7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
1/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org1
RPC Training Session: Topic III
Overview of Coexistence Planning for
Narrowband, Wideband, & Broadband
OperationsIslip, New York, November 14, 2006
Sean OHara
NPSTC Technical Support
Regions 8, 19, 28, 30 and 55
SRC - State of New York - SWN
315-452-8152 (office)
National Public Safety Telecommunications Council
David Eierman
Motorola
Principal Staff Engineer
(410) 712-6242 (office)
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
2/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org2
Introduction
Purpose Introduce RPCs to techniques and requirements for handling coordination and
coexistence of diverse 700 MHz technologies
This will only provide an overview
Relevancy Immediate need to manage these issues, since 700 MHz spectrum is likely to
become flexible use to a much larger degree than it was yesterday Audience
Technical
System Operators, RPC Technical Committee Members, FrequencyCoordinators, Spectrum and System Planners, etc
Collaboration These guidelines were developed through collaboration with Industry as well as
public safety DataRadio, Lucent Technologies, M/A-COM, Motorola, NPSTC, Qualcomm
Next Steps NPSTC and Industry will generate and make available a detailed set of
coexistence guidelines early on in 2007
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
3/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org3
Reminder
It is up to us (the RPCs) to manage thisspectrum effectively
If we do not
Interference will result Regional capacity will drop
Flexibility will go out the window
The FCC gives us basic rules we can impose
whatever additional Regional restrictions/rulesare necessary to manage the spectrum The spectrum management responsibility has been
given to us
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
4/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org4
Final BB/WB/NB Guidelines
The final Guidelines will be written such
that it could be adapted by the RPCs
without having to develop their own.
The Guidelines will contain:
Coordination procedures
Deployment recommendations (power flux
limits, minimum desired level targets, etc)
Interference mitigation procedures
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
5/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org5
Overview and Schedule
Topic Time
Introduction and Overview 02 minutes
Key Concepts and Technologies 03 minutes (end at 01:35)
Co-Channel Coordination 10 minutes (end at 01:45)
Adjacent Channel and Out of Band or Off-
Channel Coordination
35 minutes (end at 02:20)
Examples 30 minutes (end at 02:50)
Questions and Answers and Feedback 10 minutes (end at 03:00)
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
6/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org6
Key Concepts
Recall some concepts from earlier session
they are important here as well:
Reliability
Channel Performance Criterion (CPC) for Voice andData Services
Near/Far Effects
Adjacent Channel Coupled Power Ratio (ACCPR)
We do not have time to review these in full here,but please ask Qs if appropriate as we go along
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
7/58NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org7
700 Technologies
Narrowband Technologies Use: Voice and Data up to ~100 kbps (raw)
Channel Size 6.25 kHz, 12.5 kHz, 25 kHz
Modulation Methods: C4FM, F4FM, GFSK, QAM
Access Methodologies: FDD, FDMA/TDMA
Products: Project 25, OpenSky, HPD, others
Wideband Technologies Use: Data up to ~800 kbps (raw)
Channel Size 50 kHz, 100 kHz, 150 kHz
Modulation Methods: QPSK through 64-QAM, FM/N-ary FSK
Access Methodologies: FDD, and TDD
Products: SAM, IOTA, others
Broadband Technologies Use: Voice &High Speed Data (beyond 1 Mbps) Channel Size 1.25 MHz to 5 MHz
Modulation Methods OFDM with QAM, CDMA with N-PSK
Access Methodologies: FDD, and TDD
Products: 802.16/e, 802.20, cdma2000 EVDO, UMTS
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
8/58NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org8
Co-Channel
Coordination
National Public Safety Telecommunications Council
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
9/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org9
Co-Channel Planning
Co-channel planning for most situations is
a matter of bandwidth and power coupling
ratios
NB to NB, WB to WB
NB to WB, NB to BB*
WB to BB
BB to BB involves technology aspects as
well
*NB to BB is a special case for border areas or by waiver
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
10/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org10
Power Coupling
Recall the ACCPR calculations covered in the
earlier session.
