White Paper

Reducing the Risk to Backhaul Links

in the Integrated Radio-to-Antenna Path
Introduction
Dual-polarized working is not new in the microwave terrestrial point to point radio domain and is prevalent in core
or backbone transmission systems where multichannel high capacity is the norm. However in the traditionally lower
capacity Mobile Backhaul theatre, currently only a small percentage of links are using dual polarizationa figure
which is expected to grow given the recent demands for increased capacity, spectral efficiency, and improvements
in radio functionality.
Successful development of technologies such as Cross-Polar Interference Cancellers (XPICs), which mitigate the
impact of polarization cross-coupling, are facilitating co-channel, dual polarization operation within the mobile backhaul networks. Use of XPICS with a dual polarization system doubles the transmission capacity of a microwave link
within a single frequency channel allocation.
CommScope is actively partnering with the industrys major radio OEMs to develop viable models that will make
deployment of these next generation systems economically and functionally feasible. Our research has highlighted
opportunities and challenges in this area. Among the more significant challenges is the importance of designing the
radio-to-antenna path as a closely integrated package.
This is of special concern given the common practice of using waveguide components designed by third party
manufacturers and inserted in the radio-to-antenna path. Specifically, these third party add-ons may compromise
both spectrum efficiency and/or product life within the radio-to-antenna path.
This white paper has been developed in order to illustrate the risks involved in introducing third party components
into the antenna-to-radio path. Further, it argues the case for carefully qualifying and sourcing all radio-to-antenna
path components - including associated waveguide assemblies - as an integrated package from a reputable antenna manufacturer.

Dual Polarization
In a traditional dual-polarized radio-to-antenna microwave solution, remotely located radios- are connected to the
antenna via two runs of waveguideone per polarization. The polarizations merge into the same transmission path
using a device known as an Ortho-Mode Transformer (OMT). Also referred to as a polarizer the OMT forms part
of the antenna feed system and is either positioned adjacent to the focal point of a reflector antenna as part of the
feed horn, or at the antennas radio interface.
In transmit mode, the OMT combines the polarizations from the two dedicated rectangular waveguides into a
single transmission path, usually carried by a circular waveguide connected to the radiating aperture of the feed
system. In receive mode the process is reversed with the OMT responsible for accepting the combined signal from
the circular waveguide, separating it into its component polarized signals and conducting them onto their respective
rectangular waveguides.

www.commscope.com/andrew

Page 1 of 7

White Paper

(Continued)

For mobile backhaul applications, the most common radio-to-antenna configuration is the split-mount radio, which
separates the microwave circuitry from the baseband processing circuitry. The microwave components are housed
within an outdoor unit (ODU) integrated with, or mounted adjacent to, the antenna. The baseband processing components are housed in an indoor unit (IDU), often mounted in a standard rack unit at the base of the antenna tower
installation. A coaxial cable provides IF, communication and power connection between the two units.
Today, the majority of split-mount radios are configured for single polarization operation. A single go/return radio
channel pair provides full duplex operation. However, the rapid growth of data services is pressuring operators to
increase mobile backhaul capacity to cope with the increased demand.
One solution is to re-use the single polarized radio channel enabling it to, simultaneously send and receive the
orthogonal polarization. Enhancements such as the development of XPICs, allow for simultaneous transmission of
the vertical and horizontal polarizations on the same channel, while minimizing cross talk. As a result, operators can
double the channels data handling capacity with only negligible impact on spectrum leasing costs.
While this configuration is functionally viable, it is economically imprudent. Until recently, the majority of dual polarized systems for backhaul required two remote radios mounted adjacent to the antenna and two runs of flexible
waveguide to connect each radio to the ports on the OMT. The effect is a significant contribution to CAPEX cost.
In order to reduce CAPEX, system providers have recently begun mounting the ODUs of the two single polarized
radios directly onto the OMT which in turn is mounted directly onto the antenna. The solution creates a split mount
dual polarized configuration that eliminates the need for the two antenna mounts and the two runs of flexible waveguide.

Critical Design Aspects

A key concern regarding the new integrated dual polarized split mount design is the mechanical integrity of the
radio-to-antenna path. The mounting of two OEM radios onto an antenna together with the associated waveguide
components represents a considerable load. Therefore it is mandatory that the system undergo load, shock and
vibration testing at the design stage, to ensure adequate performance. The testing must be done on a per customer
basis as each OEM radio is different and each impacts the performance of the radio-to-antenna path in a different
manner.
Beyond its ability to withstand the additional load, the split mount design presents two important RF challenges
which must be considered: insertion loss, and the isolation between the two polarizations, known as inter-port
isolation. Both RF characteristics should be evaluated on the production test bench. Acceptable levels are 0.2 dB
for insertion loss and 35 dB for inter-port isolation. Insertion loss above 0.2 dB is indicative of a poor RF design
and begins to impact system gain. And while inter-port isolation less than 35 dB is acceptable, assuming cross-talk
correction from the XPIC, this can reduce the effectiveness of the XPIC in correcting for link-induced polarization
impediments.
Whereas both insertion loss and inter-port isolation can be assessed through bench testing, there is a thirdand
potentially more significantRF parameter which cannot be so easily measured.

