Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Supervisor:
Dr. Mirosaw Somiski,
Associate Professor
Consultant:
Dr. Sawomir Pietrzyk,
IS-Wireless
...........................................................
Evaluation
...........................................................
Signature of the Head
of Examination Committee
CURRICULUM VITAE
Personal Details:
Name:
Dinesh Mannani
Date of Birth: 28-02-1990
Nationality: Indian
Work Experience:
1. Intern Business Development Team at ISWireless, Warsaw, Poland
01-07-2011 to 30-09-2011
2. English Teacher (Native)
Since 03-2011
Career Highlights:
1. School Prefect
Head of the Student Union
Represented school at various public events
worked in a team environment to represent students
2. President Computer Club at School
Responsible for handling web-designing projects
Responsible for time-management of other participants
3. President English Literary Society at School
Represented the school at various debate competitions
4. Experience in Hospitality Industry
5. Experience in website and graphics designing
Education:
Skills:
..
Signature of the student
4
Acknowledgement
This Bachelors thesis is the final step in obtaining my Bachelors Degree in Electrical and
Computer Engineering with specialisation in Telecommunications at the Warsaw University
of Technology.
The thesis was conducted under the supervision of Dr. Mirosaw Somiski, Associate
Professor in the Telecommunications Department of the Faculty Electronics and Information
Technology at the Warsaw University of Technology (Politechnika Warszawska). I have
worked on my Bachelors thesis from June, 2011 to January 2012. Here I would like to
express my sincere gratitude to all those who have provided me with encouragement and
guidance during this thesis.
First of all I am particularly indebted to Dr. Mirosaw Somiski, my supervisor. He has been
a great support since the beginning of the thesis and showed trust in me when I first
approached him with the aim of finishing my thesis within one working semester. In some
circumstances where I had some unexpected problems during my project he was there to find
a solution and provide useful guidance. Further, I want to express my gratitude to
Dr. Sawomir Kukliski, who was always ready to share his knowledge and experience in the
field of LTE.
Secondly, I would like to thank Dr. Sawomir Pietrzyk CEO of IS-Wireless and his team, for
lending me invaluable knowledge support along with granting a trial license for their tool
LTE MAC Lab. Their help and suggestions have proved as important as the license itself. I
especially would like to thank Mr. Marcin Dryjaski a specialist with IS-Wireless, who has
been constantly providing me with concrete suggestions on working with the thesis along
with answering all questions that I had.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 11
1.1 Background .................................................................................................................... 11
1.2 Motivation and goals of the thesis ................................................................................. 12
1.2.1 Motivation ............................................................................................................... 12
1.2.2 Thesis goals ............................................................................................................. 13
1.3 Thesis Scope .................................................................................................................. 13
2. An Overview of LTE ........................................................................................................... 14
2.1 LTE requirements .......................................................................................................... 14
2.2 Multiple Access Techniques .......................................................................................... 15
2.2.1 Downlink - Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access (OFDMA) ............. 15
2.2.2 Uplink - Single Carrier - Frequency Division Multiple Access (SC-FDMA) ........ 16
2.3 LTE Frame Structure ..................................................................................................... 17
2.4 LTE Downlink Physical Channels ................................................................................. 18
2.5 LTE Uplink Physical Channels ...................................................................................... 20
2.6 Multiple Input Multiple Output ..................................................................................... 21
3. Selected Issues of Scheduling .............................................................................................. 23
3.1 Selected Scheduling Algorithms .................................................................................... 24
3.1.1 Round Robin Scheduling ........................................................................................ 24
3.1.2 Max SNIR Scheduling ............................................................................................ 25
3.1.3 Proportional Fair Scheduling .................................................................................. 26
4. Simulations and Testing ....................................................................................................... 27
4.1 LTE MAC Lab System Level Simulator: An overview ................................................ 27
4.1.1 Simulation Scenarios .............................................................................................. 27
4.1.2 Simulation Results and Analysis ............................................................................ 28
4.2 LTE network test environment ...................................................................................... 50
4.2.1 Testing Scenarios .................................................................................................... 50
4.2.2 Testing Results and Analysis .................................................................................. 50
5. A Student Lab Experiment................................................................................................... 57
5.1 Simulation Tools ............................................................................................................ 57
5.2 Investigation of scheduling algorithms with LTE MAC Lab Matlab tool..................... 57
5.3 Summary of abilities to be gained during the experiment ............................................. 58
6. Conclusions and future work ............................................................................................... 59
6.1 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 59
6.2 Future work .................................................................................................................... 60
7. References ............................................................................................................................ 61
7.1 CD contents .................................................................................................................... 62
6
Figures List
Fig. 1 : OFDM and OFDMA [28]............................................................................................ 16
Fig. 2 : OFDM and SC-FDMA [28] ........................................................................................ 16
Fig. 3 : LTE frame structure [18] ............................................................................................. 17
Fig. 4 : Frame Type 2 [27] ....................................................................................................... 18
Fig. 5 : LTE Downlink channels [18] ...................................................................................... 19
Fig. 6 : LTE Uplink Channels [18] .......................................................................................... 20
Fig. 7 : Single user MIMO transmission principle [8] ............................................................. 22
Fig. 8 : Multi-user MIMO transmission principle [8] .............................................................. 22
Fig. 9 : Layer 2 functionalities for dynamic packet scheduling, link adaptation, and HARQ