The same calculations need to be done for the
co-channel cases, except the signals nowoverlap.
This can actually be easier, since the interfering
power density is either (1) more uniform over the
capture filter shape or (2) is completely captured
by the victim receiver.
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
11/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org11
Power Coupling
6.25-kHz
12.5-kHz
25.0-kHz
50-kHz
100-kHz
150-kHz
1.25 MHz
Unless both signals are BB
For planning, you can simply look at the
total power of the interfering signal, de-
rated by the power coupled into the
other signal
DWE
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
12/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org12
Power Coupling
6.25 12.50 25.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 1250.00
6.25 0.00 -3.01 -6.02 -9.03 -12.04 -13.80 -23.01
12.50 0.00 0.00 -3.01 -6.02 -9.03 -10.79 -20.00
25.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3.01 -6.02 -7.78 -16.99
50.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3.01 -4.77 -13.98
100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.76 -10.97
150.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -9.21
1250.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Interferer Bandwidth (kHz)
Victimb
andwidth(kHz)
De-rate co-channel
interferers ERP by the table
at left, then perform normal
co-channel analyses
Note that as the victim
bandwidth gets wider it
captures more interference
Also note that as theinterferer gets wider, it offers
less interference into
narrower victim, bandwidths
DWE
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
13/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org13
Implications
With -23 dB power coupling, a single NB/WB toco-channel BB* coordination can be treatedmuch like an adjacent channel coordination wasperformed at NPSPAC
NB and BB can get much closer to each other thanNB to NB or NB to WB
However, a BB* signal may capture manyNB/WB co-channel interferers at each field point All the NB/WB power must be captured and combined
like in the multiple NB interferer cases shown earliertoday.
BB may be the one to get interfered with first.
*NB to BB is a special case for border areas or by waiver
DWE
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
14/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org14
Implications
SYS-2
BB
1 Channels
SYS-3
NB/WB
3 Channels
SYS-1
NB/WB
4 Channels
SYS-2 (BB) gets interfering
power from both SYS-1
(NB), and SYS-3 (NB/WB)
Therefore it suffers
reliability degradation asmuch as 6-10 dB earlier,
with reduced throughput at
cell edges
NB to BB is a special case for border areas or by waiver
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
15/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org15
Technology DependentConsiderations
OFDM/A to OFDM/A Still collecting information on this, will cover in more detail in the final guidelines
Must use FDD in this allocation, right now WiMAX (802.16) is focused on TDD
CDMA to CDMA Intra-system co-channel operations are handled through the technology and hand-
offs Inter-system co-channel coordination is possible, even between adjacent counties
However, systems should be coordinated (PN-offset codes) and synchronized
RPCs should encourage and/or require this coordination
CDMA to OFDM/A Use power coupling method
All Technologies Right now there is a real need for consistent CPCfspecifications across the
technologies
These will need to be a CPCfunction, one that related required S/(I+N) to datathroughput/goodput, message success rate or some other data metric
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
16/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org16
Adjacent and Off Channel
Coordination
National Public Safety Telecommunications Council
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
17/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org17
Adjacent and Off ChannelCoordination
In this area we look at coexistence of both directadjacent channel technologies as well as off-channeltechnologies Adjacent are within one NB/WB channel block width (NB: up to
25-kHz, WB: up to 150-kHz)
Off-Channels can be as far away as 10-MHz The main factor involved is the determination of near/far
Hole sizes and impacts (Swiss Cheese) Caused by ACCPR effects
Caused by Out of Band Emissions (OOBE)
Undesired emissions from other deployments leaking into the bandwhere the desired signal operates
Caused by receiver effects (IM and Overload) High levels of out of band power that cause the victim receiver to
operate in a non-linear manner and degrade the ability to receiveand understand the desired signal
