Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Agenda
Introduction Interference Analysis Methodology Interference Analysis Results UMTS operators co-existence Interference Prevention
Antenna protection Filter(s)
Introduction
UMTS comes after other radio systems
CDMA (800, 900, 1900), GSM900, GSM1800, GSM1900
Agenda
Introduction Interference Analysis Methodology Interference Analysis Results UMTS operators co-existence Interference Prevention
Antenna protection Filter(s)
Required isolation between GSM / UMTS antenna connector and UMTS antenna connector
Antennas performances
BTS performances
4 4
Agenda
Introduction Interference Analysis Methodology Interference Analysis Results UMTS operators co-existence Interference Prevention
Antenna protection Filter(s)
6 6
Standard recommendations
Required isolations
UMTS UMTS UMTS GSM 900 GSM 1800 transmitter transmitter transmitter transmitter transmitter to to to to UMTS to UMTS GSM 900 GSM 1800 UMTS receiver receiver receiver receiver receiver
Blocking
40 dB
58 dB
48 dB
58 dB
63 dB
29 dB
29 dB
32 dB
isolations are pessimistic since no feeder losses have been taken into account
7 7
8 8
Physical calculations considering UMTS competitor BTS and Nortel UMTS iBTS
Required isolations
iBTS UMTS transmitter to iBTS UMTS receiver iBTS UMTS UMTS competitor transmitter to transmitter to UMTS competitor iBTS UMTS receiver receiver
Blocking
0 dB
63 dB
0 dB
15 dB
15 dB
32 dB
isolations are pessimistic since no feeder losses have been taken into account
9 9
Physical calculations considering GSM competitor BTS and Nortel UMTS iBTS
Required isolations
iBTS UMTS Tx to GSM Rx 40 dB
(GSM 900)
Blocking
48 dB
(GSM 1800)
28 dB
Spurious frequencies
14 dB
: required
isolations are pessimistic since no feeder losses have been taken into account
10 10
Conclusion
Nortel iBTS UMTS:
iBTS UMTS has better performances than the UMTS standard recommendation
Competitor BTS:
If only compliant with standard recommendations, interference problems will occur
Important to do studies considering the real performances of the products in order to reduce the required isolations to avoid interference between systems
11 11
Agenda
Introduction Interference Analysis Methodology Interference Analysis Results UMTS operators co-existence Interference Prevention
Antenna protection Filter(s)
1920 MHZ
1980 MHZ
Capacity loss
Capacity loss
2110 MHZ
2170 MHZ
ACLR Ability of a transmitter to confine its transmissions to its own channel ACS Ability of a receiver to exclude the interference present on an adjacent channel
ACP Sums up the degree of interaction between adjacent channels. Combination of both transmitter and receiver performance
15 15
Good ACS Equipment limitations . SOLUTIONS Spectrum efficiency Adjacent Channel Selectivity
Carrier spacing
Co-location
16 16
MS BS
Carrier spacing
System B
Solutions:
High ACP Carrier spacing: At least 5 MHz between two inter-operator FDD FDD carriers At least 4.8 MHz between two intra-operator FDD FDD carriers FDD FDD base stations co-location
20 20
Agenda
Introduction Interference Analysis Methodology Interference Analysis Results UMTS operators co-existence Interference Prevention
Antenna protection Filter(s)
Intermodulations
Co-siting solutions
Interference Prevention
Main solutions
Antenna protection External filter(s)
External filter at Tx BTS side for reducing Tx out-band spurious and wideband noise transmission External filter at Rx BTS side for protecting out-band of Rx band and improving the Rx blocking performance
System B BTS System A BTS
Antenna decoupling
23 23
Interference Prevention
Main Solutions
With antenna decoupling, required additional decoupling (dB) is Require isolation (dB) Rx cable loss (dB) Tx cable loss - Antenna decoupling (dB) If additional decoupling 0 OK !
Cable Loss
RxLev TxPA
24 24
Combiner
PA
System A
System B
Interference Prevention
Antenna protection Antenna separation decoupling :
attenuation between two antennas when separated (between the two connectors) for a given frequency band depends on antenna performances and site configuration
Antenna rejection :
attenuation of a signal fed into an antenna working in another band
Antenna isolation :
Attenuation of a signal between the transmitting antenna connector and the reception antenna connector
25 25
Antenna decoupling
Two separated antennas Vertical separation between antennas
1 mast per sector 1 UMTS antenna 1 antenna of other system Isolation is reached:
by vertical separation between antennas
other BTS
Antenna decoupling
UMTS iBTS
26 26
Antenna decoupling
Two separated antennas Horizontal separation between antennas
2 masts per sector 1 UMTS antenna 1 antenna of other system Isolation is reached:
by horizontal separation between antennas
other BTS
Antenna decoupling
UMTS iBTS
27 27
Antenna decoupling
Two separated antennas
Other system
UMTS
example
1 X-polar antenna of other system
2 ports
Feeder Cables
Other BTS
BTS UMTS
28 28
Antenna decoupling
Antenna decoupling measurement between GSM 900/1800 Xpolar directives antennas and UMTS X-polar directive antenna
Antenna 1
Antenna 2
Network analyser
Input S
Signal generator
29 29
Antenna decoupling
with horizontal separation 0.5 to 4m d
S' in dB Average S' in UMTS band =0 deg 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 -60 -70 -80 -90 0 1 2
GSM-900 antenna GSM-1800 antenna Dual (GSM-900) Dual (GSM-1800)
Horizontal distance in m
