TTP30024 - RF Parameter Optimization

Knowledge Sharing
Key RF Parameter Optimization

All Rights Reserved Alcatel-Lucent 2006
Alex Anokye
RF Engineering Group, Murray Hill, NJ
Documents from NPE/TIS/CEC
Documents from Devesh Patel and Mattijs Visser
June 23, 2010
2
Structure of this talk
Primary goal of this talk is Knowledge sharing experience from LTE
Trials

Start with Some Key RF Performance Impacting Parameters
With Real examples from Orange & BostonTrials. Lessons learned from a technology
trial help refine RF optimization procedure

Share Analysis of Handoff Failures Test performed in MH, New Jersey

Follow with Data Analysis of RRC Layer 3 message Flow with eDAT
Helps RF Engineers how to troubleshoot RF issues

End with Open Issues and Proposed Resolutions from Phase 4 Trial
Helps to understand product functionality as we migrate to FSA and Deployments
3
RF Parameter Optimization
4
Introduction
Presentation discusses key LTE RF performance impacting parameters
Detailed description on 52 parameters
Ranges of these parameters are provided in the following excel sheet
Key in the sense likely to have the biggest impact on end-user performance and capacity

Many of these parameters are categorized as fixed parameters
Fixed means not typically customized from cell to cell or as part of RF optimization process
Some exceptions such as settings optimized for a stadium cell / special events or
specific to certain hardware platform
These are algorithmic parameters - settings optimized based on simulations and lab studies
Some amount of fine tuning in field, usually as part of focused performance studies in a
commercial system after a critical mass of traffic available
5
LTE Key Parameters
Downlink
dlSinrThresholdBetweenCLMimoTwoLayersAndOneLayer: 10.0 dB
dlSinrThresholdBetweenOLMimoAndTxDiv: 10.0 dB
dlSinrThresholdBetweenCLMimoAndTxDiv: 10.0 dB

Uplink
initialSIRtargetValueForPUSCHSemiStaticUsers: 4.0 dB
initialSIRtargetValueForPUSCHnonSemiStaticUsers: 4.0 dB

Handover
filterCoefficientRSRP: fc8
filterCoefficientRSRQ: fc8
reportAmount RSRP: r8
Reporting Interval RSRP: 240 ms
hysteresis RSRP: 2 dB
eventA3Offset: 0
qRxLevMin: -120 dBm
qRxLevMinIntraFreqNeighbor: -120 dBm

6
Switching point lies around CQI = 10-11
i.e. computed SINR ~ 15dB
if dlSinrThresholdBetweenOLMimoAndTxDiv = 15dB
dlSinrThresholdBetweenOLMimoAndTxDiv
dlSinrThresholdBetweenOLMimoAndTxDiv = Signal to Noise ratio threshold for switching between
OL Mimo mode and TxDiv mode
It does not have anything to do with the RS-SNR shown in LLDM or Agilent NiXT tool, but is
related to the SINR calculated as below
If computed SINR > dlSinrThresholdBetweenOLMimoAndTxDiv + 1dB, then eNB will switch to DL OL
Mimo mode (as long as filtered value for the UE reported rank > 1.6).
It switches back to TxDiv if SINR < dlSinrThresholdBetweenOLMimoAndTxDiv
7
Threshold for MIMO switching

