Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 5

Interference Evaluation of Control Channels under the Co-existence of LTE-FDD and TD-LTE

Jie Wei

School of Electronics and Information Engineering Beijing Jiaotong University Beijing 100044, CHINA jwei@bjtu.edu.cn

Liaowei Liu

Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Stony Brook University USA xiaowei.liu@stonybrook.edu

Abstract In the co-existence scenario of LTE-FDD and TD- LTE systems, interference should be one of the most important issues for system throughput. In this work we investigated interference from user equipment (UE) to physical control channels between the two systems: LTE-FDD and TD-LTE. The results show that if the base stations of LTE-FDD and TD- LTE are placed together and they use the adjacent carriers, some of the physical control channels will experience severe adjacent channel interference and therefore unable to be demodulated correctly. We also reached the results of the interference severity of different physical control channels under different adjacent channel interference ratio (ACIR) offset value.

Keywords-LTE-FDD; existence; ACIR

I.

TD-LTE;

control

INTRODUCTION

channels;

co-

According to ITU-R, spectrum is divided into two parts:

Paired Spectrum and Unpaired Spectrum, which are used for Frequency Division Duplex (FDD) and Time Division Duplex (TDD) in the 3rd Generation (3G), separately. LTE (Long Term Evolution) is the upgrade and evolution of 3G technologies and therefore the system should support both Paired Spectrum and Unpaired Spectrum, which makes LTE supporting both FDD and TDD methods. LTE-FDD systems and TD-LTE systems are recommended by ITU to use adjacent frequency bands, such as the 2500MHz to 2690MHz band [1] shown in Fig. 1. With the commercialization of LTE, the co-existence scenario seems very likely to happen in the deployment of LTE systems. Therefore, our investigation of interference between the two systems is of practical value.

LTE-FDD Uplink (2500MHz to 2570MHz)

TD-LTE Uplink (2570MHz to 2620MHz)

LTE-FDD Downlink (2620MHz to 2690MHz)

Fig. 1

Frequency band allocation in co-existence scenario

978-1-4799-3689-2/14/$31.00 ©2014 IEEE

Xiaofeng Zhong Department of Electronic Engineering Tsinghua University Beijing 100084, CHINA zhongxf@tsinghua.edu.cn

Xiaolong Fu Information Technology Center Tsinghua University Beijing 100084, CHINA fuxiaolong@cic.tsinghua.edu.cn

As for FDD mode, the uplink control channels and the downlink control channels are transmitted in different frequency bands (FDD uplink and FDD downlink as shown in Fig. 1) separately. However, for TDD mode, both uplink control channels and downlink control channels are transmitted in the same full bandwidth, and in different timeslot. Therefore, control channels in the two systems, TD- LTE and LTE-FDD, are likely to experience interference from both control channels and traffic channels from the each other when they are placed together. In [2], simulation results suggest that the TDD and FDD base stations cannot be co-located if they use the adjacent frequency band between which the value of Adjacent Channel Interference Ratio (ACIR) is below about 70dB. Results of system throughput loss under different ACIR value in the co-existence scenario are given in [3]. The results are important, but it did not take control channels into specifically consideration. In our work, we investigated the interference of control channels in LTE system given the co- existence scenario. Simulations are done to investigate in the interference problem. In the simulation results, we give the Signal to Interference and Noise Ratio (SINR) CDF curve under different ACIR offset to show the severity of interference that each physical control channel experience. Given the demodulation threshold in [4][5], we reach the results of the percentage of UEs that are able to demodulate certain control channels under different ACIR offset value in the co-existence scenario. In the paper, Section 2 gives the system model and also a brief introduction of the concept of ACIR. The investigation methods are given in Section 3. Section 4 shows the simulation results. Conclusions are reached in Section 5.

II. SYSTEM MODEL AND ACIR

A. System Model

In this paper we investigate in the interference between the LTE-FDD and TD-LTE systems and we mostly focus on the interference from UEs in LTE-FDD/TD-LTE system to the physical control channels in TD-LTE/LTE-FDD system.