Average S' in UMTS band =60 deg 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 -60 -70 -80 -90 -100 0 1 2 Horizontal distance in m 3
GSM-900 antenna GSM-1800 antenna Dual (GSM-900) Dual (GSM-1800)
S' in dB
30 30
Antenna decoupling
Antenna decoupling versus horizontal separation between antennas
Antenna GSM 900
d = 0.5 m = 65 dB d = 3 m = 76 dB
d dB
Antenna decoupling
Antenna decoupling with vertical separation
Average S' in UMTS band Same azimut
0.00 GSM-900 antenna -10.00 -20.00 -30.00 GSM-1800 antenna DUAL (GSM-900) DUAL (GSM-1800)
S' in dB
-40.00 -50.00
-60.00
-70.00 -80.00 -90.00 -100.00 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Antenna decoupling
Antenna decoupling versus
GSM X-polar antenna
antennas
Antenna GSM 900
D = 0.5 m = 72 dB D = 3 m = 81 dB
D dB
Antenna decoupling
Antenna decoupling with Horizontal/vertical separation
Average S' in UMTS band
0
GSM-900 antenna
-90
-100
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
Horizontal distance in m
34 34
Antenna decoupling
Antenna decoupling versus vertical and horizontal separations between antennas
Antenna GSM 900
d = 0.5 m = 70 dB d = 3 m = 85 dB
D = 1.5 m
GSM Antenna
GSM Antenna UMTS Antenna
d = 0.5 m = 90
d
d = 0.5 m = 30
UMTS Antenna
60 dB (1800) 70 dB (900)
36 36
55 to 60 dB (1800) 65 to 70 dB (900)
Antenna decoupling between two UMTS antennas versus horizontal or vertical separation
Vertical separation:
UMTS X-polar antenna
Horizontal separation:
d dB
d = 0.5 m
D dB
75 dB
d=3m
UMTS X-polar antenna UMTS X-polar antenna
d = 0.5 m
55 dB
70 dB
37 37
85 dB
d=3m
Interference Prevention
38 38
Antenna decoupling
UMTS iBTS
39 39
Antenna decoupling
UMTS iBTS
40 40
UMTS iBTS
41 41
Diplexer
Antennas options
2 vertical antennas for each band
4 antennas per sector Space diversity
Dual Band antennas can be used only if equipped with independent electrical tilt systems.
Feeders options
Duplexer
Duplexer
Duplexer
Duplexer
Duplexer
Duplexer
Duplexer
Duplexer
UMTS iBTS
UMTS iBTS
UMTS iBTS
No reuse of 2G aerials New Feeders for UMTS New antenna for UMTS Site capacity ??
Reuse of 2G feeders New antenna for UMTS Need additional feeder if 2G without diversity
Reuse of 2G feeder Reuse of 2G antenna if Xpolar. Or 1 single new antenna for both systems
44 44
External duplexer
The external duplexer can be associated with TTLNA (Tower Top Low Noise Amplifier) for UMTS only or for both UMTS and DCS 1800 Typical insertion loss for both internal and external duplexer : 0.5 dB. No impact on Link Budget
GSM 1800 path UMTS path Frequency 1710 to 1880 MHz 1920 to 2170 MHz Insertion loss (dB) 0.5 0.5 Return loss antenna port (dB) 18 18 Attenuation in GSM 50 50 Attenuation in UMTS 50 IMD 3rd order (dBc) -160 -160 Max Tx Power (W) 200 200
shared feeder
It can be incorporated with the external duplexer, and provided only for
the UMTS path or for both paths.
X-polar Dual Band antenna X-polar UMTS antenna
TTLNA
TTLNA TTLNA
TTLNA
Duplexer
Duplexer
Duplexer
Duplexer
UMTS iBTS
UMTS iBTS
The impact on the Link Budget is a 3 dB increase of the reverse path loss. This corresponds to the compensation of the feeder loss.
46 46
Agenda
Introduction Interference Analysis Methodology Interference Analysis Results UMTS operators co-existence Interference Prevention
Antenna protection Filter(s)
Spurious emission
PHS out of band spurious emission required to be less than 2.5 W correspond to a -26 dBm threshold in 5 Mhz UMTS band PHS in band spurious emission required to be less than 250 nW correspond to a -36 dBm threshold in 5 Mhz UMTS band Required out of band isolation is 92 dB, required in band isolation is 16 dB
Blocking
PHS base station maximum transmit power is 2 W correspond to 33 dBm Required isolation is 48 dB
Solution
50 dB out of band filtering at PHS base station output and physical separation of antennas isolations are pessimistic since no feeder losses have been taken into account
48 48
: required
Wideband noise
The frequency separation between the PHS band ([1905~1915MHz]) and the UMTS Downlink band ([2110~2170MHz]) is large enough
Spurious emission
For out of band spurious, maximum tolerated interference level at the mobile side in the UMTS band is 116.5 dBm For in band spurious, the minimum requirement gives a maximum power for the adjacent channel interfering signal on receive at the UMTS mobile of 52 dBm
Blocking
The required blocking level for Downlink band in UMTS is 15 dBm
Required isolation is 25 dB
Solution
PHS signal has high pathloss, usually providing enough isolation Additional isolation is required only in the worst case scenario when PHS base station is very close to an UMTS mobile but far from the PHS mobile isolations are pessimistic since no feeder losses have been taken into account
49 49
: required
Blocking
The required blocking level for Downlink band in UMTS is 10 dBm
Required isolation is 25 dB
Solution
PHS signal has high pathloss, usually providing enough isolation Additional isolation is required only in the worst case scenario when PHS terminal is very close to an UMTS base station. Presumably the probability is low.
: required
isolations are pessimistic since no feeder losses have been taken into account
50 50
Blocking
Required isolation is 25 dB
Solution
51 51
Conclusions
UMTS is an interference limited system
The interference must be minimized in the network design phase in order to optimize coverage and Capacity
52 52