Sei sulla pagina 1di 91

UMTS Network Post-launch

Optimisation and Network Evolution


O056
Factors Limiting Capacity
Cell Throughput is given by the simplified expressions for pole
capacity in kbps multiplied by the loading factor q







Crucial parameters are Eb/No, inter-cell interference i, o
orthogonality and q loading factor (which is affected by the
Noise Rise limit).
Capacity Limiting Factors
( )
( )
q
o
q

+
i
N
E
i
N
E
b
b
1
3840
1
3840
0
0
Uplink
Downlink
Factors Limiting Capacity: NR limit


NR limit on uplink is directly linked to loading factor:


NR limit appears in link budget and hence affects coverage prediction.
If a network is planned so that continuous coverage would be provided
with all cells simultaneously at NR limit, then probability suggests that
coverage is over-dimensioned.
Coverage could be planned for a NR value 1 to 2 dB below the limit
but this is often used as a comfort factor margin.
Failures will then be split between Eb/No and NR.
Capacity Limiting Factors
10
10 1 ); 1 log( 10
NR
NR

= = q q
Noise Rise vs. Throughput
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Throughput (x100kbps)
N
o
i
s
e

R
i
s
e
Series1
Factors Limiting Capacity: NR limit

Capacity Limiting Factors
Steep slope -
unstable
Shallow slope -
stable
However, if NR is allowed to reach very high values (e.g.> 7 dB)
there is concern that the network could become unstable.
Initially, it is expected that NR will be limited to a maximum of, say, 6
dB until confidence in this approach is gained.
Factors Limiting Capacity: FRE

Frequency re-use efficiency is the name given to the
proportion of received power that comes from a cells own
users rather than from all users including other cells.
Capacity Limiting Factors
1
1
1
1
cell intra
cell inter
1
1
cell inter cell intra
cell intra
=
+
=
+
=
+
=
FRE
i
i
FRE
Frequency re-use efficiency is a useful term as it varies
between zero and 1 as i drops from infinity to zero.
Factors Limiting Capacity: FRE

The ideal situation is where the receiving antenna can only
see its own users but not those of other cells. i.e. FRE = 1

The power from neighbouring mobiles close to the cell border
cause the biggest problems.
Capacity Limiting Factors
High power mobiles close to
Cell border cause FRE reduction
Factors Limiting Capacity: FRE

A large cell serving a low subscriber density surrounded by
several smaller cells serving high subscriber densities will
experience a low value of FRE.
Capacity Limiting Factors
A Large cell will experience low FRE
Because it is surrounded by
many users of other cells
Factors Limiting Capacity: FRE


Hotspots near the cell border will cause more problems that
evenly distributed neighbouring cells








A quantitative analysis is not always possible. A simulator
is extremely valuable in helping to develop a feel for the
seriousness of potential problems.
Capacity Limiting Factors
Hot spots near cell border cause
FRE reduction
Factors Limiting Capacity: FRE


Increasing FRE: the main weapon is to down-tilt
antennas.
Overlap of coverage cannot be too small otherwise hand
over will fail. However, large overlaps will lead to low
FRE.
This is most effective when there is a large angle
between the line from the antenna to the cell edge and
the horizontal.
In the case of large cells, planning to avoid hotspots near
the cell border will reduce the incidence of low FRE.
Capacity Limiting Factors
Factors Limiting Capacity: E
b
/N
0
High capacity levels depend on low levels of Eb/No being
used. ( Note BER must be acceptable ).
Achieving this relies on accurate, fast power control to
compensate for fast fading.
Fast fading occurs as a mobile moves through an
interference pattern.
Interference patterns develop due to reflections.
Repetition distance depends on angle between incident
and reflected waves.
Capacity Limiting Factors
u
( ) u

cos
2

Factors Limiting Capacity: E
b
/N
0
If the mobile cannot respond to power control commands,
the UE will notice a variation in the received signal.

This will lead to BER variations that will cause the network
to require a higher target Eb/No (a fast fading margin or
power control margin will be required).

The effect can be to increase the target Eb/No from a
normal value of perhaps 4 dB to 10 dB or more for fast
moving mobiles.

