Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 55

SRAN

GU Refarming Network
Solution

Issue
Date

3.0
2012-09-28

INTERNAL

HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD.

Copyright Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. 2012. All rights reserved.


No part of this document may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior
written consent of Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.

Trademarks and Permissions


and other Huawei trademarks are trademarks of Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
All other trademarks and trade names mentioned in this document are the property of their respective
holders.

Notice
The purchased products, services and features are stipulated by the contract made between Huawei and
the customer. All or part of the products, services and features described in this document may not be
within the purchase scope or the usage scope. Unless otherwise specified in the contract, all statements,
information, and recommendations in this document are provided "AS IS" without warranties, guarantees
or representations of any kind, either express or implied.
The information in this document is subject to change without notice. Every effort has been made in the
preparation of this document to ensure accuracy of the contents, but all statements, information, and
recommendations in this document do not constitute a warranty of any kind, express or implied.

Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.


Address:

Huawei Industrial Base


Bantian, Longgang
Shenzhen 518129
People's Republic of China

Website:

http://www.huawei.com

Email:

support@huawei.com

SRAN
GU Refarming Network Solution

About This Document

About This Document


Author
Prepared by

Date

2012-06-07

Reviewed by

Date

yyyy-mm-dd

Reviewed by

Date

yyyy-mm-dd

Granted by

Date

yyyy-mm-dd

SRAN Solution Design


Department

Change History
Date

Versio
n

Description

Author

2009-09-25

0.5

Completed the first draft.

Chen Shuai

2009-09-29

0.6

Modified the first draft.

Xiong Bin

2009-11-05

0.9

Completed the initial release.

Yang Liping

2009-12-26

1.0

Added chapter 8.

Yang Liping

2010-1-10

1.1

Updated the data of nonstandard frequency


separation.
Added interference cancelation combining such
as ICC, EICC, and SAIC that are related to
Refarming large capacity.

2010-9-10

2.0

Added the following information:


Advantages of 900 MHz Refarming
The application scenario and deployment
policy of Refarming
The definitions of nonstandard bandwidth and
nonstandard frequency separation
The instruction to the application of flexible
nonstandard bandwidth

SRAN
GU Refarming Network Solution

Date

About This Document

Versio
n

Description

Author

The contents about frequencies with


nonstandard separation not used in indoor GSM
cells, frequencies with nonstandard separation
not used in cells requiring large UMTS
capacity, and enabling the UPA algorithm for
resisting strong interference.
Added buffer zone planning method on the live
network.
Rewrote the GSM network optimization
measures after Refarming for delivery.
Added per-sales performance solutions of
Refarming.
Added implementation steps of UMTS900 in
the project implementation.
Added the instruction to the difference between
UO products and the Refarming.
2011-8-15

2.3

Added the instruction to UMTS900 capacity


gain.
Updated the Refarming antenna solution.
Added the impact of GSM frequency reuse on
network performance, including the network
simulations and KPI assessments when
different frequency reuse patterns are adopted.
Added chapter 11.

2012-5-15

3.0

Rewrote the document based on the procedures


of delivering the Refarming service products.

Li Guowei

SRAN
GU Refarming Network Solution

Contents

Contents

About This Document.......................................................................ii


Preface........................................................................................... 1
1 Refarming Overview......................................................................2
1.1 What is Refarming?...........................................................................................................................................2
1.2 Why the GU 900 MHz Refarming.....................................................................................................................2
1.3 Challenges of the GU 900 MHz Refarming......................................................................................................3

2 Refarming Solution Procedures......................................................4


2.1 Procedures for Designing the Pre-Sale Refarming Solution..............................................................................4
2.2 Procedures for Delivering the Refarming Solution...........................................................................................6

3 GSM Part...................................................................................... 7
3.1 Network Assessment..........................................................................................................................................7
3.1.1 GSM KPIs Assessment.............................................................................................................................7
3.1.2 UMTS900 Terminal Penetration Rate Assessment...................................................................................7
3.1.3 GSM Frequency Plan Analysis.................................................................................................................8
3.1.4 GBSS Feature Analysis............................................................................................................................8
3.2 Solution Design..................................................................................................................................................8
3.2.1 Interference Analysis for GU Nonstandard Frequency Spacing..............................................................8
3.2.2 Frequency Allocation Between GSM and UMTS Networks..................................................................17
3.2.3 GU Intra-Frequency Buffer Zone Planning............................................................................................23
3.2.4 GUL Inter_Rat Mobility Solution..........................................................................................................26
3.2.5 GSM Traffic Transfer Solution...............................................................................................................27
3.3 Implementation................................................................................................................................................29
3.3.1 Delivery Solutions..................................................................................................................................29
3.3.2 Implementation Procedures....................................................................................................................32
3.4 Network Optimization and Acceptance...........................................................................................................33
3.4.1 Network Optimization............................................................................................................................33
3.4.2 GSM Network Acceptance.....................................................................................................................34

