Reconnecting is going to take time, it’s cold outside and I am quickly walking back to the Argon Gateway. Most likely the results are skewed in favor of the shorter distance. I really should walk back 20 meters then wait 2 minutes, then walk another 20 meters etc, until it connects, but as I said its cold.
If you see the maximum range as 100% and you consistently lose the connection at 120%, for an installation you are not going to put your Xenons at 100% probably more like at 75%. Note that I had reconnection at about 50% of the range, but a better number is probably 75% if I was willing to wait.
Unfortunately all these distances depend on your situation. Even in the same building the results may vary a fair bit. This might be a career for someone. A company that sets up-time as the highest priority may choose a 50% distance whereas someone who could fly a Boron equipped drone around the business once a day might go with a cheaper arrangement of the 100% distance. (You could also walk around the business with an Argon and a cell phone hotspot.)
So if a business that had a 100% distance at 33.3 m and had a lot that was 100 m x 100 m using the poor connection approach the lot could be covered with 4 Mesh devices as in the diagram. However it might need some method to reconnect devices that become unconnected.
Note: Diagram updated after @peekay123 suggestion
At 75 % max distance would need 9 devices.
but if that same business wanted great up-time with the devices maybe they used the 50% distance then they need 25 devices to cover the entire lot as in the following diagram.
The coverage decisions has a huge effect on the number of devices to purchase. And I am only researching a single connection between a Xenon and an Argon. The entire situation becomes much more complex with a true mesh.
Will be interesting to see what coverage is needed with actual businesses.