Management [8] ....................................................................................................................... 23
Fig. 10 : Flow Chart for Round Robin Algorithm ................................................................... 24
Fig. 11 : Flow chart for Max SNIR algorithm ......................................................................... 25
Fig. 12 : Flow chart for Proportional Fair Algorithm .............................................................. 26
Fig. 13 : A tree diagram for all the scenarios under consideration for simulations ................. 28
Fig. 14 : PRB allocation based on SNIR values for single user downlink Case 1................... 29
Fig. 15 : Resource Allocation for a single user in downlink Case 1 ........................................ 30
Fig. 16 : Throughput Results for single user in downlink Case 1............................................ 30
Fig. 17 : PRB allocation based on SNIR values for 3 users .................................................... 31
Fig. 18 : Resource allocation by RR algorithm for 3 users in downlink Case 2 ...................... 31
Fig. 19 : Resource allocation by Max SNIR algorithm for 3 users in downlink Case 2 .......... 32
Fig. 20 : Resource allocation by Max SNIR algorithm for 3 users in downlink Case 2 ......... 32
Fig. 21 : Comparison of PRB allocation in all three algorithms over time Case 2 .................. 33
Fig. 22 : Comparison of throughput obtained from all three algorithms Case 2 ..................... 33
Fig. 23 : Resource allocation by RR algorithm for 3 users in downlink Case 3 ...................... 34
Fig. 24 : Resource allocation by Max SNIR algorithm for 3 users in downlink Case 3 .......... 35
Fig. 25 : Resource allocation by PF algorithm for 3 users in downlink Case 3....................... 35
Fig. 26 : Comparison of PRB allocation in all three algorithms over time Case 3 .................. 36
Fig. 27 : Comparison of throughput obtained from all three algorithms Case 3 ..................... 36
Fig. 28 : Resource allocation by RR algorithm for 3 users in downlink Case 4 ...................... 37
Fig. 29 : Resource allocation by Max SNIR algorithm for 3 users in downlink Case 4.......... 38
Fig. 30 : Resource allocation by PF algorithm for 3 users in downlink Case 4....................... 38
Fig. 31 : Comparison of PRB allocation in all three algorithms over time downlink Case 4.. 39
Fig. 32 : Comparison of throughput obtained from all three algorithms downlink Case 4 ..... 39
Fig. 33 : PRB allocation based on SNIR values for single user in uplink Case 1 ................... 40
Fig. 34 : Resource Allocation for a single user in uplink Case 1............................................. 41
Fig. 35 : Throughput results of single user in uplink Case 1 ................................................... 41
Fig. 36 : PRB allocation based on SNIR values for 3 users .................................................... 41
Fig. 37 : Resource allocation by RR algorithm for 3 users in uplink Case 2........................... 42
Fig. 38 : Resource allocation by Max SNIR algorithm for 3 users in uplink Case 2 .............. 42
Fig. 39 : Resource allocation by PF algorithm for 3 users in uplink Case 2 ........................... 43
Fig. 40 : Comparison of PRB allocation in all three algorithms over time uplink Case 2 ...... 43
Fig. 41 : Comparison of throughput obtained from all three algorithms uplink Case 4 .......... 44
Fig. 42 : Resource allocation by RR algorithm for 3 users in uplink Case 3........................... 45
Fig. 43 : Resource allocation by Max SNIR algorithm for 3 users in uplink Case 3 .............. 45
Fig. 44 : Resource allocation by PF algorithm for 3 users in uplink Case 3 ........................... 46
Fig. 45 : Comparison of PRB allocation in all three algorithms over time uplink Case 3 ...... 46
Fig. 46 : Comparison of throughput obtained from all three algorithms uplink Case 3 .......... 47
7
Tables List
Table 2.1 : Bandwidth and Resource blocks specifications [1] ............................................... 18
Table 4.1 summary of simulation parameters used for all the testing scenarios ..................... 28
Table 4.2 : LTE Test Environment Test 1 ............................................................................... 51
Table 4.3 : LTE Test Environment Test 2 ............................................................................... 51
Table 4.4 : LTE Test Environment Test 3 ............................................................................... 52
Table 4.5 : LTE Test Environment Test 4 ............................................................................... 52
Table 4.6 : LTE Test Environment Test 5 ............................................................................... 53
Table 4.7 : LTE Test Environment Test 6 ............................................................................... 53
Table 4.8 : LTE Test Environment Test 7 ............................................................................... 54
Table 4.9 : LTE Test Environment Test 8 ............................................................................... 54
Table 4.10 : LTE Test Environment Test 9 ............................................................................. 55
Table 4.11 : LTE Test Environment Test 10 ........................................................................... 55
Table 4.12 : LTE Test Environment Test 11 ........................................................................... 56
Abbreviations
3GPP 3rd Generation Partnership Project
LTE Long Term Evolution
MMOG Multimedia Online Gaming
HSPA High Speed Packet Access
3G Third Generation of Cellular Wireless Standards
GSM Global System for Mobile Communication
UMTS Universal Mobile Telecommunications System
UTRA UMTS terrestrial radio access
E-UTRA Evolved UMTS terrestrial radio access
UTRAN UMTS Terrestrial Radio Access Network
E-UTRAN Evolved UMTS Terrestrial Radio Access Network
MIMO Multiple Input Multiple Output
FDD Frequency Division Duplex
TDD Time Division Duplex
OFDM Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing
OFDMA Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access
SC-FDMA Single Carrier Frequency Division Multiple Access
FDMA Frequency Division Multiple Access
PAPR Peak to Average Power Ratio
BS Base Station
eNodeB Base Station
MS Mobile Station
UE User Equipment
RB Resource Block
RE Resource Element
SNIR Signal to Noise-Interference Ratio
RR Round Robin
PF Proportional Fair
CQI Channel Quality Indicator
TPSA Telekomunikacja Polska S.A.
DL Downlink
UL Uplink
HSDPA High Speed Downlink Packet Access
C.D.F Cumulative Distribution Function
EUL Enhanced Uplink
SC Single Carrier
SISO Single Input Single Output
MME Mobility Management Entity
SGW Serving Gateway
PGW PDN Gateway
CP Cyclic Prefix
DwPTS Downlink Pilot Time Slot
GP Guard Period
UpPTS Uplink Pilot Time Slot
PBCH Physical Broadcast Channel
PCFICH Physical Control Format Indicator Channel
PDCCH Physical Downlink Control Channel
9
10
1. Introduction
This chapter is dedicated to the introduction to the concept of 3rd Generation Partnership
Project (3GPP) Long Term Evolution (LTE) and technological features associated with it.
The first section, 1.1, of this chapter will discuss the background information on the subject
of LTE and scheduling. The motivation and goals for the thesis have been discussed in the
sections 1.2 and 1.3 respectively with the last section 1.3 presenting the outline of the thesis.
1.1 Background
Over the recent years we have seen mobile broadband become a reality as more and more
internet users are getting accustomed to having broadband access wherever they go, and not
just at home or in the office. Multimedia applications such as Multimedia Online Gaming
(MMOG), mobile TV, Web 2.0, streaming contents through the Internet have gathered more
attention by the internet generation and have motivated the 3GPP to work on the LTE which
is a successor to High Speed Packet Access (HSPA) currently being used in the 3rd
Generation of Cellular Wireless Standards (3G) networks. LTE is an answer to deliver better
applications and services to mobile users which consume a lot of bandwidth.