Background
At higher SINR, lower Tx antenna correlation regimes, MIMO allows for higher data
rates compared to Tx diversity
Benefit from rank of 2 (i.e., 2 parallel data streams possible)
Vice-versa for low SINR levels
Parameter Impact / Tradeoffs
Impacts DL MCS/throughput
Higher switching threshold values will reduce DL data rate otherwise
achievable in the higher SINR regime
Single stream used instead of 2 even if Tx ant correlation is low
Lower values could allow MIMO too soon -> increases the likelihood that
HARQ Retrx/BLER will be higher than achievable with Tx diversity -> lower
MCS -> lower DL data rate/throughput at the UE
8
CL MIMO 2-UE Limited Mobility for Different MIMO SINR Thresholds
UE
Avg.
DL
SINR
[dB]
Avg.
Total L1
Tput
[Mbps]
TTI
Utilizat
ion [%]
RB
Utilizat
ion per
TTI
Aggreg
ate RB
Utilizati
on
MCS
TB0
MCS
TB0
TX1
MCS
TB0
TX2
MCS
TB1
Avg
MCS
Total
BLER
[%]
CW0
BLER
CW0
TX1
BLER
CW0
TX2
BLER
CW1
BLER
Rank
Avg.
Tx
RX
Corr
TX
Corr
CQI
Rank1
CQI
Rank2
CW0
CQI
Rank2
CW1
Ext-MIMOsinrThr 0 dB 8.2 6.4 79.9 58.4 46.7 12.4 11.8 13.2 11.8 12.2 11.4 10.7 10.0 12.0 13.0 1.45 1.39 0.4 0.3 9.2 9.4 8.4
Int- MIMOsinrThr 0 dB 8.4 6.4 79.1 58.2 46.0 11.9 11.5 12.6 12.2 12.0 11.3 10.9 10.2 11.8 12.2 1.51 1.44 0.4 0.4 9.0 8.8 8.7
12.8 158.9 116.6 92.6
UE
Avg.
DL
SINR
[dB]
Avg.
Total L1
Tput
[Mbps]
TTI
Utilizat
ion [%]
RB
Utilizat
ion per
TTI
Aggreg
ate RB
Utilizati
on
MCS
TB0
MCS
TB0
TX1
MCS
TB0
TX2
MCS
TB1
Avg
MCS
Total
BLER
[%]
CW0
BLER
CW0
TX1
BLER
CW0
TX2
BLER
CW1
BLER
Rank
Avg.
Tx
RX
Corr
TX
Corr
CQI
Rank1
CQI
Rank2
CW0
CQI
Rank2
CW1
Ext-MIMOsinrThr 10 dB 8.6 6.7 79.3 58.8 46.6 13.6 13.4 14.0 12.1 13.2 11.1 10.5 9.7 12.1 12.7 1.42 1.33 0.4 0.4 9.4 9.4 8.4
Int-MIMOsinrThr 10 dB 8.7 6.8 78.7 58.6 46.2 13.2 13.2 13.1 13.6 13.3 11.1 10.6 9.6 12.6 12.7 1.50 1.34 0.4 0.4 9.3 8.7 8.7
13.5 158.0 117.5 92.8
UE
Avg.
DL
SINR
[dB]
Avg.
Total L1
Tput
[Mbps]
TTI
Utilizat
ion [%]
RB
Utilizat
ion per
TTI
Aggreg
ate RB
Utilizati
on
MCS
TB0
MCS
TB0
TX1
MCS
TB0
TX2
MCS
TB1
Avg
MCS
Total
BLER
[%]
CW0
BLER
CW0
TX1
BLER
CW0
TX2
BLER
CW1
BLER
Rank
Avg.
Tx
RX
Corr
TX
Corr
CQI
Rank1
CQI
Rank2
CW0
CQI
Rank2
CW1
EXT-MIMOsinrThr 15 dB 7.0 5.4 79.3 54.5 43.2 14.4 14.4 14.2 17.1 14.5 11.1 10.8 10.1 31.8 19.1 1.14 1.03 0.5 0.6 9.5 8.3 9.0
INT-MIMOsinrThr 15 dB 8.6 6.5 86.8 54.1 46.9 14.5 14.2 17.2 17.2 14.8 10.4 9.8 9.1 14.8 14.7 1.53 1.12 0.4 0.4 9.1 8.7 8.8
11.9 166.1 108.5 90.1
UE
Avg.
DL
SINR
[dB]
Avg.
Total L1
Tput
[Mbps]
TTI
Utilizat
ion [%]
RB
Utilizat
ion per
TTI
[%]
Aggreg
ate RB
Utilizati
on
MCS
TB0
MCS
TB0
TX1
MCS
TB0
TX2
MCS
TB1
Avg
MCS
Total
BLER
[%]
CW0
BLER
CW0
TX1
BLER
CW0
TX2
BLER
CW1
BLER
Rank
Avg.
Tx
RX
Corr
TX
Corr
CQI
Rank1
CQI
Rank2
CW0
CQI
Rank2
CW1
Int- MIMOsinrThr 0 dB 8.4 6.4 79.1 58.2 46.0 11.9 11.5 12.6 12.2 12.0 11.3 10.9 10.2 11.8 12.2 1.51 1.44 0.4 0.4 9.0 8.8 8.7
Analyzing UEs with internal antenna only for a more fair comparison
Highest avg. throughput achieved
with 10 dB MIMO SINR threshold
9
initialSIRtargetValueForPUSCHnonSemiStaticUsers