Capacity Limiting Factors
Factors Limiting Capacity: E
b
/N
0
Reducing the required Eb/No:
Diversity systems provide an Eb/No improvement.
That means that the Eb/No over the air interface
can be reduced and hence the air interface
capacity increases.
Multi-user detection (MUD) reduces the effect of
mutual interference between users on the uplink.
This reduces the required transmit power per user
and hence reduces the noise rise caused by a
given number of users.
As a result the pole capacity increases.
Capacity Limiting Factors
Factors Limiting Capacity: Orthogonality


Dramatic effect on downlink capacity.









Capacity Limiting Factors
( ) i +
=
o 1
N
E
3840
Capacity Pole
0
b
Factors Limiting Capacity: Orthogonality


Example: Eb/No = 4 dB, i = 0.6, 12200bps
Capacity Limiting Factors
2548
1.0
1914
0.8
1534 1280 1100 963 Pole Capacity
0.6 0.4 0.2 0 Orthogonality
Pole Capacity
(kbps)
1000
2000
Orthogonality
0.5 1 0
Loading Factor
Loading Factor = Actual Throughput
Pole Capacity
Factors Limiting Capacity: Orthogonality

What can be done to improve orthogonality?
Currently, very little.
No guidance regarding placing of sites to
maximise orthogonality known about.
In future there may well be but:- the only outcome
would be the recommendation to move cells (not a
welcome recommendation as it means start
planning the network from the beginning).
Capacity Limiting Factors
Factors Limiting Capacity: Hard Blocking

So far we have
discussed air
interface capacity or
soft capacity.
We could suffer also
from hard blocking
due to hardware and
fixed network
constraints.
Capacity Limiting Factors
Channel elements?
E1 links?
Factors Limiting Capacity: Hard Blocking

There is no value in
increasing the soft
capacity of the air
interface above the
networks hard
capacity.
Often the network will
be launched with a low
level of hard
capacity.
Capacity Limiting Factors
Channel elements?
E1 links?
Methods of Increasing Cell Capacity

Zero resource:
Adjusting configuration to reduce mutual interference
Adjusting network and cell parameters in order to optimise
performance.

New resource requirements:
Adding channel elements
Increasing capacity of fixed network
Implement diversity and/or multi-user detection.
Capacity Limiting Factors
Network Capacity

Capacity calculations have been per cell.
Network is of many cells.
Can we just multiply the capacity per cell by the
number of cells?
Do we just add more cells to increase network
capacity?
Very expensive option
Diminishing returns set in: higher site density results in
increasing interference.
Procedure needs to be structured for maximum
benefit.
Capacity Limiting Factors
Network Capacity

