spectrum engineering branch industry canada march, 2002
Post on 04-Feb-2016
45 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 1
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Simulation on Aggregate Interference from Wireless Access Systems including RLANs into Earth
Exploration-Satellite Service in the5250-5350 MHz Band
Spectrum Engineering Branch
Industry Canada
March, 2002
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 2
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
BACKGROUND
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 3
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Current Canada/United States/CEPT provisions for RLAN applications
5725 5150 5250 54605350 56505470 5570 5850 MHz
LE-LANs permitted through
Footnote C39A
LE-LANs permitted through
Footnote C39A
UNII devices permitted
under Part 15 rules
UNII devices permitted
underPart 15
CEPT MOBILE SERVICE:RLAN devices
MOBILE SERVICE:RLAN devices
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 4
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Current ITU Allocation
FSS(E-s)
EESS
MARITIME RADIONAV
5725 MHz5150 5250 54605350 56505470
ARNS ARNS
RADIOLOCRadiolocationRADIOLOC
Amateur
SRS Srs(deep space)
RADIONAV
5570
Note: ALL CAPS=PRIMARY ALLOCATION
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 5
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
WRC-03 consideration
MS/ms – RLANs MS/ms – RLANs
FS/fs – FWA (R3)
EESS
FSS(E-s)
EESS
MARITIME RADIONAV
5725 MHz5150 5250 54605350 56505470
ARNS ARNS
RADIOLOCRadiolocationRADIOLOC
Amateur
SRS Srs(deep space)
RADIONAV
5570
SRS
RADIOLOCATION
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 6
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
5850 MHz
CEPT
5725 MHz
MS/ms – RLANs MS/ms – RLANsFS/fs – FWA
(R3)
EESS
FSS(E-s)
EESS
MARITIME RADIONAV
5150 5250 54605350 56505470
ARNS ARNS
RADIOLOCRADIOLOC
Amateur
SRSSrs
(deep space)
RADIONAV
5570
SRS
RADIOLOCATION
LE-LAN: Footnote C39ALE-LANs
Footnote C39A
UNII : Part 15 rules UNII: Part 15
MS MS
Overall Comparison of Allocations and provisions for RLANs Overall Comparison of Allocations and provisions for RLANs and other services in the 5GHz rangeand other services in the 5GHz range
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 7
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Current Canada/United States/CEPT technical rules for RLAN applications
5725 5150 5250 54605350 56505470 5570 5850 MHz
CEPT Indoor OnlyEIRP = 200 mW
ATPC, DFS
Indoor/OutdoorEIRP = 1WATPC, DFS
Indoor Only
EIRP = 200 mW
Indoor/OutdoorTx Power=1W
EIRP=4W
Indoor/OutdoorTx Power =250 mW
EIRP = 1W
Indoor OnlyEIRP =200 mW
Indoor/OutdoorTx Power= 1W
EIRP= 4W
Indoor/OutdoorTx Power= 250 mW
EIRP = 1W
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 8
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Characteristics of EESS
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 9
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Characteristics of EESS in the 5GHz range
• Radar scatterometers– useful for determining the roughness of large objects
such as ocean waves
• Radio altimeters– used to determine the height of the Earth's land and
ocean surfaces
• Imaging radars (synthetic aperture radars) – used to produce high resolution images of land and
ocean surfaces.