192

ICOIN 2014

Here we divide the physical control channels into two categories: uplink control channels and downlink control channels. Uplink control channels:

Physical Random Access Channel (PRACH); Physical Uplink Control Channel (PUCCH). Downlink control channels:

Physical Broadcast Channel (PBCH); Physical Control Format Indicator Channel (PCFICH); Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH); Physical HARQ Indicator Channel (PHICH). The characteristics in both time and frequency domain are being investigated, including their formats, modulation and demodulation, mapping to physical resources, etc [4]. For UEs from the other cell (system) interfering uplink control channels, interference could be divided into two parts. One is Adjacent Channel Interference (ACI), coming from UEs from the other cell (system). The other part is Co- Channel Interference (CCI), coming from the UEs from the same cell (system). As shown by b in Fig. 2. For UEs from the other cell (system) interfering downlink control channels, interference could also be divided into two parts. One is ACI, coming from UEs from the other cell (system). The other part is CCI, coming from the base stations from the same cell (system). As shown by Fig. 2.

a L T E - F D D / T D - L T E
a
L T E - F D D / T D - L T E
T D - L T E / L T E - F D D
b
Fig. 2
Interference to uplink and downlink control channels

An important measurement to evaluate the quality of communication is SINR. In the co-existence of LTE-FDD and TD-LTE systems, SINR could be expressed by (1),

SINR

S

N

cell

N

ector

s



j

1

i

1

I

Ai , , j

N

cell

N

ector

s



j

1

i

1

I

Ci , , j

)

 SN

(1)

is the ACI from

is the CCI from the i th

sector in the j th cell, and N is the thermal noise.

B. ACIR ACIR is defined as the ratio of the total power transmitted from a source (base station or UE) to the total interference power affecting a victim receiver, resulting from both transmitter and receiver imperfections. ACIR is defined in (2).

the i th sector in the j th cell,

where S is the received signal power,

I Ai, , j

I Ci, , j

ACIR

1

1

1

ACS

ACLR

(2)

193

Here, ACLR is the Adjacent Channel Leakage power Ratio of the interfering systems transmitter (specified as the ratio of the mean power centered on the assigned channel frequency to the mean power centered on an adjacent channel frequency) and ACS is the corresponding receiver requirement on Adjacent Channel Selectivity of the victim system receiver. We consider ACIR as an important measurement in the simulation we performed. For downlink a common ACIR for all frequency resource blocks to calculate inter-system shall be used (we did not perform simulation for this part). For uplink, ACIR is dominated by UE ACLR. In 10MHz E-UTRA, the number of resource blocks (RBs) per aggressor UE is 10. Therefore, the ACLR adjacent to the edge of victim RBs (less than 10 RBs away) is 30+X dB, and the ACLR not adjacent to the edge of victim RBs (more than 10 RBs away) is 43+X dB [1]. Here X serves as the step size for simulations, X = … -10, -5, 0, 5, 10… dB. For uplink interferer, difference in interference depends mainly on the power spectral density (PSD) in the 10RBs adjacent to the edge of aggressor bandwidth.

III. EVALUATION METHOD

The interference is evaluated by simulation of Monte Carlo method, which is to simulate the actual network by taking a certain number of snapshots. Simulation of both no- aggressor system and with-aggressor system are done in order to better compare the severity of interference.

The first step is the deployment of base stations. After the network of base stations is generated, UEs attached to the

base stations are randomly placed in the network, with the same number of UEs in each cell. Next, the path loss between each base station and each UE are calculated according to the path loss models we selected. For path loss between base stations and UEs, we select the Hata model, defined as in (3). For path loss between UEs and UEs, we select the path loss formula from H.Xia, which is in (4).

L

UE

BS

(

R

)

69.55



26.16log

10

(

f

)

6.55log

10

10

(

f

)

(

Hb

40.94

)]log(

R

)

13.82log

10

(

Hb

)

(

f

))

2

[44.9

18.33log



10

4.78(log

(3)

where R is the base station-UE separation in kilometers, f

is the carrier frequency in MHz, Hb is the base station antenna height above ground
is the carrier frequency in MHz, Hb is the base station
antenna height above ground in meters.