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
18/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org18
Swiss Cheese, Reliability Loss
MobileReliability
(Noise-Only)
MobileReliability
(Interference
from Bases)
MobileReliability
(Interference
from Mobiles)
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
19/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org19
C/(I+N), Swiss Cheese Effects
Note the mobile edge of cell effects from TDD or OOBE
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
20/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org20
Overall ReductionIn Sensitivity
Reliability Loss
Useful
RangeS/(N+I)
S/N
C/(I+N), Swiss Cheese Effects
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
21/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org21
Adjacent Channel Coordination
Recall earlier session on TSB-88-based coordination
Process
Compute technology to technology ACCPR
De-rate interferer and follow co-channel approach
Avoid allowing the adjacent channel interferers siteinside victims service area
Manage near/far in overlap areas
If adjacent channel is BB, use off-channel approach
DWE
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
22/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org22
Off-Channel Near/Far Holes
Need to look at path isolation, IM, and link analyses for scenarios ofinterest
Necessary to understand the problem
We will review the magnitude of the noise floor degradations with
respect to current rules, and consistent broadband rules set for the700 MHz public safety allocations
Current Rules: Part 27, Commercial use of the upper 700 MHz
Examine what attenuation a guard band or guard distance mustprovide to narrowband and broadband operations
Assess impacts to public safety
Frequency coordination and utilization issues
Size and impact of interference holes
DWE
DWE
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
23/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org23
- 92 dBm
-107 dBm
-125 dBm
Near/Far Holes from BB OOBE:Existing Part 27 Rules
-46 dBm
-36 dBm
+ 10 dB Main Beam Gain (and line losses)
Path Isolation:Coupling loss between the
output of the dipole transmit antenna and a
victim dipole
= Free space loss between dipoles +
Antenna pattern discrimination below
main beam
NB Noise Floor = kTB +NF
18 dB CPCf
50% Reliability
at CPC
97% Reliability at
CPC (Z=1.88, =8)Z = 15 dB
76 + 10logP into 6.25 kHz
Additional filtering and guardband of about 1MHz can
reduce this further
NB PS LMR
PS and Commercial BB
Reliability
Losses
Desired Mobile
Signal
DWE
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
24/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org24
Typical Antenna Pattern (824-896 MHz)-DB872G60A Panel Antenna-
Antenna Manufacturer: Decibel Products
Antenna Model: DB872G60A-XYGain: 11 dBMechanical downtilt: 3 degrees
Azimuth Pointing Angle: 0 degreesElectrical Downtilt: 0 degrees
Horizontal/Azimuth Pattern Vertical/Elevation Pattern
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
25/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org
Path IsolationParameters
h
d Field Location
R
R2 = d2 + h2
Distance for Free Space Loss
= atan(h/d)The depression angle and
downtilt angle are used to
determine antenna pattern
discrimination below main beam.
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
26/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org26
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400 425 450 475 500 525 550 575 600 625 650 675 700 725 750 775 800 825 850 875 900 925 950 975 10000
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Distance From Tower Base (m)
VerticalAn
tennaPatternAttenuationBelowMainLobeGain(dB)
30-m Transmit Height
50-m Transmit Height
70-m Transmit Height
100-m Transmit Height
Vertical Pattern Attenuation for Several Transmit Heights(Using 3-degrees Downtilt)
30, 50, 70, and 100 meter transmit heights
Antenna discrimination has
little effect after ~ 75 to 175-m
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
27/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org27
Free Space Path Loss Between Dipoles30, 50, 70, and 100 meter transmit heights
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400 425 450 475 500 525 550 575 600 625 650 675 700 725 750 775 800 825 850 875 900 925 950 975 100055
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
Distance from Tower Base (m)
FreeSpaceLossbetweenDipoles(dB)
30-m Transmit Height
50-m Transmit Height
70-m Transmit Height
100-m Transmit Height
Antenna height little effect
after ~ 25 to 100-m
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
28/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org28
