the awr1843 for a while, the performance is better than the awr1642. Awr1843 can detect further objection. But we are wondering the reason. We know that the number of the Tx increased, so the gain would be larger. But the gain just 1.5 times the previous one (8 virtual Rx to 12 virtual Rx). Take the logarithm of outcome the result is not changed obviously. Could anybody tell me why the result is better? We’d read the great document from TI awr1843.pdf but we can not figure out why awr1843 can detect further objection.

 

Is there any help? I'm very appreciate for your help! Thank you!

Best regard,

Webb

  • 0
    TI__Mastermind 31680 points

    Hello Webb,

    If you refer to section 2.1.1 in this Application note:  Programming Chirp Parameters in TI Radar Devices (Rev. A), max detectable range is expressed as = IF*c/(2S). Assuming a fixed chirp slope(S), Range max is directly proportional to IF Bandwidth.

    Now referring to the device specific datasheets, AWR1642 has 5MHz IF Bandwidth, whereas AWR1843 has 10MHz, thereby providing better maximum detectable range.

    I would request you to go through the linked application note once. Please let us know if there are any other questions.

    Regards,

    Ishita

  • 0 in reply to Ishita Kochar
    Intellectual 300 points

    Hi! Ishita!

     

    I’m very appreciate that your answer and suggestion!

     

    Sorry for that I forgot to mention about we are using the same bumper in front of the radar (both awr1642 and awr1843). Since the bumper consume the signals, we can not achieve the theoretical max detectable range. The detectable distance different from the radar’s output as the same bumper in front of both radar. When using the awr1642, we captured the signal and analysis it, the maximum detectable range of the approaching object is about 30m, but awr1843 is about 100m. We are wondering why awr1843 can detect the objection further than awr1642. The theoretical max detectable range of awr1642 is about 100m.

     

    Looking forward to your reply.

    Best regard,
    Webb

  • +1 in reply to user6392473
    TI__Mastermind 31680 points

    Hello Webb,

    So other than the IF Bandwidth, Max range depends on chirp slope as well which in turn points to the chirp configuration(referring to the same above formula). Larger the chirp slope, less the Max detectable range. 

    Yes, that is true that theoretically AWR1642 can detect objects in a range of 80-120m, but that depends on the chirp configuration you're using.

    If you're using the same chirp configuration in both AWR1642 and AWR1843, then again performance of AWR1843 will be better in terms of max range because of high IF Bandwidth. 

    Regards,

    Ishita