Possible procedure
Address hard capacity issues.
Use pico-cells to provide an in-building solution
Deploy micro-cells to service hot spots
Further sectorise (e.g. six cells per sector)
Provision extra carriers on some sites (a sector
with 2 carriers is, logically, 2 cells in UMTS).
Deploy extra sites in the macro-cell layer.
Note: Priority of deployment of diversity/MUD
is a topic of discussion.
Capacity Limiting Factors
Reducing Mutual Inteference
The lower the interference the higher the capacity.
Because of the single frequency used in a UMTS layer, there is
an Interference feedback loop.
This means that interference, rather than just adding to the
background noise level, consumes a proportion of the network
resource (power on the DL, noise rise on the UL).
Reducing Mutual Interference
High Sites
Often, what is apparently sensible planning can lead to the
emergence of high sites.
In the situation shown a distant site posed an interference threat
in the area of interest.
Reducing Mutual Interference
Area of interest
Interfering
Cell
Intended
serving cell
High Sites
The first action to be taken would be to increase the down tilt of
the interfering cell.
Care must be taken to ensure that it still provides coverage
where it is intended.
Reducing Mutual Interference
Area of interest
Interfering
Cell
Intended
serving cell
Coverage
Area
High Sites
Other possible solutions include reducing the cell power of the
interfering cell.
This should be done with great care as it will affect the downlink
coverage and capacity in its wanted coverage area.
Reducing Mutual Interference
Area of interest
Interfering
Cell
Intended
serving cell
Coverage
Area
Examples of Antenna Tilt
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
No Tilt
Mechanical
Downtilt
Electrical
Downtilt
Electrical Downtilt +
Mechanical Uptilt
Reducing Mutual Interference
Problem
Limitations on Downtilt
If the antennas are
mounted centrally on a
roof,
The amount of down-tilt
achievable can be limited
by the site geometry
Plan
Block Image
Reducing Mutual Interference
The Optimum Value of Down Tilt
Although a lot of interference will reduce network capacity, too
little overlap can lead to hand over failures.
Reducing Mutual Interference
Too much interference:
network capacity
reduced.
Too little overlap:
hand over failures.
Optimising Network Parameters
Parameters that can be changed:
RNC - global
Node B
Cell
There are thousands of parameters that each
influence network functions.
We will look at some that are among the most
significant.
Network Parameters
BLER Target
Setting a low value of BLER (e.g. 0.3%) will produce
a high quality digital communication channel
But: this will in turn require a high Eb/No so each
channel will use a lot of network resource.
Optimising a network is supporting as many satisfied
customers as possible; this means providing a
service that is just good enough.
Increasing the BLER target (to, say, 1%) will
increase capacity.
Assessment on impact is often subjective.
Network Parameters
BLER Target - Packet Services
Values of 0.3% and 1% are typical for Circuit
Switched (CS) services (e.g. voice, VT).
For packet switched (PS) services, delays and re-
transmissions can be tolerated.
BLER can be much higher.
Crucial parameter
Network Parameters
SERVICE
REL 99
Target BLER Max DCH Power
dBm
AMR(12.2Kbps) 1% 31.5
PS (64Kbps) 5% 36.5
PS (384 Kbps) 5% 37
FER
N
E
b
1
0
Release 5
Server RNC Node-B
UE
RLC retransmissions
TCP retransmissions
MAC-hs retransmissions
Faster
retransmissions
allows us to have a
higher
retransmission
probability while
maintaining user
delay.
This leads to an
decrease in Eb/No.
Frame Erasure Rate (FER) = 1 Correctly received data frames
Total Transmitted data frames
Eb/No = Eb/No
1- FER
Cell Pilot Power
Network Parameters
Pilot power dictates:
cell coverage
soft hand over regions
UL soft hand over gain is maximised if UL path loss is
equal.
If MHAs are employed, pilot power should be equal at the
mast head, not at PA output.
Maximum DL Power per Bearer
Network Parameters
DL users share the power available to traffic channels
(typically 16 Watts or 42 dBm).
Allowing one user to use all this power would mean the cell
is blocked to other users; a limit is imposed.
Maximum DL Power per Bearer
Network Parameters
If demand is low, it is best to have a high limit so that
coverage is maximised.
Maximum DL Power per Bearer
Network Parameters
If demand is high, a lower limit will maximise throughput
(and hence revenue) at the expense of coverage in areas
of high path loss or interference.
Factors Limiting Capacity: NR limit


NR limit on uplink is directly linked to loading factor:


NR limit appears in link budget and hence affects coverage prediction.
If a network is planned so that continuous coverage would be provided
with all cells simultaneously at NR limit, then probability suggests that
coverage is over-dimensioned.
Coverage can be planned for a NR value 1 to 2 dB below the limit - this
is often used as a comfort factor margin.
Failures will then be split between Eb/No and NR.
Capacity Limiting Factors
10
10 1 ); 1 log( 10
NR
NR

= = q q
Hard Capacity
Hard Capacity
Because the air interface in UMTS networks is new, most
attention is paid to maximising the interference-limited
capacity of the air interface itself (the soft capacity).
However, there must be sufficient capacity in the hardware
of the fixed network to support the demand generated by
the cells.
This includes considering:
Channel Elements at the Node B
Capacity of the interfaces
Capacity of the RNCs
Hard Capacity - Channel Elements
Hard Capacity
Each bearer requires
hardware in the form of
channel elements (Ces) in
the Node B. The number of
CEs required depends on
the data rate, for example:
Voice: 1 CE
64 kbps: 3 CEs
128 kbps: 5 CEs
384 kbps: 8 CEs
Hard Capacity - Channel Elements
Hard Capacity
Allocation is shared across
cells and carriers.
Provision must be made to
accommodate soft hand
over.
Softer hand over imposes
no additional burden.
Hard Capacity - HSDPA
Hard Capacity
HSDPA is not a
magic solution.
Interference limitations
still exist.
HSDPA only possible
in areas of low
interference.
Aggregate network
capacity should be
increased.

HSDPA
Possible
No
HSDPA
Hard Capacity - HSDPA
Hard Capacity
Ultimate constraint is
the 3840 kcps chip
rate.
QPSK allows 2 bits per
symbol.
High Speed Downlink
Packet Access
(HSDPA) uses 16 QAM
which allows 4 bits per
symbol.
Hard limit is doubled.

