Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Outline
Implementation Aspects
Frequency Assignment in FH Networks
BSS - Database Parameters
Optimisation Aspects
Summary
Implementation Aspects
Baseband FH Synthesizer FH
TX Antenna TX Antenna
Hybrid Combing
Filter Combining
1 1
RF2 BB2 RF1..n BB2
2 2
RF3 BB3 RF1..n BB3
3 3
RF4 BB4 RF1..n BB4 4
4
• Wide band
• Narrow Band
• Higher insertion losses (~3 dB/stage)
• Low insertion loss (3-4 dB)
• On-air combining possible (DUCOM)
BFH SFH
TPU X
TPU 2 X X
PA X X X*
HPA X X
* not all types of first generation power amplifiers are suitable for for SFH
• No. of RF = No. of TRX BCCH TRX except for TS0 may hop
Wideband Repeaters:
• Usable for SFH and BFH
• Careful implementation (amplification of signals
in the whole frequency band)
Frequency Assignment
in Hopping Networks
Planning of Boundaries
Hopping – Non Hopping
Database
Generation
Common Band
total operator bandwidth 8.6 MHz = 43 carriers
Achievable System Load
5 hopping frequencies
PC on, DTX on
Dedicated Band 71.8%
15 BCCH carriers 28 TCH carriers 59.7%
Common Band
54.3%
MRP
Multiple Re-use Patterns (MRP)
[%]
TCH 2
TCH 2
TCH 1 TCH 3
TCH 2
TCH 1 TCH 3
TCH 2
TCH 1 TCH 3
TCH 1 TCH 3
BCCH 1
BCCH 3 BCCH 2
BCCH 4 • Reliability
BCCH 7
• Neighbor Measurements
BCCH 6 BCCH 5
BCCH 9
BCCH 10 • BSIC Decoding
BCCH 8
TCH A
Channel TCH C TCH B TCH C TCH B
TCH A
1, 4, 7, 10, ... TCH A
TCH A
TCH C TCH B
2, 5, 8, 11, ...
TCH B
TCH A
TCH C TCH B TCH C TCH B
TCH C
3, 6, 9, 12, ...
TCH C TCH B
TCH 2
• Each sector within a site uses a
different Frequency Group
TCH 1 TCH 3
TCH 2
• No co-channel collisions between
TCH 2 TCH 1 sectors of a site
TCH 3
TCH 2
• Synchronisation between the sectors
TCH 1 TCH 3 and MAIO management avoid
adjacent channel collisions
TCH 1 TCH 3
• Homogeneous network:
TCH uses each frequency only
no co-channel collisions between
part of the time (e.g. 50%) serving cell and all nearest neighbour
50% fractional load cells
TCH
• Each sector within a site uses the
TCH same frequency group
TCH TCH
TCH • Synchronisation between the sectors
TCH
TCH
TCH
and MAIO management required to
TCH TCH avoid co-channel collisions
TCH TCH
• Homogeneous network:
Co-channel collisions between
serving cell and nearest neighbor
with:
S = M’ if M’ < N
S = (M’ + T’) modulo N else
M’ = M modulo [2^Integer(log2(N)+1)]
T’ = T3 modulo [2^Integer(log2(N)+1)]
M = T2 + RNTABLE((HSN xor T1R)+T3)
T1R, T2, T3 ... Different Time Parameter
RNTABLE ... Table of 114 Integer numbers
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
TRX2
MAIO = 0
MAIO = 6
TRX3 MAIO = 12
MAIO = 16 TRX3
A: 1 4 7 10 13 16 TRX1 f A MAIO = 0
B: 2 5 8 11 14 17 TRX2 f A MAIO = 2
C: 3 6 9 12 15 18
TRX3 fA MAIO = 4