• In this analysis only one of the imaging radars (SAR 4-most sensitive) and altimeters were examinedMS/ms – RLANs
FS/fs – FWA (R3)
EES
5250 5350 MHz
RADIOLOC
SRS
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 10
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Characteristics of SARs in the 5 GHz rangeParameter SAR 2 SAR 3 SAR 4
Orbital Altitude 600 km (circular) 400 km (circular) 400 km (circular)
Orbital inclination 57 degrees 57 degrees 57 degrees
Frequency 5405 MHz 5405 MHz 5300 MHz
Peak Radiated Power 4800 W 1700 W 1700 W
Pulse Bandwidth 310 MHz 310 MHz 40 MHz
Antenna Orientation 20-38 deg from nadir 20-55 deg from nadir
20-55 deg from nadir
Receiver Noise Figure 4.62 dB 4.62 dB 4.62 dB
Footprint 164.3 km2 225.3 km2 76.5 km2
Receiver Bandwidth 356.5 MHz 356.5 MHz 46 MHz
Noise Power -113.84 dBW -113.84 dBW -122.73 dBW
Interference Threshold -119.84 dBW -119.84 dBW -128.73 dBW
Source: ITU-R Doc 8A-9B/98
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 11
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Characteristics of outdoor WAS/RLANs
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 12
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Outdoor WAS in the 5250-5350 MHz RangeParameter Value
Frequency 5.3 GHz
Bandwidth 20 MHz
Antenna Gain Pattern – azimuth plane Omnidirectional(for simulation purposes)
Antenna Gain pattern – elevation plane
Implicit within proposed EIRP mask to be shown later
Antenna tilt 0 degrees
Cell radius 1.5 km
Transmitter Power 250 mW
Scattering Coefficient 17 dB
Active Ratio 100%
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 13
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
EIRP mask used in simulation
-14 dBW/MHz -14 dBW/MHz for 0° ≤ for 0° ≤ < 5 ° < 5 °-14 -0.711 (-14 -0.711 ( -5) dBW/MHz -5) dBW/MHz for 5° ≤ for 5° ≤ < 40 ° < 40 °-38.9 -1.222(-38.9 -1.222(-40) dBW/MHz-40) dBW/MHz for 40° ≤ for 40° ≤ < 45 ° < 45 °-45 dBW/MHz-45 dBW/MHz for for > 45 ° > 45 °
=elevation angle above the local horizon=elevation angle above the local horizonFor For <0, EIRP= -13 dBW/MHz <0, EIRP= -13 dBW/MHz
WAS EI RP mask above lo cal horiz on
-48
-46
-44
-42
-40
-38
-36
-34
-32
-30
-28
-26
-24
-22
-20
-18
-16
-14
-12
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90
elevation abo ve local h or iz on (d eg rees)
EIR
P (
dB
W/M
Hz
)
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 14
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Characteristics of indoor WAS/RLANs
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 15
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Characteristics of Indoor WAS systemsIndoor Type 1 Indoor Type 2
Parameter Value Value
Frequency 5.3 GHz 5.3 GHz
Bandwidth 20 MHz 20 MHz
Antenna Isotropic (for simulation purposes)
Isotropic (for simulation purposes)
Antenna gain 0 dBi 0 dBi
Transmitter power
250 mW 200 mW
Building loss 18 dB 18 dB
Active Ratio 100% 100%
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 16
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Distribution of WAS/RLANs
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 17
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Distribution of WAS/RLANs• Based on population data from the UN, cell radius of WAS/RLANs
and perceived deployment rate. Deployment factor of 30% was used. See ITU-R Doc. 8A-9B/83
• City A (extremely large city)– Population = 17.6 million– Include effects of stations operating in sub-urban areas surrounding the
city as well as to simulate effects of aggregate interference from stations operating in near-by cities, the radius was extended from 54 km to approximately 81 km.
• City B (medium size city) – Population = 3.7 million– Radius of this city = approximately 12 km. An actual radius of 18 km
was used to account for effects from stations operating in sub-urban areas as well as effects from near-by cities.
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 18
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Distribution of WAS/RLANsCase 1 Case 2 Case 3
Indoor Indoor Type 1 Indoor Type 2 Indoor Type 1
Number of active systems 440 440 440
Deployment Area (km2) 76.5 76.5 76.5
Density (number of active systems/km2)
5.75 5.75 5.75
Outdoor Large cityCity A
Large cityCity A
Medium cityCity B
Number of active systems 870 870 43
Deployment Area (km2) 13122 13122 648
Density (number of active systems/km2)
0.066 0.066 0.066
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 19
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Methodology• Within each cell:
– one station transmitting at all times • One-third of all transmitters has an additional scattering coefficient of 17
dB • 3dB polarization loss for outdoor systems• 0dB polarization loss for indoor systems• no atmospheric attenuation is assumed• The satellite was simulated to run for a period of 30 days, the period of
time in which the EESS would receive maximum interference was then revisited with time steps of 200 milliseconds. The results shown here represent a period of time in which the EESS would be visible by the WAS systems in a single orbit in which EESS would experience the maximum possible interference from the aggregate interference of WAS.