QPSK
16 QAM
HSDPA architecture and channel structure
A HS-PDSCH corresponds to one channelling
code of fixed spreading factor SF=16, and there
are 15 such codes reserved for HS-DSCH
transmission.
Multi-code transmission and code multiplexing are
facilitated for, i.e. UE can be assigned multiple-
codes depending on its capability or several UE
can be multiplexed using different codes.
With the introduction of HS-DSCH, additional
intelligence in the form of an HSDPA Medium
Access Control (MAC) layer is installed at the
Node B, thus leading to shorter delay with packet
data when retransmissions are needed.

HSDPA UE categories
Category Max. number of
HS-DSCH codes
Modulation Max. data rate
[Mbit/s]
1 5 QPSK and 16-QAM 1.2
2 5 QPSK and 16-QAM 1.2
3 5 QPSK and 16-QAM 1.8
4 5 QPSK and 16-QAM 1.8
5 5 QPSK and 16-QAM 3.6
6 5 QPSK and 16-QAM 3.6
7 10 QPSK and 16-QAM 7.3
8 10 QPSK and 16-QAM 7.3
9 15 QPSK and 16-QAM 10.2
10 15 QPSK and 16-QAM 14.4
11 5 QPSK only 0.9
12 5 QPSK only 1.8
The UE is a member of one of 12 categories, this is a function of the hardware
capabilities.
HSDPA architecture and channel structure
HSDPA represents an evolution of the WCDMA radio
interface, which uses very similar methods to those employed
in EDGE evolution of the GSM radio interface.
To implement the HSDPA feature, new channels are
introduced in the 3GPP physical layer specifications:
High Speed Physical Downlink Shared Channel (HS-PDSCH)
High Speed Shared Control Channel (HS-SCCH)
High Speed Dedicated Physical Control Channel (HS-DPCCH)
The transport channel carrying the user data with HSDPA
operation is denoted as the High Speed Downlink Shared
Channel (HS-DSCH)
The HS-DSCH is mapped onto a pool of physical channels
(i.e. HS-PDSCH), to be shared among HSDPA users in a
time multiplexed manner.
HS-SCCH: High Speed Shared Control Channel (DL)
When HSDPA is operated using Time multiplexing, then only one HS-
SCCH can be configured. ONLY one user receives data at a time.
1
4
1
3
1
2
11 1
0
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
10ms
HS-
SCCH
HS-DSCH
Demodul
ation info
USER
1
The HS-SCCH has a two slots
offset compared with HS-DSCH.
USER
2
Demodul
ation info
USER
3
Demodul
ation info
HS-SCCH: High Speed Shared Control Channel (DL)
1
4
1
3
1
2
11 1
0
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
10ms
HS-
SCCH
HS-
SCCH
HS-DSCH
USER
1
USER
1
When there is a need to have code
multiplexing, then more than ONE
HS_SCCH needs to be included. A single
terminal may consider at MOST four
codes
Code Multiplexing
The higher the data rates and terminal capabilities the smaller the need for code
multiplexing.
Use of code multiplexing is not necessarily where carrier shared with DCH traffic.
OR
When there is a desire to have HSDPA data users operating with reasonable data
rates 384Kbps and more
Up to
15
codes
reserv
ed for
HS-
PDSC
H
Code Multiplexing
Up to 15 codes may be used in the Node B
UE typically support 5
To maximize spectral efficiency 3 parallel users with 5 codes
Code multiplexing used for large number of HSDPA users with LOW data rate ie
VoIP.
Up to
15
codes
reserv
ed for
HS-
PDSC
H
Channels Allocated to One HSDPA User
UE
NodeB
1
-