Problem: max UL throughput in the field is lower than expected for BE

Suspicion: initialSIRtargetValueForPUSCHnonSemiStaticUsers parameter

When trying to reach the max theoretical UL throughput in the field in static tests,
it is essential to get close to the ideal condition as possible:
The mobile should be located close to the site, within the main beam of
the antenna.
The RSSI should be around -40dBm and the SNR around 25dB for
each of the 2 antennas.
It is worth to play around separately with each of the antennas
until we reach the desired values on each one [this is also
recommended in DL throughput issues as well]
The other elements that could impact on the throughput [UL and
DL] are the MTU settings in the drive-test computer (it is
recommended to use TCP Optimizer) and the FTP server
configuration.
10
initialSIRtargetValueForPUSCHnonSemiStaticUsers configures the initial UL SIR target for non semi-static users.
Closed-loop power control allows the eNodeB to send power control commands to the UE.
The UE will consequently increase or decrease its transmission power to reach a defined SIR target for the received UE
signal at the eNodeB.

UE Tx power increase to
reach SIR target at eNodeB
11
The higher the parameter, the higher the transmission of the mobile on the PUSCH channel (for non semi-static users)
And consequently the higher the received signal quality at the eNodeB.
Higher MCS used on the UL => higher throughputs
As single UE test is performed in the field, this parameter can be changed from 10 to 18dB to experience max UL
throughput.
Up to 16Mbps were reached instead of the previous 12Mbps.
In multi-UE environment, too high value for this parameter may generate more UL interference and eventually lower
total throughput on the UL.
In case of multi-UE, it is recommended to use the default value of 10dB.
Note: If the total transmission on the mobile is already at its max, i.e. 23dBm, then the UL throughput is already limited
for another reason (most probably pathloss).

Conclusion: initialSIRtargetValueForPUSCHnonSemiStaticUsers value was changed from
10 to 18
12
Attachment procedure

Problem: UE can not attach to the network, even if located close to the site (Cachan).

Suspicion: qRxLevMin parameter
3-sector site
installed on 2
poles
No attach possible
from this position
(RSRP = -102dBm)
30
135 270
13
Attachment procedure: qRxLevMin
qRxLevMin configures the minimum required Rx level in the cell for the mobile to be allowed to attach to the network.
Default DLU value: -50, i.e. -100dBm (2*IE).
From drive test data, most locations at cell edge, the signal is between -100dBm and -110dBm, with still reasonable good performance.
The value was changed to -55, i.e. -110dBm.
The distance range where the UE can attach was increased by a factor of 1.75
Note: -110dBm per Resource Element for the RS (Reference Signal) corresponds to -90dBm for the total RS power.
A slightly lower value of qRxLevMin is still possible, but it is not recommended to go lower as reasonable good quality when attaching to the
network is required.

Note: Please do the distinction between qRxLevMin and qRxLevMinIntraFreqNeighbour.

qRxLevMinIntraFreqNeighbour is set by default to -70, i.e. -140dBm, and is used in HO procedures to configure the minimum required Rx level in
the target cell for the mobile to be allowed to handover to that target cell.

Conclusion: qRxLevMin value was changed from -50to -55 (i.e. -110dBm).
14
RxLevMin & RxLevMinOffset (to favor a particular cell)
15
Handover optimization

Problem: a lot of ping pongs and call drops in the handover areas.

Suspicion: The following HO parameters were suspected to be the reason:
1- hysteresis
2- TimeToTrigger
3- filterCoefficientRSRP

The tuning steps were done on the parameters with the same order mentioned above
16
Handover optimization
Handover hysteresis: measurement difference between a source cell and a target cell to trigger a measurement report (from UE to eNodeB).
Time-to-trigger: time during which specific criteria for the event needs to be met in order to trigger a measurement report (from UE to eNodeB).

The trigger metric can be RSRP and/or RSRQ.