Path Isolation30, 50, 70, and 100 meter transmit heights, with 3-deg downtilt
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400 425 450 475 500 525 550 575 600 625 650 675 700 725 750 775 800 825 850 875 900 925 950 975 100065
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
Distance from Tower Base (m)
SiteIsolation(dB)
30-m Transmit Height
50-m Transmit Height
70-m Transmit Height
100-m Transmit Height
Free space lossdominates after
Antenna and TX height
dominate at 100 to 350-m
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
29/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org29
The Table Lamp: Path Isolation30 m transmitter height, with 3-deg downtilt
Antenna Nulls
Free Space Free Space
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
30/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org30
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 30065
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
Distance from Tower Base (m)
SiteIsolation(dB)
30-m Transmit Height
50-m Transmit Height
70-m Transmit Height
100-m Transmit Height
Path Isolation(Free Space Loss, and Vertical Pattern Attenuation)
30, 50, 70, and 100 meter transmit heights, with 3-deg downtilt
~ 70 dB Typical for Cellular
~ 80 dB Typical for PS LMR
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
31/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org31
OOBE Reliability Degradation vs. Hole SizeStandard Mobile Noise Limited Design (97%)
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 10.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Distance From Base of BB Site (km)
liabilityofAchiveingDAQ=
3.5
forP
25bf
OOBE Near far Effects from BB to NB (Standard 97%Reliability Noise Floor Design)
TX Height : 30-m
TX Height : 50-m
TX Height : 70-m
TX Height : 100-m
Large reliabilitylosses in Hole
for lower sites
Long distance
reliability
degradation effects
ProbabilityofAchievingDAQo
f
3.5
forP25
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
32/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org32
OOBE Reliability Degradation vs. Hole SizeMobile Noise + 5 dB Margin Design (97%)
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 10.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Distance From Base of BB Site (km)
liabilityofAchiveingDAQ=
3.5
forP
25bf
OOBE Near far Effects from BB to NB (Standard 97%Reliability with 5 dB Elevated Noise Floor Design)
TX Height : 30-m
TX Height : 50-m
TX Height : 70-m
TX Height : 100-m
Manageable reliability
losses in Holefor all sites
No long distance
reliability
degradation effects
ProbabilityofAchievingDAQo
f
3.5
forP25
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
33/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org33
OOBE Reliability Degradation vs. Hole SizeStandard Portable* Noise Limited Design (97%)
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 10.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Distance From Base of BB Site (km)
liabilityofAchiveingDAQ=
3.5
forP
25bf
OOBE Near far Effects from BB to NB (Standard 97%Portable Reliability Noise Limited Design)
TX Height : 30-m
TX Height : 50-m
TX Height : 70-m
TX Height : 100-m
Manageable reliability
losses in Holefor all sites
No long distance
reliability
degradation effects
*10 dB Antenna losses
ProbabilityofAchievingDAQo
f
3.5
forP25
DWE
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
34/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org34
Power Flux Density (PFD)
Desired
Undesired
Individual PFD: Total power of individual undesired signals
Cumulative PFD: Total power of all undesired signals
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
35/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org35
- 92 dBm
-107 dBm
-125 dBm
Near/Far Holes from NB/WB/BB IM
IMR
IM Rejection relative to static
sensitivity of PS receiver
IMR(NB) < IMR(WN) < IMR(BB)
IMR(NB) ~ 75 dB (Mobile)
NB Noise Floor = kTB +NF
18 dB CPCf
50% Reliability
at CPC
97% Reliability at
CPC (Z=1.88, =8)Z = 15 dB
Power Flux Density at the
Input to NB Victim Dipole
NB PS LMR
PS Commercial NB/WB/BB
Reliability
Losses
Portable radio antenna losses
relative to dipole (if applicable)
Static Sensitivity
= kTB + NF + Cs/N
Desired Mobile
Signal
- 45 dBm
DWE
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
36/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org36
Progression of Off Channel Interference(NB, WB, and BB)
As signal levels on the ground rise, the impacts shift
from OOBE to IM to Overload
-20 dBm-30 dBm-40 dBm
Overload
Range
(OL)
BB to
NB/WB IM
NB/WB to
WB/NB IM
and
BB to NB/WB
OOBE
DWE
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