www.commscope.com/andrew

Page 2 of 7

White Paper

(Continued)

RF Leakagethe hidden menace

RF leakage can occur virtually anywhere along the radio-to-antenna path, but can be especially problematic from
the waveguide devices such as OMTs and couplers. These devices typically feature a split-block waveguide design
in which two half-longitudinal sections are joined to create an RF seal. The integrity of the seal: however, must be
established at the design stage. To do this, the waveguide device is integrated with the target antenna; radiation
patterns from the entire assembly are then measured on an antenna test range and evaluated.
Conclusive antenna range testing requires high dynamic measurement capabilities. Depending on the antennas
gain the radiation limits, as set by regulatory authorities, can be 60-80 dB below the main beam peak level.

Figure 2Typical Integrated OMT unit mounted

on the antenna

Figure 1Typical test range set up for the evaluation of RF leakage

To accurately test for RF leakage, engineers first mount and align the antenna in isolation onto an azimuth rotator;
the antenna is illuminated by an in-band RF signal transmitted from a remote location. The received signal level is
then recorded as a function of azimuth angle. Typically, and per ETSI, measurements are recorded at the bottom,
mid, and top frequencies across the operating band. Measurements are also taken at the co-polar and cross-polar
incident polarizations. On completion, the OMT device is assembled onto the antenna now commonly referred to
as the assembly under test (AUT), and the measurement program repeated. Any differences in the recorded radiation
patterns between the antenna when measured in isolation and the AUT can then be directly attributed to RF leakage
arising from integration.
RF leakage from the AUT can significantly impact the antennas radiation pattern performance. Figure 3a
compares the co-polar radiation patterns of an integrated system using a ValuLine 18 GHz microwave antenna
with a well-designed OMT as compared to the same antenna paired with a poorly-designed third-party OMT. The
pattern degradation behind the antenna, caused by RF leakage, is severe enough to prevent compliance to the
mandatory ETSI regulation Class 3 pattern envelope specification. Figure 3b illustrates the corresponding cross-polar
radiation patterns, where the specification is even more stringent. Again the effect of RF leakage from the poorly
designed OMT package is apparent.

www.commscope.com/andrew

Page 3 of 7

White Paper

(Continued)

Figure 3a: Co-polarized Radiation Pattern Coverage of correctly designed integrated OMT assembly compared with poorly
designed components against mandatory FCC and ETSI regulatory specifications

Figure 3b: Cross-polarized Radiation Pattern Coverage of correctly designed integrated OMT assembly compared with poorly
designed components against mandatory FCC and ETSI regulatory specifications.

www.commscope.com/andrew

Page 4 of 7

White Paper

(Continued)

Potential Consequences of RF Leakage:

Degradation of carrier/noise ratio (C/N) can lead to bit errors in systems using stringent high capacity
modulation schemes
Non-compliance to published specifications
Non-compliance to mandatory regulatory specifications such as FCC and ETSI
Non-compliance to Conformity to Harmonized Standards (in the EU) prevent the use of the CE mark on the
assembly.
RF leakage poses a significant risk to the performance of an integrated radio system and must be eliminated at
the design stage, and confirmed by RF testing as an assembly. Because of the sophistication and cost of the testing
involved the majority of third party waveguide component manufacturers do not have this ability.
Leasing an approved testing facility with the associated personnel typically costs $3,000 or more per day. That
cost rises substantially if the system is to be labelled with the CE mark in the EU. When multiplied by the number
of frequency bands that must be tested and the various combinations of radios/OMTs/antennas that must be confirmed, the process quickly becomes cost-prohibitive.
Clearly, the third-party is at a considerable disadvantage when it comes to developing and evaluating add-on
devices such as an OMT solution for an antenna integration compared with the reputable antenna manufacturer who
not only has the design expertise, but also ready access to the mandatory test regime.
In Europe, it is the radio OEM who will take ultimate responsibility for the declaration of compliance to harmonized
standards for the complete integrated radio system. It is therefore incumbent on them to ensure that the required
performance parameters are achieved. Such information is readily accessible for the antenna to radio integration
package from the reputable antenna manufacturers who perform the overall design and qualification of their own
Integrated Products as part of their Product Development Process (as required by for example ISO9000).

Moisture Ingressanother hidden menace

With any integrated assembly, the risk of moisture ingress is present. For any single isolated component such as
an OMT, ensuring the mechanical integrity of an environmental seal is as straightforward as performing a simple
pressure leak test. Confirming the integrity of multiple seals in an integrated system, is far more involved and no less
important when it comes to the design and verification processes. Of special concern is the point at which the radio/OMT assembly attaches to the antenna at or adjacent to the microwave interface. To accurately and precisely
engineer the seal with the requisite integrity requires intimate details of the mating parts during the design stage.
Such information is of course readily available to the antenna designer/manufacturer who owns the design. The
third-party supplier, who does not have access to the design details of the antenna, is at a significant disadvantage.
Therefore, the antenna designer/manufacturer is best suited to provide directly compatible parts for the integration.
A poorly designed ineffectual environmental seal at the OMT/Antenna interface may not be detected during or
even immediately after installation. The impact, however, will be unmistakable in time. Moisture ingress into the microwave path will lead to significant losses in link performance and can result in missing availability targets.
Unfortunately, there is no redundancy or protection within an integrated system to mitigate against the effects of
moisture ingress. What is more, the OMT/Antenna interface is in the common RF path, so the loss in link performance
will affect both channels. The most likely solution will be to replace both the antenna and integration unit.