TRX0 BCCH
•Automatized
Planning Routines •Global / Local
•Variety of Parameter Settings
Planning Algorithms
Input data
from radio network
planning tool
Minimisation Evaluation
Evaluation
ofofthe
theassignments
of Frequency Assignment •C/I
assignments
•C/I andFER
and FERplots
plots
interference •C/I and FER analysis
•C/I and FER analysis
on
onperpercarrier
carrierbasis
basis
a
rk Dat
wo
Net
Live
•Setting of planning
•Consideration of constraints
FH, PC, DTX •Common / Dedicated
Band Planning
Potentially serving
signal SC
EIRP - Path
loss
EIRP - Path
Potentially interfering
signal SI loss
Ai
Ai
Ai
50%
NH
2 Ch
FH Gains as determined via 3 Ch
4 Ch
Real Network Simulations 5 Ch
8 Ch
Gain: up to 7 dB
FER in % FER in %
3% 3%
<3% <3%
<2% <2%
< 1% < 1%
1x3 reuse, 0,3 fractional load 1x3 reuse, 0,6 fractional load
No. of TRX
3 2 2
Network Example:
3 4 4 4 4 4
• 11 Sites
3 4 4
• 33 Cells 3
• 6 cells 2 TRX
• 12 cells 3 TRX 3 3 4 4 4 4
• 15 cells 4 TRX 3 3
4
• 33 TRX BCCH 3
• 75 TRX TCH 3
4 4 4
3 3
2 2
2 2
f0
f4
• No Interference diversity using
frequency groups
Principle of Random Hopping
Random hopping sequence {... f1, f4, f2, f0, f0, f3, f0, f1, f2, f4, ...}, MAIO 0
Random hopping sequence {... f3, f1, f4, f2, f2, f1, f2, f3, f4, f1, ...}, MAIO 2
TDMA frame
F r e q u e n c y
f0
f3
• Less frequency diversity
f4
BCCH TRX0
TRX0 BCCH
3 - 6 - 9 - 12 - 15 - 18 TRXFREQ = 18 TRX1
.. TRX1 TRXFREQ = 2 2 - 5 - 8 - 11 - 14 - 17
.. .. ..
. . .
.
Network Design and Consulting
s
Planning & Optimisation of Frequency Hopping in GSM Networks
RXQUAL
7
Power Increase
(bad quality)
L_RXQUAL_XX_P
U_RXQUAL_XX_
P
Power Decrease
(good quality)
RXLEV
0 63
L_RXLEV_XX_P U_RXLEV_XX_P
POW_RED_STEP_SIZE
P_CONFIRM PWRCONF 1...31 Maxim um inte rval for waiting for a confirm ation of the ne w trans m it
/PWRC pow e r le vel. unit: 2 TSACCH
L_RXLEV_DL_P LOWTLEVD 0...63 RXLEV thre s hold on dow nlink/uplink for pow e r incre as e
L_RXLEV_UL_P LOWTLEVU
U_RXLEV_DL_P UPTLEVD 0...63 RXLEV thre s hold on dow nlink/uplink for pow e r d e cre as e
U_RXLEV_UL_P UPTLEVU
L_RXQUAL_DL_P LOWTQUAD 0...7 RXQUAL thre s hold on dow nlink/uplink for pow e r incre as e
L_RXQUAL_UL_P LOWTQUAU
U_RXQUAL_DL_P UPTQUAD 0...7 RXQUAL thre s hold on dow nlink/uplink for pow e r d e cre as e
U_RXQUAL_UL_P UPTQUAU
P_CON_INTERVAL PCONINT / PWRC 0...31 Minim um inte rval be twe e n changes of the RF trans m it pow e r le ve l
R XQU AL @9 0%
5 5
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
0,1 1 10 100 0,1 1 10 100
FER@90% [%] FER@90% [%]
Cyclic FH 4 Frequencies Cyclic FH 8 Frequencies
7 7
2% FER 2% FER
6 6
RXQU AL @9 0%
R XQUAL@90%
5 5
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
0,1 1 10 100 0,1 1 10 100