The 3GPP is the organisation which stipulates and standardises the specifications for LTE
along with Global System for Mobile Communication (GSM) and 3G Universal Mobile
Telecommunications System (UMTS) terrestrial radio access (UTRA) systems. It started
work on the evolution of 3G mobile system in November 2004, and the project came to be
known as LTE. The main focus of this initiative to introduce LTE was on enhancing the
UTRA and optimizing 3GPPs radio access architecture. A lot of research has been carried
out since 2004 and proposals have been presented on the evolution of the UTRAN. The
specifications related to LTE are formally known as the evolved UMTS terrestrial radio
access (E-UTRA) and evolved UMTS terrestrial radio access network (E-UTRAN), but are in
general referred as project LTE.
The end of year 2008 saw the Release 8 of the 3GPP, which cites the stable specifications for
LTE, being frozen. The initial deployment of LTE began in 2010 with many operators
adopting it gradually. According to Release 8 specs, LTE supports peak rates of 300Mb/s
which could be achieved with the help of Multiple Input Multiple Output (MIMO) and a
radio-network delay of less than 5ms. In addition to that it operates on both Frequency
Division Duplexing (FDD) and Time Division Duplexing (TDD) and can be deployed in
different bandwidths depending on the availability of spectrum. In TDD configuration the
uplink and downlink operate in same frequency band whereas with FDD configuration the
uplink and downlink operate in different frequency bands.
Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM) has been adopted as the downlink
transmission scheme for the 3GPP LTE [11]. The transmission which occurs from the base
station to the User Equipment is referred to as downlink whereas vice-versa uplink. OFDM
divides the transmitted high bit-stream signal into different sub-streams and sends these over
many different/parallel sub-channels. For uplink transmission scheme the 3GPP selected SCFDMA (Single Carrier Frequency Division Multiple Access). An uplink is a transmission
from the mobile station to the base station. SC-FDMA is a modified form of Orthogonal
Frequency Division Multiple Access (OFDMA) and has similar throughput performance and
11
essentially the same overall complexity as OFDMA. Like OFDM, SC-FDMA also consists of
sub-streams but it transmits on sub-channels in sequence not in parallel which is the case in
OFDM, which prevents power fluctuations in SC-FDMA signals i.e. low Peak to Average
Power Ratio (PAPR). A base station (BS) is called an Evolved NodeB (eNodeB) in the Long
Term Evolution and a mobile station (MS) is called a User Equipment (UE) in the Long Term
Evolution.
The data transmission in LTE is organized as physical resources which are represented by a
time-frequency resource grid consisting of Resource Blocks (RB). Resource blocks consist of
a no. of Resource Elements (RE). One of the major functionalities that have been assigned to
the BS is scheduling which is carried out by scheduler. The scheduler is responsible for
assigning the time and frequency resources to the different UE under the BS coverage. It does
that by allotting the RBs which are the smallest elements that can be assigned by a scheduler.
In the thesis we will be discussing the major scheduling algorithms that are used by the
schedulers, they are, Max Signal to Noise-Interference Ratio (SNIR) Scheduling, Round
Robin (RR) Scheduling and Proportional Fair (PF) Scheduling. In brief, the Max SNIR
scheduling assigns the resource blocks to the user with the highest Channel Quality Indicator
(CQI-received as a feedback from the UE by the BS) on that RB. In Round Robin scheduling
the UEs are assigned the resource blocks in turn (one after another) without taking the CQI
into account, allocating resources to the users equally. In Proportional Fair Scheduling the
UEs are assigned the resource blocks on the basis of the best relative channel quality i.e. a
combination of CQI & level of fairness desired.
The Max SNIR Scheduling, RR Scheduling and PF Scheduling have been simulated in a
MATLAB-based System Level Simulator (LTE MAC Lab) from IS-Wireless. The
performance of these scheduling algorithms in terms of throughput is analysed. We have
considered various scenarios for proper analysis in the thesis. Furthermore, the algorithms
have been analysed with their implementation in an LTE network test environment (deployed
in the Institute of Telecommunications within the Smart City of TPSA in the Warsaw
University of Technology).
12
13
2. An Overview of LTE
This chapter will provide an insight into the technical details of Long Term Evolution as
underlined by the 3GPP. The chapter starts with describing the LTE requirements, the
transmission schemes used for uplink and downlink, followed by other important features
like MIMO.
shall be maintained at speeds from 120 km/h to 350 km/h (or even up to 500 km/h depending
on the frequency band).
Spectrum efficiency:
3-4 times higher spectrum efficiency (in bits/s/Hz/site) in downlink and 2-3 times higher in
uplink, compared to Release 6 HSDPA and EUL respectively.
Bandwidth/Spectrum flexibility:
LTE should support several different spectrum allocation sizes such as: 1.25 MHz, 1.6 MHz,
2.5 MHz, 5 MHz, 10 MHz, 15 MHz and 20 MHz. in both uplink and downlink where the
latter is used to achieve the highest peak data rate, with both TDD and FDD modes. It should
also support the flexibility to modify the radio resource allocation for broadcast transmission
according to specific demand or operators policy.
Furthermore the communication can take place both in paired (FDD) and unpaired (TDD)
bands. Paired frequency bands means that the uplink and downlink transmissions use separate
frequency bands, while in the unpaired frequency bands downlink and uplink share the same
frequency band.
Coverage:
Cell ranges up to 5 km support the above targets; up to 30 km will suffer some degradation in
throughput and spectrum efficiency and up to 100 km will have overall performance
degradation.
Given some of the advantages of an OFDM approach, 3GPP has specified OFDMA as the
basis of its LTE effort.
15
16
always reserved for downlink transmission. UpPTS and the subframe immediately following
UpPTS are reserved for uplink transmission. Other subframes can be used for either uplink or
downlink. Frame Type 2 is illustrated in Fig. 4.
We can notice here that subcarrier spacing remains same in all bandwidth configurations. The
best results in terms of throughput can be achieved by the bandwidth with maximum amout
of RBs.