www.commscope.com/andrew

Page 5 of 7

White Paper

(Continued)

Fine Polarization Adjustment

In a practical dual polarized microwave point to point link, it is important to ensure that the polarization axes of
the two antennas are coincident. This minimizes cross coupling between vertical and horizontal polarized signals.
The antennas are generally mounted onto pipe structures which in turn are attached to towers. The orientation of the
pipes at each end wont necessarily be coincident. If, for example, the pipe at one end of the link is at +3 degrees
to the vertical whilst the pipe at the far end is 3 degrees, the result will be a misalignment of the polarization axes
of 6 degrees. Unless corrected, this misalignment will result in polarization coupling.
Reputable antenna manufacturers have resolved this issue by incorporating an independent polarization alignment
feature within the antenna/radio assembly. The alignment feature, which functions independent of the mounting pole,
enables operators to optimize the link cross-coupling at the RF commissioning stage. For example, one end may be
set to the nominal reference, while the remote end is fine adjusted to provide maximum isolation. In this way, the
XPICs are not being used to compensate for internally generated stable cross-polarization created by misalignment.
Instead, they are deployed to compensate for dynamic variations in cross-polarization impediments arising from the
link, a purpose for which they are much better suited.
Again, this is a feature that is regularly incorporated into the integrated OMT/Antenna designs of reputable
antenna manufacturersbut is not, however, typically a feature of waveguide components products by third-party
manufacturers

Mechanical Integrity
The presence of two ODUs can constitute a significant load on the antenna and/or antenna mount system. The
effect of the increased load must be determined during assembly and should take into account all integrated hardware including the OEM radios. Recommended procedures for determining load impact include analytical work,
such as Finite Element Analysis (see Figure 4), supported by practical 3-axis vibration testing, shock analysis to ETSI
EN 300 019, and load testing. Integrated assemblies subjected to these test have been shown to meet or exceed
mechanical integrity requirements, longevity, and the strict beam-pointing accuracy specifications of high frequency,
high gain antennas (Figure 5).
A second mechanical consideration involves structural logistics. The two ODUs mounted adjacent to the back
of the antenna must not impede or interfere with the mounting of the assembly onto the required pole. At the same
time, the mounting must also allow for the full range of azimuth and elevation adjustment, typically +/15 degrees
along both axis.

Figure 5: Dual Polarized Integration undergoing Y-axis

Vibration Testing
Figure 4: Typical Finite Element Analysis of Antenna Mount
when loaded with an integrated OMT and two radios

www.commscope.com/andrew

Page 6 of 7

White Paper

(Continued)

As with sophisticated range testing used to measure RF leakage, the advanced analysis needed to
verify mechanical integrity of the integrated assembly
is typically not within the scope of the third party
waveguide component supplier. It is, however, very
much within the ability of the reputable antenna manufacturer. In house resources and expertise - not to
mention the proprietary information needed - enable
the established manufacturer to perform the necessary design, analysis, and product verification.
This takes on added importance considering each
OEMs has their own unique approach to designing
their units. Different sizes, volumes and weights of
specific units require individual and unique integration designs. The mechanical verification phase becomes a critical aspect of the design process.

Figure 6: Typical shock test result

Conclusion
Todays mobile network is quickly evolving into a high-capacity, data-driven environment. This evolution is leading to more dual-polarized radio systems being used in the backhaul theatre. The most common deployment of the
dual-polarized radio is the split-mount design that features a dual-polarized radio, antenna, and various waveguide
components such OMTs. As these integrated packages become more commonplace, the use of third-party waveguide components becomes more frequent.
However, the use of third-party waveguide components poses a severe risk to overall system performance and longevity. Without the resources to design and test their waveguide components within the context of the entire system,
third suppliers can introduce a variety of problems into the integrated system. These include unacceptable levels of
RF leakage, moisture ingress, mechanical instability and imprecise polarization adjustment issues.
Considerable expertise and resources are required, not only for the design of the individual components, but in the
design and performance verification of the entire Integration Package as a whole. Reputable antenna manufacturers
have this expertise, together with the requisite infrastructure necessary to demonstrate integrated product integrity.

www.commscope.com/andrew
Visit our Web site or contact your local CommScope representative for more information.
2011 Commscope, Inc. All rights reserved.
All trademarks identified by or are registered trademarks or trademarks, respectively, of CommScope, Inc.
This document is for planning purposes only and is not intended to modify or supplement any specifications or warranties relating to CommScope products or services.
WP-104316.1--EN (4/11)

www.commscope.com/andrew

Page 7 of 7