FER@90% [%] FER@90% [%]
Power Control:
LOWTQUAD: 3 (4*) 4 ... 5 3 ... 4
LOWTQUAU: 3 (4*) 4 ... 5 3 ... 4
UPTQUAD: 1 1 1
UPTQUAU: 1 1 1
PAVRQUAL 4-1 4-1 4-1
Optimisation Aspects
Points of Examination
Impact of RLC on Network Quality
4.0%
3.0%
~ 18 % Improvement
2.0%
~ 14 % Improvement
1.0%
0.0%
Dropped Call Rate TCH Drop Rate Call Drop Rate BS
No Hopping 4.55% 1.23% 1.90%
SFH 1x1 4.39% 1.08% 1.59%
SFH 1x3 4.40% 1.04% 1.52%
80.0%
Percentage
60.0% of
Quality HO
Parameter
increases
Optimisation
40.0%
20.0%
0.0%
No Hopping S1 / SFH 1x3 SFH 1x3
Uplink Quality (Per) Downlink Quality (Per) Uplink Strengh (Per) Downlink Strength (Per)
Distance (Per) Better Cell (Per) Direct Retry (Per)
20,0%
Optimisation of Database
Parameters
Percentage of Intra cell
10,0% HO decreased again
0,0%
InterCellHO/TCHAssignm IntraCellHO/TCHAssignm
RXQUAL_UL > 5
RXLEV_UL > 3180%
60%
40%
20%
0%
No Hopping S1 / SFH 1x3 SFH 1x3
Intra Downlink Quality 54% 62% 74%
Intra Uplink Quality 46% 38% 26%
Less percentage of
Rate of idle traffic channels per interference band measurements in
higher bands
SFH + PC + DTX 99.3% 0.7% 0.0%
0.0% Reduction of
Interference
SFH + PC 98.9% 1.1% 0.0%
0.0%
Interference Band 1 Interference Band 2 Interference Band 3 Interference Band 4 Interference Band 5
30%
Power Control was
20% enabled in Downlink
additionally
10%
0% Reduction of
SFH 1x1 PC, DTX SFH 1x1
Uplink Quality (Per) 14% 23%
Downlink Quality HO
Downlink Quality (Per) 20% 16%
Uplink Strengh (Per) 8% 7%
Downlink Strength (Per) 7% 6%
Distance (Per) 0% 0%
Better Cell (Per) 49% 47%
Direct Retry (Per) 2% 1%
No Synchr. No Synchr.
1,00%
HSN = a HSN = a
0,80% Synchronization
0,60%
0,20%
No Synchronisation
between the cells
0,00%
TCH Drop Rate SFH Reuse 1x3 TCH Drop Rate SFH Reuse 1x1
4,0% Reduction of 6
Frequencies
3,0%
2,0%
1,0%
0,0%
Dropped Call Rate TCH Drop Rate
TTTTTTTTTTTTSTTTTTTTTTTTT-
26 frames = 120 ms
60,0% 70,0%
50,0% 60,0%
50,0%
40,0%
40,0%
30,0%
30,0%
20,0% 20,0%
10,0% 10,0%
0,0% 0,0%
0 4 8 12 16 20 > 20 5 6 7
FER [% ] RxQual
No Hopping BCCH Hopping TCH 1x3 Hopping TCH 1x1 No Hopping BCCH Hopping TCH 1x3 Hopping TCH1x1
Summary
Siemens SFH
High capacity configurations:
Networks in
• Network with site configurations up to 4/6/4:
China 4/4/4, 4/5/4, 4/6/4
Croatia
• Cells are significantly loaded with traffic
Czech Rep.
• Call Drop Rate less than 2 %
Germany
TCH Drop Rate better than 2% (in selected cases
Kuwait better than 1%)
RSA Achievable quality in the networks depends on
Syria • coverage situation
Taiwan • available spectrum
• Traffic load and traffic distribution
Thailand • homogeneity of the network and topography
USA of the landscape
Network Design and Consulting
s
Summary
Additional Information