18
We will be discussing the role and description of the physical uplink channels [28] involved
in LTE:
Physical Uplink Control Channel (PUCCH)
The PUCCH carries uplink control information and is never transmitted simultaneously with
PUSCH data. PUCCH conveys control information including channel quality indication
(CQI), ACK/NACK responses of the UE to the HARQ mechanism, and uplink scheduling
requests.
Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH)
Uplink user data is carried by the PUSCH. Resources for the PUSCH are allocated on a subframe basis by the UL scheduler. Subcarriers are allocated in units of RBs, and may be
hopped from sub-frame to sub-frame. The PUSCH may employ QPSK, 16-QAM, or 64QAM modulation.
Physical Random Access Channel (PRACH)
The PRACH carries the random access preamble and coordinates and transports random
requests for service from UEs. The PRACH channel transmits access requests (bursts) when
a wireless device desires to access the LTE network (call origination or paging response).
Uplink Reference Signal
There are two variants of the UL reference signal. The demodulation reference signal
facilitates coherent demodulation, and is transmitted in the fourth SC-FDMA symbol of the
slot. A sounding reference signal is also used to facilitate frequency dependent scheduling.
Both variants of the UL reference signal use Constant Amplitude Zero Autocorrelation
(CAZAC) sequences.
21
22
Fig. 9 : Layer 2 functionalities for dynamic packet scheduling, link adaptation, and HARQ
Management [8]
23
In LTE networks, the role of resource scheduling is very important because great
performance gain can be achieved by properly observing the amount of radio resources
assigned to each user. As the 3GPP hasnt standardised any scheduling algorithm, we are free
to choose and implement any algorithm that would meet the expected our QoS. While
choosing or designing a scheduling algorithm many factors such as expected QoS level, the
behaviour of data sources, and the channel status have to be kept in mind. The problem
becomes more complex in the presence of users with different requirements in term of
bandwidth, tolerance to delay, and reliability [13].
The main advantage of this kind of scheduling is the relative ease in its implementation
whereas the major disadvantage is the fact that it does not take into account user CQI
feedback, which may lead to lower and unequal throughput.
25
26
27
Testing Scenarios
Downlink
Uplink
Round Robin
Single User
Max SNIR
Proportional
Fair
......
........
Round Robin
.......
Max SNIR
Proportional
Fair
.......
.......
Multiple
Users
Stationary
High Mobile
One user at
cell edge
Fig. 13 : A tree diagram for all the scenarios under consideration for simulations
The scenarios have been selected to analyse the impact of the scheduling algorithms in
different conditions, hence understand their functioning in much more detail.
Value
1or 3
Bandwidth
3 MHz
Channel type
Simulation length
150 TTI
Scheduling algorithms
Multipath Model
3GPP model
Environment Type
Urban
Frequency
850 MHZ
Model Type
3GPP model
20 m
Omnidirectional
1.5 m
BLER
10^(-1)
FFT Size
256
Transmission Scheme
SISO
The parameters have been considered so as to create the most appropriate simulation
environment that is relative to real scenarios.
Downlink Scenario
Case 1: Single User, High mobility, Using Round Robin, Max SNIR and Proportional Fair
scheduling algorithms
In this first case we simulate a single user and we show the resource allocations and user
throughput for different SNIR values. We have plotted graph depicting the SNIR measured
for each PRB which eventually impacts the scheduling along with a single graph depicting
the resource allocations and throughput, respectively, for different scheduling algorithms
(RR, Max SNIR, PF) as in case of single user the scheduling algorithm does not impact the
resource allocations as all resources are allocated by default to the single user.
Measured SNIR for 1 user in Downlink in the frequency axis (3 MHz band)
25
User 1
20
SNIR in dB
15
10
8
10
PRB number
12
14
16
Fig. 14 : PRB allocation based on SNIR values for single user downlink Case 1
29
The SNIR values have been limited to the range of -2 dB to 25 dB like in a realistic scenario
so as to derive results which reflect the real life situation.
Scheduler allocations for single user
16
14
12
PRB
10
2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
TTI
User 1
5
Mbit/s
8
9
TTI * 10
10
11
12
13
14
15
Case 2: 3 Users, Stationary, Using Round Robin, Max SNIR and Proportional Fair
scheduling algorithms
In this case we simulate 3 users and we show the resource allocations and user throughput for
different SNIR values. We have plotted graph depicting the initial SNIR measured for each
PRB which eventually impacts all the scheduling algorithms followed by plots depicting the
resource allocations and throughput for different scheduling algorithms (RR, Max SNIR, PF).
Measured SNIR for 3 users in Downlink in the frequency axis (3 MHz band)
25
User 1
User 2
User 3
20
SNIR in dB
15
10
8
10
PRB number
12
14
16
14
12
PRB
10
2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
TTI
Fig. 18 depicts the allocation of resources by Round Robin algorithm in which each user gets
allocated the same number of resources.
MaxSNIR Scheduler allocations
16
14
12
PRB
10
2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
TTI
Fig. 19 : Resource allocation by Max SNIR algorithm for 3 users in downlink Case 2
We can observe that the allocation of resources in Fig. 19 is as per the SNIR values of each
user; hence the higher a user has SNIR the more resources get allocated to it.
Proportional Fair Scheduler allocations
16
14
12
PRB
10
2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
TTI
Fig. 20 : Resource allocation by Max SNIR algorithm for 3 users in downlink Case 2
32
Fig. 20 shows how the PF algorithm first starts out by allocating equal no. of resources to
each user and then eventually shares the resources such that each user is able to attain highest
equal throughput.
MAX SNIR scheduler
User 1
User 2
User 3
1500
1000
500
20
40
60
80
TTI
Round Robin scheduler
User 1
User 2
User 3
100
120
140
20
40
60
80
100
TTI
Proportional Fair scheduler
User 1
User 2
User 3
120
140
20
40
120
140
1500
1000
500
1500
1000
500
60
80
100
TTI
Fig. 21 : Comparison of PRB allocation in all three algorithms over time Case 2
Throughput vs TTI for 3 users :Downlink Round Robin scheduler
Mbit/s
2
User 1
User 2
User 3
8
9
10
11
12
13
TTI * 10
Throughput vs TTI for 3 users :Downlink MAX SNIR scheduler
14
15
Mbit/s
2
User 1
User 2
User 3
8
9
10
11
12
13
TTI * 10
Throughput vs TTI for 3 users :Downlink Proportional Fair scheduler
14
15
Mbit/s
2
User 1
User 2
User 3
8
9
TTI * 10
10
11
12
13
14
15
each user irrespective of their SNIR values, in Fig. 19 we see the Max SNIR scheduler allots
more resources to the users having a higher SNIR than the other and in Fig. 20 we observe
the Proportional Fair scheduler assigning resources in terms of fairness in the beginning and
then trying to balance the fairness and best throughput results for each user. In Fig. 21 we can
analyse the allotment of PRB over time using each scheduling algorithm, it also shows the
fairness of these algorithms quite clearly. The last Fig. 22 shows the throughput results
achieved with the help of these scheduling algorithms and helps us compare them. We can
observe that Round Robin algorithm delivers fairness to all the users, the Max SNIR
algorithm has the Maximum throughput but not all users are able to enjoy the best speed and
the Proportional Fair algorithm tries to strike a balance between fairness and achieving the
Maximum throughput.