Handover between cells 54 and 55
-110.00
-105.00
-100.00
-95.00
-90.00
-85.00
-80.00
-75.00
-70.00
-65.00
-60.00
R
S
R
P

(
d
B
m
)
RSRP (cell 55)
RSRP (cell 54)
RSRP Handover
hysteresis = 5 dB
timeToTrigger
17
Handover optimization: RSRP measurement report
18
Handover optimization: RSRQ measurement report
19
Handover Optimization: timeToTrigger
Parameter timeToTrigger configures the time-to-trigger for the HO.
The higher its value, the less ping pongs will be seen in the field.
Current default value was 20ms.
No performance enhancements were seen in the field.
Was discovered that changing this parameter will not have any effect unless the new
value is above 200ms
The reason being that the UE informs the upper layer of any new filtered RSRP every
200ms.

Conclusion: timeToTrigger value was not changed in the field

20
Handover Optimization: filterCoefficientRSRP
Parameter filterCoefficientRSRP is used to filter and average the RSRP measurements at the UE level at a sample of
200ms.
The higher this value, the less ping pongs and less HO rate but increases
filter time content and therefore increase HO delay
The current default value is 4.
It was tuned to a value of 11 for smoother handovers (i.e.
filterCoefficientRSRP = fc11).
Also, less ping pongs effect was seen in the field.
RSRP(n) = (1 1/2
(k/4)
) x RSRP(n-1) + (1/2
(k/4)
) x M(n)
Where
k = filterCoefficientRSRP
M(n) the latest measurement
21
Handover Optimization: filterCoefficientRSRP
Effect of filterCoefficient k on RSRP
-120
-110
-100
-90
-80
-70
-60
R
S
R
P

(
d
B
m
)
RSRP Measurements
Filtered RSRP (k=4)
Filtered RSRP (k=11)
Conclusion: filterCoefficientRSRP value was changed from fc4 to fc11
22

Intra-Frequency DL Measurements : sIntrasearch / sMeasure
Two parameters are used to trigger measurements of the neighbouring cells:

1) sIntrasearch, in idle mode:
intra-frequency measurements are triggered when the signal value in the serving
cell fulfills the below formula:
RSRP
serving cell
qRxLevMin (in dBm) sIntrasearch (indB)

2) sMeasure, in connected mode:
measurements are triggered when the signal value in the serving cell is lower than
sMeasure.
This parameter is set by default to more_than_minus44, i.e. -43dBm.
Meaning that measurements are always performed in connected mode.
23
Paging 1/2
It can happen that the mobile receives a lot of paging messages.

This does not necessarily imply UL problems.

The first thing to look at is the TMSI (Temporary Mobile Subscriber Identity) value in the
paging message and compare it to the TMSI of the mobile we are using (see LLDM NAS
ATTACH request).

If both TMSI are matching, then and only then, there might be some UL problems due to
UL messages from the mobile not being received by the eNodeB.

24
Paging 2/2
25
Reselection parameters : qHyst / tReselectionEUTRAN SIB3
Cell reselection is used for mobility in idle mode.

HysteresisCellReselection should theoretically be set to a value at least equal
to the handover hysteresis as cell reselection in idle mode is not as important as
handover in connected mode.
tReselectionEUTRAN configures the time during which specific criteria for the
event needs to be met in order to trigger a cell reselection.
Its default value is 2s.
The idle mode was only quickly tested in mobility, and therefore idle mode
mobility parameters were not optimized.
But qHyst could be fine tuned.
HysteresisCellReselection = qHyst + qOffsetCell
qHyst is set by default to 4dB.
qOffsetCell is set by default to 3dB for all cells (this parameter,
although present in LA1.0, will start to be used in LA1.1).
26
Reselection parameters : qHyst / tReselectionEUTRAN
Cell reselection between cells 32 and 31
-130.00
-125.00
-120.00
-115.00
-110.00
-105.00
-100.00
-95.00
-90.00
R
S
R
P

(
d
B
m
)
RSRP (cell 32)
RSRP (cell 31)
qRxLevMin = -110 dBm
Start of the other-cells measurements
with sIntrasearch = 10 dB
Reselection hysteresis = 7 dB
tReselectionEUTRAN = 2 s
27
Handover Hysteresis Background: cellIndividualOffset
cellIndividualOffset can be used to fine tune the handover hysteresis on a cell-to-cell basis.