20log(
)
L UE
 UE
2
2
d
1
1
10log[
(
)
2 ]
(4)
2
2
  
r
2
b
1
1
2
2
10log[(
(
 )
]
2
)
 d
2
2
 
2
(
h
b
m )
where d is the 2 2 r hx ( ) m |  h 
where
d
is
the
2
2
r hx
(
)
m
|
 h
 1
m |
 tan
(
.
b )

UE-UE

,

separation

tan

1

(

in

| h

kilometers,

UEs in the victim system while intra-system interferences

come from UEs in the aggressor system. For downlink

, control channels, PBCH, PCFICH, PDCCH and PHICH, inter-system interferences come from base stations within the victim system while intra-system interferences come from UEs in the aggressor system. After calculating the interferences, SINR could be given using (1). Finally, the snapshot ends with collecting statistics.

| m ) x
|
m
)
x

The next simulation step is setting the UE transmit power by adjusting each control channel with their specific power control method. The power control methods for uplink control channels, PRACH and PUCCH, are shown in (5) and

(6).

IV.

SIMULATION RESULTS

Table 2

Simulation Parameters

P

PUCCH



i

min

P

CMAX

hn

,

CQI

P

,

0_PUCCH

n

HARQ

PL



F_PUCCH

F



gi

 

[dBm]

(5)

where

is the downlink path loss estimate calculated in the UE in

is a PUCCH format dependent value,

corresponds to the number of information bits for the

channel quality information defined in section 5.2.3.3 in [7]

is

provided by higher layers, g i is the current PUCCH

power control adjustment state.

and

P CMAX

hn

CQI

n

HARQ

is the configured UE transmitted power, PL

,

n

HARQ

is the number of HARQ bits,

F_PUCCH

F

dB,

n CQI

P

PRACH

min{

P

CMAX

,

PREAMBLE_RECEIVED_TARGET_POWER+

PL}[dBm]

(6)

is the configured UE transmitted power.

PREAMBLE_RECEIVED_TARGET_POWER is the

target preamble received power and PL is the downlink path loss estimate calculated in the UE. There are also power control methods for uplink traffic channel, Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH). Here we adopt the power control method for PUSCH in[1], which is expressed in (7).

where

P CMAX

Pi ( )

PUSCH

min{

P

CMAX

,

10log

(

)

j

10

M

PUSCH

iP

PL



TF

( i )

f

(

( ))

j

( i )}[dBm]

(

O_PUSCH

)

(7)

is the configured UE transmitted power,

is a parameter defined in [36.213], PL is the

downlink path loss estimate calculated in the UE in dB,

(i) is the assigned number of resource blocks valid

(i) , f (i) are specific parameters

where

P CMAX

P 0_PUSCH

M

PUSCH

for subframe i, ( j) ,

provided by higher layers. Two sets of parameters are introduced, see Table 1.

TF

Table 1

Parameter sets for PUSCH power control method

Parameter set

P

0

PUSCH

dBm

Set 1

1

 

-101

Set 2

0.8

 

-92.2

Then, inter-system and intra-system interferences are calculated for each victim UE. For uplink control channels, PUCCH and PRACH, inter-system interferences come from

Parameters

Uplink

 

Downlink

Cellular layout

Macro: Hexagonal grid, 19 cell sites, 57 sectors (Wrap around)

Carrier frequency

2600MHz

Bandwidth

 

10MHz

Resource Block (RB) size

180kHz

Number of active UEs per sector

 

5

Base Transceiver Station (BTS) antenna height

 

30m

UE antenna height

 

1.5m

Receive antenna gain (include feeder loss)

15dBi

0

Transmission antenna gain (include feeder loss)

0

15dBi

log-normal fade shadow

 

10dB

Shadowing correlation

Between cells: 0.5, Between sectors: 1.0

BS max Tx power

46dBm

UE max/min Tx power

24dBm/-30dBm

White noise power density

-174dBm/Hz

BTS noise figure

 

5dB

UE noise figure

 

9dB

Scheduling

RR/PF

In our simulation, LTE-FDD cells and TD-LTE cells are placed adjacent to each other. First we studied 10MHz E- UTRA uplink interfering uplink control channels. For both PUCCH and PRACH, we did simulations under different PUSCH power control parameter sets shown in table. Also,

for

PREAMBLE_RECEIVED_TARGET_POWER , which are

and

P

0_PUCCH

power control parameters for PUCCH and PRACH, we applied their maximum, minimum and median value of them

in our simulation:

P 0_PUCCH

127dBm, 111dBm, 96dBm ,

120dBm,

PREAMBLE_RECEIVED_TARGET_POWER=

106dBm,

90dBm.

From the simulation results we could conclude that whether the SINR could reach the demodulation threshold

depends on the power control parameters (

for

or

for

PRACH), as well as ACIR offset. Here we define that if over 95% of the users could reach the demodulation threshold, the certain channel is able to be demodulated correctly.