37/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org37
Currently Proposed* PFD Limits
Interferer
Type
Individual PFD
(dBm)
Cumulative PFD
(dBm)
Narrowband -40 -35
Wideband -38 -33
Broadband -30 -25
*Still Looking at final PFD recommendations,
and at what site distance it should be measured
DWE
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
38/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org38
Best Practices
Pay attention to planning around and resolving these issues at the RegionalPlanning and Frequency Coordination level Should not create issues that need to be resolved later by adding cost to
systems
Bring system design team into Regional Planning and FrequencyCoordination Frequency coordination and channel selection must happen early in the system
design process
Best practices to mitigate near/far effects Use additional filtering and guard band to reduce OOBE
Limit undesired power at the ground (PFD Restrictions) to reduce IM and OL
Raise desired power at the ground in appropriate areas to combat OOBE and IM
Other sources of guidance
Motorola Technical Appendix to the Nextel Best Practices Guide TIA TSB-88
FINAL NPSTC COEXISTANCE GUIDELINES 1Q07
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
39/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org39
Example (1)
Deployment of NB/BB/WB
within a County
National Public Safety Telecommunications Council
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
40/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org40
Suppose in a given County, there is a desire to deploy700 MHz BB data. Area: 950 mi2
Population: 120,000
BB Data Sites: 30, each 100 foot high, with 6-km cell radius In the County there is already a 700 MHz NB system
deployed NB Voice Sites: 6, each 150 to 350 feet high
How can this be done?
What impacts need to be examined?
How will the co-deployments affect each othersperformance?
County BB and NB Coexistence
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
41/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org41
Need to decide where in the frequency band the
BB can be deployed.
There either needs to be a guard band or guard
distance Since the guard distance is zero, a guard band
must be employed
How big should the Guard band be
As big as it needs to be to meet the OOBE limitations
External filters may be used here to control OOBE
First: Where do we put the BB
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
42/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org42
A combination offiltering andguard band willbe required to
meet the OOBElimitations intothe nearest NBincumbent
76 + 10logP -46 dBm / 6.25
kHz
Guard Band, OOBE and Filtering
BB/WB NB
For reasonable filtering, about a
1-MHz Guard band would berequired
This can be reduced through
tighter filtering
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
43/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org43
Assume the OOBE level as the main
transmitter power into the antenna.
Run area reliability degradation study as
we would for narrowband.
We will see that this passes
Second: How Do We Coordinate?
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
44/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org44
Example County
Area: 950 mi2
Population: 120,000
NB Voice Sites: 6
BB Data Sites: 30
Macro Example: County Deployment
Propagation Model
Longley Rice 1.2.2.
Median Mode
No LULC
Broadband Sites
30-m Transmitter Height
-38 dBm ERP OOBE
6-km Site Radius
Received Power (dBm)
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
45/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org45
Macro Example: County Deployment
Desired Signal (NB Site Coverage) Undesired Signal (BB Site Coverage)
Received Power (dBm) Received Power (dBm)
Macro Example: County Deployment
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
46/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org46
Signal to Interference
Macro Example: County DeploymentS/I (dB)
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
47/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org47
Macro Example: County Deployment
Results Broadband Effects
No significant interference effects
0.01% Reduction in Area Reliability
S/N, S/(I+N) Distributions Identical
Impacts would be greater for less
reliable designs
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 10010
-4
10-3
10-2
10-1
100
Distributions
X: Distribution of S/N, S/(I+N)
P(x>X)
S/N
S/(I+N)
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
48/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org48
Impacts Near Sites
Incumbent should look at the areas around thesites
Look at the average desired power near thesites.