4

x

H
S
-
S
C
C
H

H
S
-
D
P
C
C
H

HS-PDSCH: High-Speed Physical
Downlink Shared Channel (DL)
Actual HSDPA data for HS-DSCH
transport channels
1-15 codes per channel
QPSK or 16QAM modulation
HS-SCCH: High Speed Shared Control
Channel (DL)
Informs the UE how and when to
receive the HS-PDSCH
HS-DPCCH: High Speed Dedicated
Physical Control Channel (UL)
MAC-hs ACK/NACK information
Channel Quality Information
(CQI)
In-building Solutions
In-building solutions
Cells with indoor antennas can help
with coverage problems.
Most importantly, they add to the
network capacity and serve an
indoor hotspot.
Eg; 20 floor, 200 people per floor
(4000 people): 800 subscribers, 20
Erlangs offered.
If this is VT, this would be typical for
a sectored Node B. A macro-cell
may contain several such buildings.
In-building solutions can alleviate
macro-cell capacity problems.
Frequency allocation
In-building solutions
Advantageous if same
frequency as macro-cell layer
can be used.
Spectral efficiency maximised
Hand over between indoor and
outdoor environment simplified.
Mutual interference must be
minimised whilst engineering
soft hand over region.
Reducing Mutual Inteference
The lower the interference the higher the capacity.
Because of the single frequency used in a UMTS layer, there is
an Interference feedback loop.
This means that interference, rather than just adding to the
background noise level, consumes a proportion of the network
resource (power on the DL, noise rise on the UL).
In-building solutions
Reducing Mutual Inteference
The walls of the building will help
provide isolation between the
indoor and outdoor cells, thus
improving capacity.
Problem areas are those where
the path loss to both cells is
similar.
Presence of walls makes it
possible to make this region
negligibly small.
Similar, in principle, to a macro-cell
structure with gaps in coverage
low interference (but HO failures
but people dont walk through
walls).

In-building solutions
The Dead Zone Effect
Adjacent carrier interference may
be particularly noticeable within
pico cell environments.




33 dB is typical of the isolation
between adjacent carriers.
Case shown illustrates the limiting
case where Ec/Io = -15 dB.
Max EIRP from pico cell is typically
40 dBm (33 dBm Tx Power; 7 dBi
antenna).
Problem cases will occur.
In-building solutions
Macro cell pilot:
-105 dBm
Pico cell
interference: -57 dBm
The Dead Zone Effect: solutions?
Unlikely to provide a solution by
engineering the radio environment:
low path loss to best server is
generally a good thing




Possibilities
All affected operators deploy a pico
cell within a particular building.
Operators allow hand over to pico
cell carriers from affected cells.
In-building solutions
Macro cell pilot:
-105 dBm
Pico cell
interference: -57 dBm
Hand Over
A hand over region needs to be
provided.
Sudden changes in signal level
from a cell can lead to calls being
dropped.
Required hand over region is near
the door.
Hand over region:
Large enough to allow hand over.
Should be where subscriber
density is low, as hand over region
is area where mutual interference
is highest.
Preventing sudden changes in
signal strength at the HO region
requires appropriate siting of pico-
cell and macro-cell antennas.


In-building solutions
Required hand
over region
Hand Over
Contour of equal pilot strength
(between macro-cells and pico-cell)
should be engineered to be just
outside, rather than just inside the
building.
This is because subscriber density is
likely to be much higher inside the
building.
This needs to be checked by
measurements.
This will lead to the path loss to the
pico-cell, for subscribers within the
building, being much less than that to
the macro-cell.
This is a good thing as it means the
pico-cell will have a negligible impact
on macro-cell capacity.


In-building solutions
Contour of equal
pilot strength.
Implementing the in-building solution
Design and implementation of in-
building solutions is an area of
expertise in its own right.
The following provides an outline of the
decisions and choices regarding the
design of the pico-cell.
A high level overview of the relative
advantages of the different options is
provided.


In-building solutions
The Choices The Node B
Single Node B
In-building solutions
Multiple Compact
Node Bs
Repeater to
external Node B
The Choices The Node B
Single Node B
In-building solutions
Easy capacity expansion (just
add more cards).
Staff familiar with equipment,
as Node B can be the same as
for the macro-cell.

Centralised system could be
prone to faults.
Node B could be physically
large to accommodate.
The Choices The Node B
In-building solutions
Multiple Compact
Node Bs
More robust to faults as it is
distributed.
Can lead to superior coverage.
Smaller physical size.


Capacity expansion can be
harder.
Staff may need extra training
on new type of Node B.
The Choices The Node B
In-building solutions
Repeater to
external Node B
Cheap but no solution to
network capacity problems.
The Choices Antenna Systems
Distributed Passive
Antennas
In-building solutions
Distributed Active
Antenna System
Radiating Cable
The Choices Antenna Systems
Distributed Passive
Antennas
In-building solutions
Closeness of antenna to UE
allows low radiated power.
Most suitable antenna can be
chosen for each location
allowing good control of
radiation.