SRAN
GU Refarming Network Solution

Contents

4 UMTS Part..................................................................................35
4.1 Network Assessment........................................................................................................................................35
4.1.1 Assessment and Analysis of KPIs...........................................................................................................35
4.1.2 UMTS900 Coverage/Capacity Assessment............................................................................................36
4.1.3 Identifying UMTS Value Areas..............................................................................................................36
4.2 Solution Planning.............................................................................................................................................37
4.2.1 Antenna Solutions...................................................................................................................................37
4.2.2 UMTS Inter-Carrier Mobility Solution..................................................................................................41
4.2.3 Power Configuration Analysis................................................................................................................41
4.2.4 Parameter Configuration.........................................................................................................................42
4.3 Network Implementation.................................................................................................................................43
4.3.1 Policy for Deploying the UMTS900......................................................................................................43
4.3.2 UMTS900 Hardware Installation...........................................................................................................43
4.3.3 Activating the UMTS900........................................................................................................................43
4.3.4 Setting the UMTS Filter.........................................................................................................................44
4.4 Network Optimization and Acceptance...........................................................................................................44
4.4.1 UMTS Network Optimization................................................................................................................44
4.4.2 UMTS Network Acceptance...................................................................................................................45

5 Refarming Scenarios...................................................................46
Reference Documents....................................................................47

SRAN
GU Refarming Network Solution

0Preface

Preface
UMTS900 has advantages over UMTS2100. This drives most operators to reduce cost by
deploying the UMTS900 network. Due to the frequency resource limitation, those operators
cannot free a GSM 900 MHz frequency band of 5 MHz for Refarming. Therefore, they focus
on the GU 900 MHz Refarming of a nonstandard bandwidth, such as 3.8 MHz, 4.2 MHz, or
4.6 MHz.
To meet operators' requirements, this document provides the solution for the GU 900 MHz
Refarming of 3.8 MHz, 4.2 MHz, or 4.6 MHz. This document is mapping with SRAN3.0 or
later versions. The GU 900 MHz Refarming of 3.8 MHz is supported in SRAN6.0 or later
versions. For reasons of simplicity and clarity, this document discusses 900 MHz Refarming.
All the statements apply equally to 850 MHz Refarming.

Issue 3.0 (2012-09-28)

Huawei Proprietary and Confidential


Copyright Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.

SRAN
GU Refarming Network Solution

0Reference Documents

Refarming Overview

1.1 What is Refarming?


Refarming is a strategy that telecom operators reuse their frequency resources and introduce
new radio communication technologies to improve the spectral efficiency and data
throughput. For example, the mainstream GU 900 MHz Refarming solution is that operators
free about 5 MHz of the GSM on the 900 MHz band and deploy UMTS on the 900 MHz
frequency band.
On July 27, 2009, all 27 EU telecom ministers approved a 900 MHz Refarming bill that all
the member countries are required to implement in six months to drive up the development of
3G mobile communication. The operators with the 900 MHz spectrum resources can put their
spectrum Refarming plans in practice and use their desired mobile communication
technologies in the 900 MHz frequency band without license restriction.

1.2 Why the GU 900 MHz Refarming


The advantages of implementing the GU 900 MHz Refarming are as follows:

Gains in spectral efficiency


The 900 MHz devices are most commonly used. Industry statistics show that by the end
of 2008, about 80% of wireless devices work in the 900 MHz frequency band. By the
end of 2009, the GSM900 license may be expired for many equipment suppliers and they
have to apply for a license extension. In July, 2009, EU passed a resolution that the
GSM900 band can be used for UMTS. In this manner, some operators can deploy a
UMTS network without purchasing any UMTS licenses.

Gains in coverage
UMTS900 has a 7 dB path loss advantage over UMTS2100 in free space conditions.
This advantage can be more than 20 dB in indoor scenarios. For details, see reference
[1]. As a result, the deployment of UMTS900 saves equipment cost by reducing the
number of sites in suburban areas and provides a better and deeper indoor coverage in
urban areas.

Gains in capacity
In coverage-limited and non-interference-limited scenarios (for example, deep coverage
areas in densely-populated urban areas or cell edge areas in suburban areas), UMTS900

SRAN
GU Refarming Network Solution

0Reference Documents

has larger throughput and capacity than UMTS2100 since UMTS900 has higher receive
levels and Ec/Io.
In the interference-limited scenario, capacity gains brought by UMTS900 coverage are reduced when
interference increases. As a result, the UMTS900 coverage does not have gains in this scenario.