Case 3: 3 Users, High Mobile (Vehicular), Using Round Robin, Max SNIR and Proportional
Fair scheduling algorithms
In this case we simulate 3 users moving at a speed of 100 Kmph and we show the resource
allocations and user throughput for different SNIR values. We have plotted graph depicting
the initial SNIR measured for each PRB which eventually impacts all the scheduling
algorithms followed by plots depicting the resource allocations and throughput for different
scheduling algorithms (RR, Max SNIR, and PF).
Please refer to Fig. 17 for initial PRB allocations based on SNIR values.
14
12
PRB
10
2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
TTI
14
12
PRB
10
2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
TTI
Fig. 24 : Resource allocation by Max SNIR algorithm for 3 users in downlink Case 3
We observe that the allocation of resources in Fig. 24 is still as per the SNIR values of each
user; the change of speed does not affect the allocations until unless the SNIR also changes
significantly, hence the higher a user has SNIR the more resources get allocated to it.
Proportional Fair Scheduler allocations
16
14
12
PRB
10
2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
TTI
35
We can notice the difference between the Fig. 20 and Fig. 25 both depicting the allocation as
per PF with the channel of channel conditions.
MAX SNIR scheduler
1500
User 1
User 2
User 3
1000
500
20
40
60
80
TTI
Round Robin scheduler
100
120
140
40
60
80
100
TTI
Proportional Fair scheduler
120
140
120
140
1500
User 1
User 2
User 3
1000
500
20
1500
User 1
User 2
User 3
1000
500
20
40
60
80
100
TTI
Fig. 26 : Comparison of PRB allocation in all three algorithms over time Case 3
Throughput vs TTI for 3 users :Downlink Round Robin scheduler
Mbit/s
User 1
User 2
User 3
1
8
9
10
11
12
13
TTI * 10
Throughput vs TTI for 3 users :Downlink MAX SNIR scheduler
14
15
Mbit/s
3
2
User 1
User 2
User 3
1
0
8
9
10
11
12
13
TTI * 10
Throughput vs TTI for 3 users :Downlink Proportional Fair scheduler
14
15
Mbit/s
User 1
User 2
User 3
1
8
9
TTI * 10
10
11
12
13
14
15
between fairness and achieving the Maximum throughput. The throughput results are a bit
better due to the fact all users are located within 7-8 m radius from the base station and the
change of SNIR values has a positive effect in the small time frame under consideration, but
eventually as the distance of users from the eNodeB increases there should be degradation in
throughput.
Case 4: 3 Users (user 1 at cell edge), High Mobile (Vehicular), Using Round Robin, Max
SNIR and Proportional Fair scheduling algorithms
In this case we simulate 3 users moving at a speed of 100 Kmph with user 1 at cell edge and
we show the resource allocations and user throughput for different SNIR values. We have
plotted graph depicting the initial SNIR measured for each PRB which eventually impacts all
the scheduling algorithms followed by plots depicting the resource allocations and throughput
for different scheduling algorithms (RR, Max SNIR, and PF).
Please refer to Fig. 17 for initial PRB allocations based on SNIR values.
14
12
PRB
10
2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
TTI
37
14
12
PRB
10
2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
TTI
Fig. 29 : Resource allocation by Max SNIR algorithm for 3 users in downlink Case 4
Proportional Fair Scheduler allocations
16
14
12
PRB
10
2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
TTI
1000
500
20
40
60
80
TTI
Round Robin scheduler
100
120
140
40
60
80
100
TTI
Proportional Fair scheduler
120
140
120
140
1500
User 1
User 2
User 3
1000
500
20
1500
User 1
User 2
User 3
1000
500
20
40
60
80
100
TTI
Fig. 31 : Comparison of PRB allocation in all three algorithms over time downlink Case 4
Throughput vs TTI for 3 users :Downlink Round Robin scheduler
Mbit/s
2
User 1
User 2
User 3
8
9
10
11
12
13
TTI * 10
Throughput vs TTI for 3 users :Downlink MAX SNIR scheduler
14
15
Mbit/s
3
User 1
User 2
User 3
2
1
0
8
9
10
11
12
13
TTI * 10
Throughput vs TTI for 3 users :Downlink Proportional Fair scheduler
14
15
14
15
Mbit/s
User 1
User 2
User 3
8
9
TTI * 10
10
11
12
13
Fig. 32 : Comparison of throughput obtained from all three algorithms downlink Case 4
As a conclusion we can say that in the downlink the throughput results are not much affected
by the channel conditions provided that SNIR values do not change significantly. The Max
SNIR and RR scheduling algorithms provide consistent results while the PF algorithm tries to
achieve the best throughput within available conditions.
39
Scenario Uplink
Case 1: Single user, Stationary, Using Round Robin, Max SNIR and Proportional Fair
scheduling algorithms
In this case we simulate a single stationary user. We show the resource allocations and user
throughput for different SNIR values. We have plotted graph depicting the initial SNIR
measured for each PRB which eventually impacts all the scheduling algorithms followed by
plots depicting the resource allocations and throughput for different scheduling algorithms
(RR, Max SNIR, and PF).
Measured SNIR for 1 user in Uplink in the frequency axis (3 MHz band)
25
User 1
20
SNIR in dB
15
10
8
10
PRB number
12
14
16
Fig. 33 : PRB allocation based on SNIR values for single user in uplink Case 1
The same settings were chosen for the simulations in uplink also so as to facilitate analysis of
results.