Cables can be lossy and
expensive.
Installation of heavy cable can
be difficult.
The Choices Antenna Systems
In-building solutions
Low grade CAT 5 cable can be
used instead of feeder making
installation easier.
Lower feeder losses

Restricted to low transmit
power.
Power supply required at each
antenna location. Distributed Active
Antenna System
The Choices Antenna Systems
In-building solutions
Easiest to model/predict link
loss.
Produces even coverage.
Can be hidden from view.

Often the most expensive
solution.
Not suited for all shapes
(better for longitudinal shapes).
Precision installation required
to maximise benefits.

Radiating Cable
Field Measurements to Check on Implementation
In-building solutions
Scanner measurements can be used to assess:
Coverage
Hand over region
Isolation from macro-cell. Ideally the macro-cell and the
pico-cell should not interfere with each other.

Micro-cell planning
Typical range for macro-cell for VT is 500 metres in dense urban
environment.
Site Density for coverage approximately 2 sites/km
2
.
Capacity then approximately 22 Erlangs of VT per site
Macro cell layer
providing
continuous
coverage
Micro cells
serving hot
spots.
Micro-cell Planning
Micro-cell planning: carrier re-use
If the macro cell carrier can be re-used:
Hand over between micro and macro cells is easier.

Macro cell layer
providing
continuous
coverage
Micro cells
serving hot
spots.
Micro-cell Planning
Micro-cell planning: mutual interference
In the case of in-building solutions, the building walls formed a
barrier against interference.
This made re-use of the macro cell carrier more straightforward.
Outdoor micro cells have no such barrier.
Potential for more serious interference issues, reducing
capacity gains

In-building
solution: walls
form barrier
against
interference.
Micro cells no
barrier against
interference..
Micro-cell Planning
Micro-cell planning: theory
Suppose an area within a macro cell could accommodate only 1
Erlang of offered traffic if the macro cell capacity was divided
equally on an area basis.
Now consider the situation if this area was expected to generate 12
Erlangs of offered traffic.

Area generates
12 times the
expected
traffic.
Micro-cell Planning
Micro-cell planning: theory
If carrier frequency is to be shared and no extra loading to be
placed on macro cell:
Each UE should operate at 1/12
th
of the power that it would if it
connected to the macro cell.
Path loss to micro cell should be 11 dB less than that to macro cell.


Area generates
12 times the
expected
traffic.
Micro-cell Planning
Micro-cell planning: theory
This can be arranged with pilot power settings but there are
problems:
If pilot powers are left equal, then border region will be where path loss
is equal between micro cell and macro cell UL interference on macro
cell results.
If micro cell pilot is 11 dB less than that for macro cell, UEs just outside
the micro cell border will cause a lot of UL interference on the micro
cell.

Micro-cell Planning
Pilot powers equal:
macro-cell affected
by UEs on border.
Micro cell pilot reduced by
11 dB. Micro cell affected
by UEs just outside border.
Engineering the Micro cell
The success of any strategy depends on the user behaviour.
Areas of high mutual interference are only problematic if there
are lots of users.
Need to engineer the micro cell accordingly
Micro cell dominance area should exceed the hotspot area.

Micro-cell Planning
Area of dominance of
micro cell should
exceed the hotspot
area.
Engineering the Micro cell
Radiation pattern of micro cell antenna should ensure that
path loss rapidly increases once outside the dominance area.

Micro-cell Planning
Initial setting of pilot power and NR limit can be the same as
for macro cell. Ideally, should be possible to reduce DL power
to 37 dBm (pilot power would then have to be reduced
proportionately).

Possible Problems
If there are lots of users in the border area, this will cause
interference problems.
If the micro-cell pilot power is reduced it may suffer from
interference as the UEs connected to the macro-cell will be
transmitting with relatively high power.

Micro-cell Planning
Users in the border
area will cause and
experience
interference
problems.
Using Scanner Measurements
With pilot powers of the micro-cell and macro-cell set to equal
levels, the strength of the micro-cell pilot should be at least 10
dB greater than the macro-cell pilot throughout the area of
high expected user density (the hotspot).

Micro-cell Planning
Area of expected high
user density.
Engineering the Micro cell: field measurements
If the pilot powers are equal, the border area is at locations of
equal path loss.
Pilot strength of micro cell should be 10 dB greater than that
from macro cell at all areas of high subscriber density.
If transmit pilot power of micro cell is 6 dB less than macro cell,
then micro cell pilot can be just 4 dB greater.
When micro cell pilot is reduced, problem comes from potential
uplink interference from macro cell UEs just outside the border.
Should be possible to raise the NR limit to help with this. (E.g.
macro cell NR limit: 4 dB; micro cell NR limit: 8 dB).