• Free space propagation• Building loss = 18 dB
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 20
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Simulation
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 21
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Results of simulation
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 22
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Aggregate interference from indoor and outdoor WAS into SAR 4 at 20 degrees from nadir
Aggregate interference from WAS into SAR 4 at 20degree from nadir
-200
-190
-180
-170
-160
-150
-140
-130
-120
-110
-100
0 60000 120000 180000 240000 300000 360000 420000 480000 540000 600000 660000 720000
milliseconds
I dB
W/M
Hz I Criteria
Case 1
Case 2
Case 3
Case 1 = -142.9 dBW/MHzCase 2 = -143.8 dBW/MHzCase 3 = -143.9 dBW/MHz
Case 1: Iaggregate exceeds Icriteria for approximately 1.6 secondsCase 2: I aggregate exceeds I criteria for approximately 1.4 secondsCase 3: I aggregate exceeds I criteria for approximately 1 second
Case 1
Case 2
Case 3
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 23
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Aggregate interference from indoor and outdoor WAS into SAR 4 at 55 degrees from nadir
Aggregate Interference from WAS into SAR4 operating at 55 degrees from nadir
-200
-190
-180
-170
-160
-150
-140
-130
-120
-110
-100
0 60000 120000 180000 240000 300000 360000 420000 480000 540000 600000
millisecond
I dB
W/M
Hz
criteria Case 1
Case 2 Case 3
Case 1: Imax = -138.3 dBW/MHzCase 2: Imax = -139.1 dBW/MHzCase 3: Imax =-138.7 dBW/MHz
Case 1 and Case 2: Iaggregate exceeds Icriteria for approximately 3.2 secondsCase 3: Icriteria is exceeded for approximately 2.8 seconds
Icriteria
Case 2
Case 1
Case 3
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 24
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Aggregate interference from indoor and outdoor WAS into an altimeter
Aggregate interference from WAS into altimeter
-200
-190
-180
-170
-160
-150
-140
-130
-120
0 600000 1200000 1800000 2400000 3000000
milliseconds
I (d
BW
/MH
z)
I criteria
Case 1
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 25
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Summary of ResultEESS SAR 4 @ 20deg from nadir SAR 4 @ 55deg from nadir Altimeter
WAS(see Table 7)
Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 1
Interference criterion(dBW/MHz)
(100% of the time)
-145.36 -145.36 -145.36 -145.36 -145.36 -145.36 -143.05
Maximum interference(dBW/MHz)
-142.9 -143.8 -143.9 -138.3 -139.1 -138.7 --
Duration of time in which Interference > Interference criterion
1.6 sec 1.4 sec 1 sec 3.2 sec 3.2 sec 2.8 sec 0
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 26
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Observations
• Actual deployment of WAS indoor and outdoor is expected to be less than what is assumed in this analysis.
• The result represents worst case interference for the EESS– interference is expected to be less at any other
time.
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 27
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
EIRP mask• Based on comparison of results between City A and City B, the EIRP mask
for outdoor WAS can be increased by at least 3 dB and the interference criterion for the SAR should still be met for the vast majority of cities in the world. Hence, the EIRP mask can be modified as follows: -11 dBW/MHz 0 <5-11 - 0.711( –5) dBW/MHz 5 < 40-35.9 - 1.222 ( - 40) dBW/MHz 40 < 45-42 dBW/MHz 45where is the elevation angle above local horizon in degrees.
• However, since a maximum EIRP of 1W (-13 dBW/MHz) is allowed, the proposed EIRP mask then becomes…
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 28
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Proposed EIRP mask for outdoor WAS/RLANs
-13 dBW/MHz 0 <5-13 - 0.711( –5) dBW/MHz 5 < 40-35.9 - 1.222 ( - 40) dBW/MHz 40 < 45-42 dBW/MHz 45
where is the elevation angle above local horizon in degrees.
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 29
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Further Simulation
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 30
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Further simulation• Regulatory concerns on how to enforce the
proposed outdoor EIRP mask• Simulation performed for SAR 4 operating at 55
degrees from nadir• Assumed ALL of the WAS/RLANs were pointing
upward, although still using the EIRP mask as proposed.
• Pointing angles assumed: 0 to 10 and 0 to 20 degrees
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 31
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Further simulationFigure 2: Interference from indoor & outdoor WAS (including the
effect of scattering) into SAR 4 (55 deg from nadir)
-200
-195
-190
-185
-180
-175
-170
-165
-160
-155
-150
-145
-140
-135
-130
-125
-120
-115
-110
-105
-100
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
seconds
I dB
W/M
Hz
0 deg
0 to 10 deg
0 to 20 deg
I criterion
23 sec
29 sec
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 32
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Conclusion
March 2002
Rebecca Chan, Industry Canada
Slide 33
doc.: IEEE 802.11-RR-02/036
Submission
Conclusion
• With respect to sharing between EESS and WAS/RLANs in the 5250-5350 MHz– Sharing appears to be feasible given that indoor systems have a
maximum EIRP of 250 mW and that outdoor systems employ certain technical constraints such as the EIRP mask as proposed
• With respect to sharing between EESS and WAS/RLANs in the 5470-5570 MHz range– Further studies are required to examine the impact on wideband
SARs (SAR 2 and SAR 3)
• Not covered in this presentation – sharing between WAS/RLANs and Radiolocation in the 5GHz range
top related