Handover can be made more difficult from cell1 to cell2 by decreasing the cellIndividualOffset of the
cell2, or sooner by increasing the value.

The effect would be to decrease number of ping pongs between 2 cells after having already tuned the
parameter hysteresis -, or to have an earlier HO before loosing the source cell.

In the next slide, moving from cell 34 to 33, the call is dropped all the time.
In the opposite direction, more than 50% dropped call.
By setting cellIndividualOffset to dB2 in both direction, the dropped call disappeared as the HO is
happening sooner and without any ping-pong.
28
Handover Hysteresis Background: cellIndividualOffset
Drop call + Reselection on 33
Building doing shadowing
29
cellIndividualOffset setting in WiPS
Analysis of Handoff Failures at 50%
OCNS Loading
Murray-Hill Blockhouse Drive test run with G13 DE hardware
31
G13 DE run w/ 50% loading
11 failures
5 on the target cell right after HO
Typically displayed as T304 expiry on the LLDM Radio Problem Cause screen
6 (4+2) on the source cell itself before MR could be sent out (incl. 2 w/o MR)
Typically displayed as SRMax on the LLDM Radio Problem Cause screen
Counted as HO failures as MR should
have been sent
The HO failure rate
can be calculated in
various ways:

HO Failure Rate 1:
(5+6)/(94+2) = 11.5%

HO Failure Rate 2:
(5+4)/94 = 9.8%

32
Failure 1: HO Failure On Target - T304 Expire
Sudden / Momentary
drop in RSRP on 83
causing UE to send MR to
a weak Cell ID 82
SINR drops right after HO to weak
cell. RSSI strong. Call drops because
UE can not acquire target cell
33
Failure 1: HO Failure On Target - T304 Expire - Timeline
09:39:56.740 Cell 83: RSRP -67 dBm
09:39:56.750 SINR: 15.65 dB
09:39:56.910 SINR: 15.74 dB
09:39:56.940 Cell 83: RSRP -65 dBm
09:39:57.070 SINR: 14.75 dB
09:39:57.140 Cell 83: RSRP -150 dBm Sudden Drop in RSRP of 83
09:39:57.180 RRC MeasurementReport: (83, RSRP=38) ; (82, RSRP=42)
09:39:57.210 RRC Conn Reconfig Handover Command to weak cell 82
09:39:57.240 SINR: -52 dB
09:39:57.240 Cell 82: RSRP -150 dBm; Cell 83: RSRP -150 dBm
09:39:57.250 RRC Reconfig Complete: Handover Confirm
09:39:57.310 Cell 83: RSRP -65 dBm; Cell 82: RSRP -150 dBm 83 strong again
09:39:57.240 SINR: -8.79 dB
:
09:39:58.840 SINR: -17.45 dB
:
09:39:59.210 Radio Problem Cause (T304 Expiry) - Call drops
42 = ~ -98 dBm RSRP
Momentary plunge in 83s RSRP -> causes HO to weak cell 82 -> leads to the drop call
What could cause
UE to lose 83
momentarily ?
34
Failure 2: HO Failure On Source - SRMax
MR could not be sent out in time
before DL SINR degrades to a
point the call drops; strong RSSI
Last DL and UL grant
before the dropped call
MR not ready by then
35
Failure 2: HO Failure On Source - SRMax - Timeline
09:46:56.630 SINR 4.24
:
09:46:58.470 SINR -0.80
09:46:58.630 SINR 0.92
09:46:58.790 SINR -7.6
09:46:58.950 SINR 4.42
09:46:59.110 SINR 3.45
09:46:59.270 SINR -3.82
09:46:59.430 SINR -10.50
09:46:59.590 SINR -7.08
09:46:59.750 SINR -4.60
09:46:59.830 RRC MeasurementReport: (81, RSRP=69) ; (82, RSRP=72) Too late to send MR?
09:46:59.910 SINR -44.56
09:46:59.920 Radio Problem Cause (SRMax)
MR should be sent out around
here before SINR degrades
too much?
36
Sudden / Momentary
drop in RSRP on 82
a weak Cell ID 81
37
Sudden / Momentary
drop in RSRP on 83
a weak Cell ID 82
38
before DL SINR degrades to a
point the call drops; strong RSSI
Both source and Target RSRPs drop to -150dBm
momentarily just around the time of HO
39