Micro-cell Planning
Further Sectorisation of Sites
Further Sectorisation
Three-sectored sites
have evolved to be the
norm in urban and
suburban areas.
Each antenna controls a
120 sector.
Antenna beamwidth a
compromise between
coverage and
interference.
65 is the most common.
18 dBi is typical gain.
Further Sectorisation of Sites
Further Sectorisation
Six-sectored sites could, in
theory, double the capacity.



If mutual interference
increases, capacity may not
increase as expected.
But, if antennas are higher
gain, q can increase.
( )
q
i
N
E
b
+
=
1
3840
Capacity
0
Further Sectorisation of Sites
Further Sectorisation
Antenna beamwidth is
highly significant in arriving
at the optimum between
coverage and interference.
35 is seen as the most
appropriate.
21 dBi is typical gain.
Monte Carlo simulations
can quantify the likely
improvement.
Uplink Receive Space Diversity
This is not conventional space diversity.

Each antenna is connected to a separate finger of the Rake
receiver.

This is possible due to the synchronisation and channel estimation
derived from the Pilot bits on the DPCCH channel.

Eb/No is improved, rather than simply an effective power gain.
Diversity
Downlink Transmit Diversity
UMTS explicitly allows the use of transmit diversity from the base station
However it is not possible to simply transmit simultaneously from two close antennas as
this would cause an interference pattern
Mobile terminals must have the capability of implementing downlink transmit diversity .
Transmit
antenna 1
Transmit
antenna 2
Diversity
Multi-User Detection
Mid 1980s research showed that joint, optimal, maximum-likelihood decoding of
all users out performed matched filter alternatives.

The problem was the exponential increase in processing as the number of
simultaneous users went up. ( Viterbi trellis techniques )

Current research interests
Suboptimal linear receivers
Data-aided minimum mean squared (MMSE) linear receivers
Blind ( nondata-aided ) MMSE receiver
Non-linear multiuser detection
Multistage interference cancellation, parallel and serial, PIC & SIC

Diversity
Multi-User Detection
Viterbi decoding uses past symbol knowledge to weight present
and future choices

Multiuser decoding has the added complexity of having present
other user interfering symbols

Therefore some decision as to the interfering symbols must be
made

Due to the complexity, multiuser detection is more likely to exist
in the Node B
Diversity
Multi-User Detection
Multiuser detection reduces the need for tight power control

Power control is still important to the performance of the MUD
system

Best performance used with short spreading codes, repeating
every symbol. ( Downlink )

Can be used with long spreading codes, pseudorandom
sequences which are much longer than the symbol duration.
(Uplink)

Diversity
Visualising the Processing Gain w/o MUD
W/Hz
W/Hz W/Hz
E
c

I
o

Signal
Intra-cell Noise
Inter-cell Noise
Before
Spreading
After
Spreading
With Noise
f
f
f
W/Hz
After
Despreading
/Correlation
f
W/Hz
E
b

N
o

Post
Filtering
(No MUD)
f
dBW/Hz
E
b

N
o

E
b
/N
o

f
Diversity
Visualising the Processing Gain with MUD
W/Hz
Signal
Inter-cell Noise
After
Despreading
/Correlation
Post
Filtering
f
Other Users
E
b

N
o

W/Hz
f
E
b

N
o

W/Hz
f
E
b

N
o

W/Hz
f
E
b

N
o

W/Hz
f
Because of MUD the contribution of the other users to the
Noise is Reduced.

It is not completely eliminated because of the inaccuracies of
the Multiple access interference estimation.
Diversity
Nortel UTRAN KPIs
RRC Connection Establishment Failure

RRCConnEstablishmentSuccessRate (global)

CauseRRCConnectionestablishment (per cause)

T352 Expiry

RRCConnVoice+ConvEstablishmentSuccessRate

RRC Connection Abnormal Release Rate

RRC Abnormal Release
Nortel KPIs
RRC Unspecified Release Rate

RAB Establishment Failure Conversational

RAB Establishment Failure PS Interactive + PS Background

RABVoice&ConvEstablishmentSuccessRate

RABStreamingEstablishmentSuccessRate

RABPSEstablishmentSuccessRate

ISHO CS

IU Release Command CS Failure Rate

Potrebbero piacerti anche