P 0_PUCCH

PUCCH

PREAMBLE_RECEIVED_TARGET_POWER

194

SINR CDF curve of PUCCH under different ACIR and 0-PUCCH P of PUCCH

1 ACIR offset=-10,P 0-PUCCH = -96 ACIR offset= 0,P 0-PU CCH = -96 0.9 ACIR
1
ACIR offset=-10,P 0-PUCCH = -96
ACIR offset= 0,P 0-PU
CCH = -96
0.9
ACIR offset=10,P
-96
0-PUCCH =
ACIR offset=20,P
-96
0-PUCCH =
0.8
Single LTE system,P
-96
0-PUCCH =
ACIR offset=-10,P 0-PUCCH = -111
ACIR offset= 0,P 0-PU
CCH = -111
0.7
Single LTE system,P
-111
0-PUCCH =
ACIR offset=20,P 0-PUCCH = -111
0.6
ACIR offset=10,P 0-PUCCH = -111
ACIR offset=-10,P 0-PUCCH = -127
0.5
ACIR offset= 0,P 0-PU
CCH = -127
ACIR offset=10,P
-127
0-PUCCH =
ACIR offset=20,P 0-PUCCH = -127
0.4
Single LTE system,P
-127
0-PUCCH =
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
CDF

Fig. 3

and

SINR(dB)

SINR CDF curve of PUCCH under different ACIR offset

P

0

PUCCH

of PUCCH for PUSCH power control Set 1

SINR CDF curve of PUCCH under different ACIR and 0-PUCCH P of PUCCH

1 ACIR offset=-10,P 0-PUCCH = -96 ACIR offset= 0,P 0-PUCCH = -96 0.9 ACIR offset=10,P
1
ACIR
offset=-10,P 0-PUCCH = -96
ACIR offset= 0,P 0-PUCCH = -96
0.9
ACIR offset=10,P 0-P
ACIR offset=20,P 0-P
UCCH = -96
UCCH = -96
0.8
Single LTE system,P 0-PUCCH =
-96
ACIR
offset=-10,P 0-PUCCH = -111
ACIR offset= 0,P 0-PUCCH = -111
0.7
ACIR offset=10,P 0-P
UCCH = -111
ACIR offset=20,P 0-P
UCCH = -111
0.6
Single LTE system,P 0-PUCCH =
-111
ACIR offset=-10,P 0-PUCCH = -127
0.5
ACIR offset= 0,P 0-PUCCH = -127
ACIR offset=10,P 0-P
UCCH = -127
ACIR offset=20,P 0-P
UCCH = -127
0.4
Single LTE system,P 0-PUCCH =
-127
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
CDF

Fig. 4

and

SINR(dB)

SINR CDF curve of PUCCH under different ACIR offset

P

0

PUCCH

of PUCCH for PUSCH power control Set 2

The percentage of users that could not reach -4.4dB threshold value for PUCCH demodulation

1 P 0-PUCCH = -96; P 0-PUSCH = -101,alpha=1.0 0.8 P 0-PUCCH = -96; P
1
P 0-PUCCH = -96; P 0-PUSCH = -101,alpha=1.0
0.8
P 0-PUCCH = -96; P 0-PUSCH = -92.2,alpha=0.8
P 0-PUCCH = -111; P 0-PUSCH = -101,alpha=1.0
P 0-PUCCH = -111; P 0-PUSCH = -92.2,alpha=0.8
0.6
P 0-PUCCH = -127; P 0-PUSCH = -101,alpha=1.0
P 0-PUCCH = -127; P 0-PUSCH = -92.2,alpha=0.8
0.4
0.2
0
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
User Percentage

Fig. 5

ACIR offset (dB)