Maturity of UMTS900 terminal industry chains


A large-scale industry chain of the UMTS900 terminals has taken shape. Based on GSA
investigation, until February, 2012, the total number of the UMTS900 terminals has
reached 719. It is predicted that by 2015, the market penetration rate of the UMTS900
terminals will reach 100%.
As a result, more and more operators plan to improve their competitiveness by
implementing the GU 900 MHz Refarming and the GU 900 MHz Refarming is
becoming the trend in the industry.

1.3 Challenges of the GU 900 MHz Refarming


The GU 900 MHz Refarming also brings challenges to network planning and may affect
network performance. The following are operators' concerns about implementing the GU 900
MHz Refarming:

How to reduce co-channel and adjacent-channel interference between GSM900 and


UMTS900 networks

After the Refarming, the GSM frequency resources are greatly reduced. In this case, how
to smoothly transfer GSM900 traffic to the GSM1800 or UMTS900 network to keep the
GSM network quality

Whether the antenna of the GSM900 network can be reused by the UMTS900 network
with network quality kept and cost saved

How to balance traffic load among the GSM, UMTS, and LTE networks after the
UMTS900 deployment
The preceding questions are of great concerns to the operators and are the key to the
success of the GU 900 MHz Refarming solution.

Refarming Solution Procedures

2.1 Procedures for Designing the Pre-Sale


Refarming Solution
With the increase of Refarming projects, field pre-sales personnel raise more specific
requirements for the performance and the implementation of the Refarming solution, and
require Huawei to provide a pertinent and feasible Refarming solution. This chapter aims at
guiding the field pre-sales personnel how to provide a feasible Refarming performance
solution as well as how to make sales and delivery policies. This chapter also gives a detailed
depiction by using examples.

Figure 2.1.1.I.1.1.1 Flowchart for designing the pre-sale Refarming solution

The preceding flowchart is for a general Refarming solution. The flowchart for a specific
Refarming solution varies based on the following factors: frequency reuse coefficient, the
coverage of DCS1800, the ratio of traffic intensity to the number of TCHs, and the proportion
of traffic carried over half-rate TCHs (TCHHs).

2.2 Procedures for Delivering the Refarming


Solution
Huawei has developed Refarming service products which are divided into GSM and UMTS
groups. Each group consists of four procedures: network assessment, solution design, network
implementation, and network optimization acceptance. The following figure shows
procedures for delivering Refarming service products.
Figure 2.2.1.I.1.1.1 Delivery procedures

Delivery personnel should understand some or all of the above topics as required to ensure a
better delivery.

GSM Part

3.1 Network Assessment


3.1.1 GSM KPIs Assessment
1.

Collecting KPIs of the live network


For more details about the collected KPIs and recommended equations, see GU
Refarming Network solution 3.0_annex 1_GSM KPI.xls. The recommended equations in
the document can be modified as required.

2.

Commitment of KPIs after the Refarming


During bidding clarification, do not promise that the KPI does not deteriorate after the
Refarming. Any KPI commitment must be reviewed by Huawei KPI Auditing committee
before being made to customers.

3.1.2 UMTS900 Terminal Penetration Rate


Assessment
Currently, the penetration rate of UMTS900 terminals cannot be calculated based on traffic
statistics counters. Calculate the UMTS900 penetration rate as follows:
1.

Obtain it from customers.

2.

Obtain the terminals' IMEIs from the core network (CN). The UMTS900 terminal
penetration rate can be calculated based on the obtained IMEIs because the IEMIs
indicate terminal types and radio access (RA) capability.

The penetration rate of UMTS900 terminals in the GSM network is important for calculating
the amount of traffic in the GSM network that can be transferred to the UMTS900 network.
To calculate this rate, do as follows:
1

Calculate the penetration rate of UMTS terminals based on the Measurement of MS


Capability counters A03624: Number of Calls Originated or Terminated by MSs
Supporting FDD and A03604: Number of Calls Originated or Terminated by MSs
Supporting Early Classmark Sending.

Obtain the penetration rate of UMTS900 terminals among all the UMTS terminals.

Calculate the penetration rate of UMTS900 terminals in the GSM network based on the
preceding two figures.

Take the GSM network of operator V in country E as an example. The penetration rate of
UMTS terminals in the GSM network is about 6% based on relevant counters while the
penetration rate of UMTS900 terminals in all the UMTS terminals is about 15% (This number
is obtained from the customer). As a result, the proportion of traffic in the GSM network that
can be transferred to the UMTS900 network after the Refarming is 6% x 15% = 0.9%. The
figure 0.9% indicates that little traffic in the GSM network can be transferred to the UMTS
network.

2 GSM Frequency Plan Analysis


To reuse the GSM frequency, you can allocate frequencies to BCCHs and TCHs separately or
together.