before DL SINR degrades to a point
there are no Grants decoded leading
to drop call; strong RSSI
40
No MR sent
41
No MR sent
42
Sudden / Momentary
drop in RSRP on 112
a weak Cell ID 111
43
Sudden / Momentary
drop in RSRP on 112
a weak Cell ID 113
44
Last UL grant before
the dropped call MR
not ready by then
First MR due to momentary / sudden drop in
RSRP of 113. Results in HO to 112. Next
when 113 becomes strong again, UE
attempts to send MR to another weak pilot
82. The MR never gets sent out.
45
Layer 3 Analysis Using eDAT
46
Call Flow 1/2

47
Call Flow 2/2

48
Successful Handover Call

49
Handover Failure Call Flow

50
Successful PS Origination

51
Open Issues
The following Issues were observed during Phase 4 trial
Admission Control
UL Fairness
HO Performance
Throughputs drop
Stuck IMSI issue

Admission Control
o Ensures that enough radio resources are available to support the dedicated bearer
throughput requirements before a new user is allowed to establish connection to the same
sector
o This capability was not fully functional in the eNB build delivered to the trial hence it was
not demonstrated
o The feature is planned for validation as part of the LE2.0 release

UL Link Budget
UE: USB detach, crashes seen under certain Scenarios

52
Open Issues UL Fairness
It was observed that with 2 to 4 active UEs, the PRB allocations between users
were not quite fair
We observe that this fairness issue is not seen with higher number of users under
variable radio conditions such as with mobility
The main reason for this behavior was identified as the non-flat nature of SRS SINR
profile that causes some skew in the priority metric computations of the scheduler,
which in turn are used by the PRB allocation algorithm.
Additional distortion of the SRS signal from fading that may bias the priority metric
evaluated at eNB in field environments
UL scheduler has very limited choices for the PRB allocation, hence any bias in the
scheduler metrics will result in a noticeable skew in PRB allocation and impact
fairness.
With larger number of users, PRB allocations are less restrictive and biases in the
metrics are not apparent.

53
Open Issues HO Performance
High Handover Failure Rate under 100% loading
PDCCH Performance at low SINR
PDCCH has errors or UE could not decode under marginal conditions
Signal quality on serving sector degrade noticeably as there is delay in detecting and
reporting the candidates
UE measurement performance at low SINR
RF Coverage Issues
Implementation of Aggregation Level 8 has been identified as key enhancement for
PDCCH performance. This is plan for LE2.0
Further enhancement to PDCCH Power Control introduced in LA1.1 will be made
available in LE2.0
Further UE enhancements will also be required to improve performance.

54
Open Issues Throughput Drops
Bi-directional TCP traffic & Fairness with Bi-directional FTP
DL scheduler fairness and throughput with TCP traffic impacted by bi-directional traffic
TCP Acks and bearer data flowing in the UL direction potentially was causing the server to
throttle down on the bearer data going in the DL direction
Test executed with UDP traffic to evaluate the fairness aspect and RB utilization is quite
uniform indicating good fairness
Flow that suffers throughput degradation with bi-directional TCP can be improved to the
same level as if it is by itself through the TCP window size change

55
Open Issues Stuck IMSI
Some error conditions causes the call status between the UE, MME and
SGW to be out of sync leading to call processing failures.
eNB and MME could have released the UE context, but the SGW is still in a
state where it has an active context for the same UE
UE tries to attach again, SGW would reject it due to an existing session.
Work around was to CLEAR the UE IMSI before UE could attach again
Mismatch in status between network elements is currently under test and
is planned for LE2.0

Uplink Link Budget
Uplink MCS and PRB would gracefully reduce to the minimum supported
value before the link breaks resulting in a call drop
UL MCS did not reach the minimum before the uplink performance
degraded and the call ultimately dropped.
This reduced the achievable range
The issue remains under investigation

UE
USB detach, crashes seen under certain scenarios

56
RSRP & RSRQ Measurement Report Mapping

57
www.alcatel-lucent.com
www.alcatel-lucent.com

TTP30024 - RF Parameter Optimization

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

TTP30024 - RF Parameter Optimization

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Knowledge Sharing

Key RF Parameter Optimization

Potrebbero piacerti anche