The percentage of users that could not reach the PUCCH demodulation threshold

195

SINR CDF curve of PRACH under different ACIR and PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER 1 ACIR
SINR CDF curve of PRACH under different ACIR and PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER
1
ACIR offset=-10,PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-90
ACIR offset=0,PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-90
Preamble Power=-120
0.9
ACIR offset=10,PREAMBLE
ACIR offset=20,PREAMBLE
RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-90
RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-90
Single LTE
system,PREAMBLE RECEIVED
TARGET POWER=-90
0.8
ACIR offset=-10,PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-106
ACIR offset=0,PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-106
0.7
ACIR offset=10,PREAMBLE
RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-106
Preamble Power=-106
Preamble Power=-90
ACIR offset=20,PREAMBLE
RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-106
Single LTE
system,PREAMBLE RECEIVED
TARGET POWER=-106
0.6
ACIR offset=-10,PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-120
ACIR offset=0,PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-120
ACIR offset=10,PREAMBLE
RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-120
0.5
ACIR offset=20,PREAMBLE
RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-120
Single LTE
system,PREAMBLE RECEIVED
TARGET POWER=-120
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-70
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
SINR(dB)
Fig. 6
SINR CDF curve of PRACH under different ACIR offset
CDF

and PREAMBLE_RECEIVED_TARGET_POWER of

PUCCH for PUSCH power control Set 1

SINR CDF curve of PRACH under different ACIR and PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER 1 ACIR
SINR CDF curve of PRACH under different ACIR and PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER
1
ACIR offset=-10,PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-90
Preamble Power=-120
ACIR offset=0,PREAMBLE RECEIVED
TARGET POWER=-90
0.9
ACIR offset=10,PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-90
ACIR offset=20,PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-90
Single LTE system,PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-90
0.8
ACIR offset=-10,PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-120
Preamble Power=-106
Preamble Power=-90
ACIR offset=0,PREAMBLE RECEIVED
TARGET POWER=-120
ACIR offset=10,PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-120
0.7
ACIR offset=20,PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-120
Single LTE system,PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-120
ACIR offset=-10,PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-106
0.6
ACIR offset=0,PREAMBLE RECEIVED
TARGET POWER=-106
ACIR offset=10,PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-106
0.5
ACIR offset=20,PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-106
Single LTE system,PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER=-106
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
SINR(dB)
Fig. 7
SINR CDF curve of PRACH under different ACIR offset
CDF

and PREAMBLE_RECEIVED_TARGET_POWER of

PUCCH for PUSCH power control Set 2

The percentage of users that could not reach -7.8dB threshold value for PRACH demodulation

1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER= -90; P 0-PUSCH = -101,alpha=1.0 0.5
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER= -90; P
0-PUSCH = -101,alpha=1.0
0.5
PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER= -90; P
0-PUSCH = -92.2,alpha=0.8
PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER= -106; P
0-PUSCH = -101,alpha=1.0
0.4
PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER= -106; P
0-PUSCH = -92.2,alpha=0.8
PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER= -120; P
0-PUSCH = -101,alpha=1.0
PREAMBLE RECEIVED TARGET POWER= -120; P
0-PUSCH = -92.2,alpha=0.8
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
User Percentage

Fig. 8

ACIR offset (dB)

The percentage of users that could not reach the PRACH demodulation threshold

Fig. 3, Fig. 4, Fig. 6, and Fig. 7, show the SINR CDF curve of PUCCH and that of PRACH under different ACIR offset and power control parameters, respectively. Fig. 5 and Fig. 8

user percentage

show the percentage of users that could not be correctly demodulated for PUCCH and PRACH, respectively. As for PUCCH, it is clear that for ACIR offset ranges from -10dB

to 20dB, the median value of

that 95% of the usersSINR could reach the demodulation threshold of PUCCH. However, for Set 1, ACIR offset should range from 0dB to 20dB to ensure that 95% of the users could reach the threshold. When comparing Set 1 and Set 2, Set 2 outperforms Set 1 in usersSINR under the

same ACIR offset and the same

As for PRACH, for ACIR offset ranges from -15dB to

could ensure Set 2

15dB to 20dB. For PCFICH and PHICH, it is of little possibility that 95% of the users’ SINR could reach the demodulation thresholds. For ACIR offset ranges from -

15dB to 20dB, there are always about 15.5% of the users could not reach the demodulation threshold of PCFICH and about 9% of the users could not reach the demodulation threshold of PHICH.

P 0_PUCCH

V.

CONCLUSIONS

LTE-FDD and TD-LTE cells could not adjoin each other

if they use the adjacent frequency band. Otherwise, physical control channels could not work well. For uplink control channels (PUCCH and PRACH) in LTE system, they should maximize their power control parameters in order to maintain a good performance in the actual situation. For downlink control channels, while the interference situation for PBCH and PDCCH seem to be tolerable, PCFICH and PHICH are not likely to be demodulated correctly in the co- existence scenario. Certain mitigation methods should be considered in the co-existence scenario. Also, 10MHz E- UTRA downlink interfering control channels should be further investigated as well as other geographical co- existence scenarios could be considered.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This work was supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (No.2012JBM019), National Basic Research Program of China (2012CB316000), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (61271305), the Specialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education (20110009110001), and National S&T Major Project (2013ZX03003004-002).