Round Robin Scheduler allocations
16
14
12
PRB
10
2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
TTI
40
3.5
Mbit/s
2.5
1.5
0.5
8
9
TTI * 10
10
11
12
13
14
15
User 1
User 2
User 3
20
SNIR in dB
15
10
8
10
PRB number
12
14
16
14
12
PRB
10
2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
TTI
14
12
PRB
10
2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
TTI
Fig. 38 : Resource allocation by Max SNIR algorithm for 3 users in uplink Case 2
42
In the uplink the Max SNIR allocates as much consecutive PRBs as possible up to the point
when other user has better SNIR. In UL we cannot get non-consecutive allocations so all
PRBs must be consecutive.
Proportional Fair Scheduler allocations
16
14
12
PRB
10
2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
TTI
1000
500
20
40
60
80
TTI
Round Robin scheduler
100
120
140
40
60
80
100
TTI
Proportional Fair scheduler
120
140
120
140
1500
User 1
User 2
User 3
1000
500
20
1500
User 1
User 2
User 3
1000
500
20
40
60
80
100
TTI
Fig. 40 : Comparison of PRB allocation in all three algorithms over time uplink Case 2
Fig. 40 helps us clearly see how the algorithms are allocating users over the whole simulation
period. From this we can also predict the results of the throughput, the more resources a user
43
Mbit/s
User 1
User 2
User 3
1
8
9
10
11
12
13
TTI * 10
Throughput vs TTI for 3 users :Uplink MAX SNIR scheduler
14
15
Mbit/s
3
2
User 1
User 2
User 3
1
0
8
9
10
11
12
13
TTI * 10
Throughput vs TTI for 3 users :Uplink Proportional Fair scheduler
14
15
Mbit/s
1.5
1
User 1
User 2
User 3
0.5
0
8
9
TTI * 10
10
11
12
13
14
15
Fig. 41 : Comparison of throughput obtained from all three algorithms uplink Case 4
In the above plots we can see the how each scheduling algorithm carries out the task of
resource allocation in the uplink. We can also observe that the scheduling allocations in
downlink and uplink are not the same due to the fact that downlink uses OFDMA whereas
uplink uses SC-FDMA.
In Fig. 37 we can see the resources being allocated in a cyclic way to each user irrespective
of their SNIR values, in Fig. 38 we see the Max SNIR scheduler allocates as much
consecutive PRBs as possible up to the point when other user has better SNIR and in Fig. 39
we observe the Proportional Fair scheduler assigning resources in terms of fairness in the
beginning and then trying to balance the fairness and best throughput results for each user. In
Fig. 40 we can analyse the allotment of PRB over time using each scheduling algorithm, it
also shows the fairness of these algorithms quite clearly.
The last Fig. 41 shows the throughput results achieved with the help of these scheduling
algorithms and helps us compare them. We can observe that Round Robin algorithm delivers
fairness to all the users, the Max SNIR algorithm has the Maximum throughput but not all
users are able to enjoy the best speed and the Proportional Fair algorithm tries to strike a
balance between fairness and achieving the Maximum throughput.
44
Case 3: 3 users, High Mobile (vehicular), Using Round Robin, Max SNIR and Proportional
Fair scheduling algorithms
In this case we simulate 3 highly mobile (100 Kmph) users. We show the resource allocations
and user throughput for different SNIR values. We have plotted graph depicting the initial
SNIR measured for each PRB which eventually impacts all the scheduling algorithms
followed by plots depicting the resource allocations and throughput for different scheduling
algorithms (RR, Max SNIR, and PF).
Please refer to Fig. 36 for initial PRB allocations based on SNIR values.
Round Robin Scheduler allocations
16
14
12
PRB
10
2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
TTI
14
12
PRB
10
2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
TTI
Fig. 43 : Resource allocation by Max SNIR algorithm for 3 users in uplink Case 3
45
In Fig. 43, we can notice that with the change in channel conditions the resource allocation
has been affected, this might be due to the SNIR change experienced by the different users.
14
12
PRB
10
2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
TTI
1000
500
20
40
60
80
TTI
Round Robin scheduler
100
120
140
40
60
80
100
TTI
Proportional Fair scheduler
120
140
120
140
1500
User 1
User 2
User 3
1000
500
20
1500
User 1
User 2
User 3
1000
500
20
40
60
80
100
TTI
Fig. 45 : Comparison of PRB allocation in all three algorithms over time uplink Case 3
In Fig. 44 we observe that the PF algorithm has to change how the resources are allocated so
as to accommodate the change in channel conditions.
46
Mbit/s
2
User 1
User 2
User 3
8
9
10
11
12
13
TTI * 10
Throughput vs TTI for 3 users :Uplink MAX SNIR scheduler
14
15
Mbit/s
3
2
User 1
User 2
User 3
1
0
8
9
10
11
12
13
TTI * 10
Throughput vs TTI for 3 users :Uplink Proportional Fair scheduler
14
15
Mbit/s
1.5
1
User 1
User 2
User 3
0.5
0
8
9
TTI * 10
10
11
12
13
14
15
Fig. 46 : Comparison of throughput obtained from all three algorithms uplink Case 3
Case 3: 3 users with User 2 at cell edge, High Mobile (vehicular), Using Round Robin, Max
SNIR and Proportional Fair scheduling algorithms
In this case we simulate 3 highly mobile (100 Kmph) users with user 2 at cell edge. We show
the resource allocations and user throughput for different SNIR values. We have plotted
graph depicting the initial SNIR measured for each PRB which eventually impacts all the
scheduling algorithms followed by plots depicting the resource allocations and throughput for
different scheduling algorithms (RR, Max SNIR, and PF).
Please refer to Fig. 36 for initial PRB allocations based on SNIR values.