In this case, it is all greater than -79 dBm into a dipolereceive antenna (mobile coverage)
Compute the average impact around the sites With the applicant meeting OOBE and PFD limits
Decide whether or not to increase desired powernear the sites Are the areas critical?
Is the coverage degradation unacceptable?
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
49/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org49
Impacts Near Sites
OOBE Impacts: OOBE Level at ground at a D = 150-m
-36 dBm 70 dB = -106 dBm
Reliability at a distance D
Assume undesired
has no effect R = 1 Qerf((-79 18 (-106))/8) = 0.87 or 87%
IM Impacts: Require applicant to show that (1) PFD limits are met,
or (2), get agreement that degradation near the sites
is acceptable to the incumbent If PFD is met, then it is up to the incumbent to
increase desired power if coverage degradation nearthe BB sites is unacceptable
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
50/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org50
Example (2)
Deployment of BB/WB
within/between Regions
National Public Safety Telecommunications Council
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
51/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org51
-76.5 -76 -75.5 -75 -74.5 -74 -73.5 -73 -72.5 -72 -71.5
39
39.5
40
40.5
41
41.5
42
42.5
43
Lets look at Several folkswishing to deploy BB (1.25
MHz) and WB (50-kHz)
systems:
County A: Wideband (8-Chan)
County B: Wideband (8-Chan)
County C: Broadband (1-Chan)
County D: Wideband (8-Chan)
County E: Broadband (1-Chan)
Note that these systems span
three Regions
A
BC
D
E
Co-Channel WB/BB Requests
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
52/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org52
What to Look For
First: Can the systems operate non co-channel? See below, there are three broadband channels available.
We only need two BB channels
The WB could use spectrum in the third, on between the BBchannels
EC
A,B,D
6-MHz
Flexible
Use
Flexible
Use
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
53/58
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
54/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org54
Co-Channel Coupling
System A, WB, 8-50 kHz Channels 0-dB (100%) Coupling from Sys-B and Sys-D
14-dB Coupling from Sys-C and Sys-E 10log(50 / 1250) = -14dB
System B, WB, 8-50 kHz Channels 0-dB (100%) Coupling from Sys-A and Sys-D
14-dB Coupling from Sys-C and Sys-E 10log(50 / 1250) = -14dB
System C: 1.25 MHz BB 0-dB (100%) Coupling from Sys-B and Sys-D
0-dB (100%) Coupling from Sys-A and Sys-B, and Sys-D
System D, WB, 8-50 kHz Channels 0-dB (100%) Coupling from Sys-A and Sys-B
14-dB Coupling from Sys-C and Sys-E 10log(50 / 1250) = -14dB
System E: 1.25 MHz BB 0-dB (100%) Coupling from Sys-B and Sys-D
0-dB (100%) Coupling from Sys-A and Sys-B, and Sys-D
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
55/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org55
Analysis
Analysis will follow the model set outearlierExcept
We do not have a mature CPC model for datareliability and or goodput degradation
For the high speed data systems (or any datasystems), this is a need that needs to be workedon.
Ongoing work in several areas to fill this need NPSTC (BB Task Force and Ad Hoc Joint TWG),RPCs, TIA/TR-8.18, etc
N ti l P bli S f t T l i ti C il
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
56/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org56
Q&A and Feedback
National Public Safety Telecommunications Council
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
57/58
NPSTC: The Collective Voice of Public Safety Telecommunications www.NPSTC.org57
Q&A and Feedback
This is a lot to pack into 90-minutes
I will be happy to go these concepts this
again at area RPC meetings
Usually attend Region 8, 30, 55 meetings
Often attend Region 19 and 28 meetings as
well
Any Questions?
Any Feedback?
7/29/2019 Rpc Training Nov 2006 Nb_wb_bb r5
58/58
Contact for Further Information
Sean OHara
Business Area Manager Analysis, Communications, and Collection Systems
Syracuse Research Corporation
315.452.8152 office, 315.559.5632 mobile
David Eierman
Principle Staff Engineer
Motorola
410.712.6242 office
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]