REFERENCES

[1]

3GPP TR 36.942 V10.2.0 (2010-12) Radio Frequency (RF) system

System,Communication Technology Proceedings, 2000. WCC -

[2]

scenariosMiao Qingyu, Wang Wenbo, Yang Dacheng, and Wang Daqing, An

Investigation of Interference Between UTRA-TDD and FDD

ICCT 2000. International Conference on, pp. 339- 346 vol.1.

[3]

Wang Dong and Yang Jia Wei, The Analysis of Interference and

[4]

Coexistence between TD-LTE and LTE-FDD in 2.6Hz Band,CRAM'09, ISBN: 9787121098413. Xiaofeng Zhong, Guo Wang, Shunliang Mei, and Jing Wang, A New Constrained-send Mechanism to Enhance the Performance of IEEE 802.11 DCF, Journal of Harbin Institute of Technology (New Series), Oct. 2012

[5]

Sesia, S., Toufik, I. and Baker, M. (eds) (2009) Front Matter, in LTE - The UMTS Long Term Evolution: From Theory to Practice,John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester, UK. pp. 181-205, 381-400, 421-456, doi: 10.1002/9780470742891.fmatter.

[7]

P 0_PUCCH

.

of

PREAMBLE_RECEIVED_TARGET_POWER could

ensure Set 2 that 95% of the usersSINR could reach the demodulation threshold of PRACH. However, for Set 1, the ACIR offset should range from 5dB to 20dB to ensure the same situation. When comparing Set 1 and Set 2, Set 2 outperforms Set 1 in usersSINR under the same ACIR

the

same PREAMBLE_RECEIVED_TARGET_POWER . Then we investigated the 10MHz E-UTRA uplink interfering downlink control channels. For downlink control channels, PBCH, PCFICH, PDCCH and PHICH, no power control method is used. In this case, CCI interferences come from all the base stations except the access point of the victim UE from the victim system, while ACI comes from the users from the aggressor system using the same Resource Elements (REs) as the victim user does. When comparing the CCI and the ACI that the users experiencing, the influence of ACI is much less severe than that of CCI. The reason is that the transmission power is much less than that of the base stations. Therefore the ACLR of them is much less. That is to say, the main interference should be CCI and different ACIR offsets should have little influence to system performance.

offset

20dB,

the

median

value

and

The percentage of users that could not reach threshold value for demodulation

For PBCH (demodulation threshold=-8.3dB) For PCFICH (demodulation threshold=-2dB) For PDCCH (demodulation
For PBCH
(demodulation threshold=-8.3dB)
For PCFICH (demodulation threshold=-2dB)
For PDCCH (demodulation threshold=-7dB)
For PHICH (demodulation threshold=-3dB)
0

0.45

0.4

0.35

0.3

0.25

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

ACIR offset (dB)

Fig. 9

The percentage of users that could not reach the downlink control channels demodulation threshold

From the simulation results (Fig. 9) we could conclude that: For PBCH and PDCCH, 95% of the users could reach the threshold quite well, when ACIR offset ranges from -

0.5

[6] Xiaofeng Zhong, Ming Zhao, Shidong Zhou, Xin Su, Jing Wang, Content Aware Soft Real Time Media Broadcast (CASoRT), IEEE/ACM CHINACOM2008 Conferencethe threshold quite well, when ACIR offset ranges from - 0.5 Sun Yin, Zhong Xiaofeng, Chang

Sun Yin, Zhong Xiaofeng, Chang Tsung-Hui, Zhou Shidong, Wang Jing, Chi Chong-Yung, Optimal Real-Time Spectrum Sharing Between Cooperative Relay and Ad hoc Networks, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SIGNAL PROCESSING, vol 60, issues 4, page 1971~1985, Apr. 2012 (SCI) 3GPP TS 36.212 “Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E - UTRA); Multiplexing and channel coding” 3GPP TS 36.212 “Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E- UTRA); Multiplexing and channel coding”

[8]

196

Оценить