Round Robin Scheduler allocations
16
14
12
PRB
10
2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
TTI
47
14
12
PRB
10
2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
TTI
Fig. 48 : Resource allocation by Max SNIR algorithm for 3 users in uplink Case 4
Proportional Fair Scheduler allocations
16
14
12
PRB
10
2
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
TTI
1000
500
20
40
60
80
TTI
Round Robin scheduler
100
120
140
40
60
80
100
TTI
Proportional Fair scheduler
120
140
1500
User 1
User 2
User 3
1000
500
20
1500
User 1
User 2
User 3
1000
500
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
TTI
Fig. 50 : Comparison of PRB allocation in all three algorithms over time uplink Case 4
Throughput vs TTI for 3 users :Uplink Round Robin scheduler
Mbit/s
2
User 1
User 2
User 3
8
9
10
11
12
13
TTI * 10
Throughput vs TTI for 3 users :Uplink MAX SNIR scheduler
14
15
Mbit/s
3
2
User 1
User 2
User 3
1
0
8
9
10
11
12
13
TTI * 10
Throughput vs TTI for 3 users :Uplink Proportional Fair scheduler
14
15
Mbit/s
1
User 1
User 2
User 3
0.5
8
9
TTI * 10
10
11
12
13
14
15
Fig. 51 : Comparison of throughput obtained from all three algorithms uplink Case 4
In this case we observe how the user at the cell edge is unable to get resources allocated due
to its poor SNIR values. Even the Round Robin algorithm is not able to allocate resources to
this user due to the fact that in uplink, not all resources need to be allotted, but some can be
left blank, which hence results in lesser allocation of resources even in a fair algorithm like
49
Round Robin, Fig. 47. The proportional fair algorithm, Fig. 49 also tries to schedule user 2
but is unable to achieve the best results due to it conditions.
Downloading different sizes of file from the server behind the core network
All users close to the eNodeB (within 5-6 m range)
One user at cell edge while other users near eNodeB.
Two users at cell edge while other user near eNodeB.
All users at the cell edge
50
HTTP Test 1
Download 100MB
Current Transfer Rate
Average Transfer Rate
Maximum Transfer Rate
Total Data Transferred
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
HTTP Test 2
Download 200MB
Current Transfer Rate
Average Transfer Rate
Maximum Transfer Rate
Total Data Transferred
7
6
5
4
2
1
0
1
51
USER 1
Incoming Outgoing
(MB/s)
(KB/s)
1.9
33.2
1.84
31.5
2.22
40.6
512 MB 8.56 MB
USER 2
USER 3
Incoming Outgoing Incoming Outgoing
(MB/s)
(KB/s)
(MB/s)
(KB/s)
2.82
40
5.63
78.4
5.24
74
5.47
76.1
6.62
94
6.18
87.3
514 MB
7.09 MB 514 MB 6.99 MB
7
6
5
4
2
1
0
1
HTTP Test 4
Download 500MB
Current Transfer Rate
Average Transfer Rate
Maximum Transfer Rate
Total Data Transferred
8
7
6
5
4
2
1
0
1
52
USER 1
Incoming Outgoing
(MB/s)
(KB/s)
2.05
34.3
1.97
33.1
2.11
34.9
19.7 MB 331 KB
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
USER 2
USER 3
Incoming Outgoing Incoming Outgoing
(MB/s)
(KB/s)
(MB/s)
(KB/s)
4.45
63.2
1.38
19.4
4.34
61.6
1.29
18
4.56
64.7
1.43
20.2
43.4 MB
616 KB 12.9 MB 180 KB
Fig. 56 : Throughput results from HTTP Download with user 3 at cell edge
Table 4.7 : LTE Test Environment Test 6
USER 1
USER 2
USER 3
HTTP Test 6
User 2 IN - USER 1&3 OUT
Incoming Outgoing Incoming Outgoing Incoming Outgoing
(MB/s)
(KB/s)
(MB/s)
(KB/s)
(MB/s)
(KB/s)
Current Transfer Rate
653
13.6
4.48
63.7
681
9.15
Average Transfer Rate
0.65
13.5
4.16
59.4
0.64
8.63
Maximum Transfer Rate
0.95
21.5
4.54
64.7
0.8
10.9
Total Data Transferred
6.31 MB 135 KB
41.6 MB
594 KB 6.27 MB 86.3 KB
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Fig. 57 : Throughput results from HTTP Download with user 1 & 3 at cell edge
53
USER 1
Incoming Outgoing
(MB/s)
(KB/s)
882
15.3
0.96
16.7
1.43
28.7
9.36 MB 167 KB
USER 2
USER 3
Incoming Outgoing Incoming Outgoing
(MB/s)
(KB/s)
(MB/s)
(KB/s)
1.19
16.6
1.05
14.6
1.17
16.2
1.1
15.3
1.25
17.3
1.31
18.4
11.7 MB
162 KB 11.0 MB 153 KB
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
1
Fig. 58 : Throughput results from HTTP Download with all 3 users at cell edge
FTP Test 8
8
7
6
5
4
2
1
0
1
Fig. 59 : Throughput results from FTP Download within 5m of eNodeB : 500 MB file
54
USER 1
Incoming Outgoing
(MB/s)
(KB/s)
4.38
62.8
4.14
59.3
4.47
64.3
41.4 MB 593 KB
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
USER 2
USER 3
Incoming Outgoing Incoming Outgoing
(MB/s)
(KB/s)
(MB/s)
(KB/s)
3.4
48.3
1.33
18.7
3.63
51.5
1.4
19.7
3.91
55.7
1.7
24.2
36.3 MB
515 KB 14.0 MB 197 KB
Fig. 60 : Throughput results from FTP Download with user 3 at cell edge
Table 4.11 : LTE Test Environment Test 10
USER 1
USER 2
USER 3
FTP Test 10
User 2 IN - Users 1&3 OUT
Incoming Outgoing Incoming Outgoing Incoming Outgoing
(MB/s)
(KB/s)
(MB/s)
(KB/s)
(MB/s)
(KB/s)
Current Transfer Rate
1.32
18.5
2.7
38.8
1.49
21
Average Transfer Rate
1.25
17.4
3.17
45.4
1.6
22.7
Maximum Transfer Rate
1.43
20.1
3.95
56.6
1.86
26.5
Total Data Transferred
12.5 MB 174 KB
31.7 MB
454 KB 16.0 MB 227 KB
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Fig. 61 : Throughput results from FTP Download with user 1 & 3 at cell edge
55
USER 1
Incoming Outgoing
(MB/s)
(KB/s)
1.24
17.4
1.18
16.6
1.31
18.5
11.8 MB
166 KB
USER 2
USER 3
Incoming Outgoing Incoming Outgoing
(MB/s)
(KB/s)
(MB/s)
(KB/s)
0.74
10.3
0.72
9.86
0.75
10.3
0.82
11.2
0.82
11.5
0.96
13.4
7.28 MB
103 KB 8.01 MB 112 KB
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
Average Transfer Rate
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
1
Fig. 62 : Throughput results from FTP Download with all 3 users at cell edge
We can see from Test 1, 2, 3 and 4, where HTTP was considered for downloads, that the
resource allocation to each user is equal although user 1 shows less throughput as compared
to its counter-parts, it may be due to the some interference or configuration of the machine.
But overall looking at pattern we may deduce that nearly equal resources are allotted. The
results of the Test 5, 6, 7 also considered HTTP where in every test one user shifted to the
cell edge respectively shows the effect of moving away from the base station and its impact,
technically the increase in distance from eNodeB means more interference, multipath as well
as lower SNIR ratio. The throughput performance suffers as is clearly visible from the data
collected. In Test 8, 9, 10 and 11 with FTP protocol similar conditions were repeated as in
case with the earlier tests and the results were pretty much similar or even better. The reason
for improved results could be the internet configuration on the different machines which have
impact on HTTP while FTP is quite resistant to such configurations as it strictly deals with
data transfer.
After analysing the results, I have come to the conclusion that the scheduling algorithm
implemented at the eNodeB in the LTE Test environment is Proportional Fair algorithm
because the resources are allocated to all the users despite their position as along with
ensuring the user with good channel condition also gets enough resources to maintain good
throughput.
56
57
two-three students, so as to allow better discussion on the subject and instigate new methods
of thinking part from the standard algorithms.
During the laboratory the investigations shall cover the analysis of:
Parameters influencing scheduling
Scheduling algorithms such as
o Round Robin
o MaxSNIR or BestCQI
o Proportional Fair
Link Adaptation
Modulation and Coding Schemes
Analysis of allotment of PRB on different factors
Throughput results in various scenarios
The results could be shown in the form of resource allocation under each scheduling
algorithm for each user over time, comparison of resource allocation of various scheduling
algorithms, throughput results of each scheduling algorithm.
58
59
The theoretical study, simulations along with the practical implementation of the scheduling
algorithms have increased my understanding of the concept of scheduling as well as helped
me to remove my doubts concerning it.
60
7. References
[1] Motorola, Long Term Evolution (LTE): Overview of LTE Air-Interface, White Paper
[2] Motorola, Long Term Evolution (LTE): A Technical Overview, White Paper
[3] U. Barth, 3GPP LTE/SAE Overview, Alcatel, September 2006, Presentation
[4] Dr. Jayesh Kotecha, Jason Wong, LTE: MIMO Techniques in 3GPP-LTE, Freescale
Semiconductors, Nov 5, 2008, Presentation
[5] Jim Zyren, Dr. Wes McCoy, Technical Editor, Overview of the 3GPP Long Term
Evolution Physical Layer, Freescale Semiconductors, July 2007, White Paper
[6] Rysavy Research / 3G Americas, HSPA to LTE-Advanced: 3GPP Broadband Evolution to
IMT-Advanced (4G), September 2009, whitepaper
[7] 4G Americas, 4G Mobile Broadband Evolution: 3GPP Release 10 and Beyond HSPA+,
SAE/LTE and LTE Advanced, February 2011, whitepaper
[8] Harri Holma and Antti Toskala, LTE for UMTS: OFDMA and SC-FDMA Based Radio
Access, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 2009
[9] Elias Yaacoub, Hussein AI-Asadi, and Zaher Dawy, Low Complexity Scheduling
Algorithms for the LTE Uplink, 2009, Research paper
[10] 3GPP, Requirements for Evolved UTRA (E-UTRA) and Evolved UTRAN (E-UTRAN)
(3GPP TR 25.913 version 8.0.0 Release 8), January 2009, Technical Report
[11] Tshiteya Dikamba, Downlink Scheduling in 3GPP Long Term Evolution (LTE), MSc.
Thesis, Delft University of Technology, March 18th, 2011
[12] Sajid Hussain, Dynamic Radio Resource Management in 3GPP LTE, MSc. Thesis,
Blekinge Institute of Technology, January 2009
[13] Giuseppe Piro, Luigi Alfredo Grieco, Gennaro Boggia, and Pietro Camarda, A Two-level
Scheduling Algorithm for QoS Support in the Downlink of LTE cellular networks, February
2010, Research paper
[14] Shreeshankar Bodas, Sanjay Shakkottai, Lei Ying, R. Srikant, Low-complexity
Scheduling Algorithms for Multi-channel Downlink Wireless Networks, December 2009,
Research Paper
[15] D. C. Dimitrova, H. van den Berg, R. Litjens, G. Heijenk, Scheduling strategies for LTE
uplink with flow behaviour analysis, May 2010, Research Paper
[16] Luis A ngel Maestro Ruiz de Temino, Gilberto Berardinelli, Simone Frattasi and
Preben Mogensen, Channel-Aware Scheduling Algorithms for SC-FDMA in LTE Uplink,
2008, published in IEEE
[17] Huda Adibah Mohd Ramli, Riyaj Basukala, Kumbesan Sandrasegaran, Rachod
Patachaianand, Performance of Well Known Packet Scheduling Algorithms in the Downlink
3GPP LTE System, 2009 IEEE 9th Malaysia International Conference on Communications
[18] Sauter, Martin. , From GSM to LTE : an introduction to mobile networks and mobile
broadband, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2011, book
[19] Francesco Davide Calabrese, Scheduling and Link Adaptation for Uplink SC-FDMA
Systems, A LTE Case Study, PhD Thesis, Aalborg University, April 2009
[20] Jarosaw Medwid, Elaboration of laboratory experiments for teaching purposes in the
area of LTE, WIMAX networks planning, SON networks, Msc. Thesis written under
Professor M. Somiski supervision, IT-WUT, September 2011
[21] Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd., 3900 Series LTE eNodeB Product Documentation,
Product Version: V100R003C00, Library Version: 08, Date: 9/30/2011
[22] Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd., M2000 Product Documentation (Solaris10), Product
Version: V200R011C00, Library Version: 09, Date: 11/28/2011
[23] http://www.gsacom.com/
[24] http://is-wireless.com
61
[25] www.3gpp.org
[26] http://www.eventhelix.com/lte/tutorial/web-presentation.htm
[27] http://www.radio-electronics.com
[28] http://www.anritsu.com
7.1 CD contents
62