Allocating frequencies to BCCHs and TCHs separately


In this case, the frequency reuse coefficients of BCCHs and TCHs are calculated
separately.
Assume that the number of frequencies occupied by BCCHs in the GSM network is M,
that of frequencies occupied by TCHs in the GSM network is N, and the average number
of carriers configured for a cell is X.

If the frequency reuse mode of the TCH is none-FH or baseband FH, the frequency reuse
coefficient of the BCCH is M and that of the TCH is N/(X1).

If the frequency reuse pattern of the TCH is RF FH, the frequency reuse coefficient of
the BCCH is M. The frequency reuse pattern of the TCH can be 1x1 or 1x3. FRLOAD =
3x(X1)N.

Allocating frequencies to BCCHs and TCHs combinedly


In this case, BCCHs and TCHs use the same frequencies. As a result, the frequency reuse
coefficients of the two are the same. Assume that the number of frequencies available in
the network is W, the average number of carriers configured for a cell is X. The
frequency reuse coefficient of the network is W/X. After the Refarming, the GSM traffic
will be transferred to the UMTS network to ensure that the frequency reuse coefficient of
the GSM900 network remains the same. In this way, the GSM network quality, which
greatly relies on its frequency reuse coefficient, is maintained. For details about
transferring GSM traffic, see section 25GSM Traffic Transfer Solution.

3 GBSS Feature Analysis


To make a detailed network planning and optimization scheme after the Refarming, you must
first check the enabled features in the live network since the GBSS network performance is
closely related to the enabled features.
For the key features that must be checked, see the GSM Feature Audit List.

2 Solution Design
1 Interference Analysis for GU Nonstandard
Frequency Spacing
This section only provides a simple analysis on the interference between the GSM and UMTS networks.
For more details, see the WRFD-021001 Flexible Frequency Bandwidth of UMTS 4.2 MHz Carrier
Technical White Paper and MRFD-221703 2.0MHz Central Frequency Point Separation between GSM
and UMTS Mode Technical White Paper.

UMTS Nonstandard Bandwidth


The power spectrum of the UMTS is concentrated within 4.2 MHz around its center
frequency (depending on the filter capability of the NodeB). Therefore, the frequencies with
low power density at the edge of the UMTS spectrum can be used for GSM carriers, as shown
in 1. The nonstandard filter is steeper than the standard 5 MHz one. Compared with the
standard 5 MHz UMTS, the nonstandard UMTS can provide another one-to-six GSM carriers
at each side for operators.
1

GU power spectrum of small separation application


4.2MHz steeper filter

2.2MHz
2.6MHz

If the spacing between the center GSM and UMTS frequencies is larger than 2.6 MHz, the
UMTS uses a standard bandwidth of 5 MHz; if that spacing is 2.0 MHz, 2.2 MHz, or 2.4
MHz, the UMTS uses a nonstandard bandwidth of 3.8 MHz, 4.2 MHz, or 4.6 MHz,
respectively. A UMTS bandwidth less than 5 MHz is regarded as a nonstandard UMTS
bandwidth. The GSM frequencies less than 2.6 MHz away from the center UMTS frequency
are regarded as small-spaced frequencies. 2 shows the flexible frequency spacing between the
GSM and UMTS frequencies.

Flexible frequency spacing

U5.0M

2.6MHz

U4.8M

2.6MHz

2.4MHz

2.6MHz

2.4MHz

2.4MHz

2.2MHz

2.4MHz

U4.0M
U

2.2MHz

2.2MHz

U3.8M

2.0MHz

2.0MHz

2.0MHz

2.2MHz

(1)

When the nonstandard UMTS bandwidth feature is enabled, a nonstandard filter is used on the
NodeB side for transmitting and receiving signals while a 5 MHz standard filter is still used on the
UE.

(2)

Versions earlier than SRAN6.0 only support the nonstandard UMTS bandwidth of 4.2 MHz or 4.6
MHz. The nonstandard UMTS bandwidth of 3.8 MHz is supported by SRAN 6.0 or later versions.

(3)

The spacing between the center GSM and UMTS frequencies must be an integer multiple of 0.2
MHz. Therefore, the spacing can only be 2.2 MHz, 2.4 MHz, or 2.6 MHz and cannot be 2.1 MHz,
2.3 MHz, or 2.5 MHz.

(4)

The GU 900 MHz Refarming of 4.2 MHz solution has been verified in both urban and suburban
areas. As a result, this solution can be implemented on a large scale.

(5)

The GU 900 MHz Refarming of 3.8 MHz solution has not been verified in urban areas and is only
recommended in suburban areas.

The standard spacing between the center UMTS frequencies is 5 MHz. If that spacing is less
than 5 MHz, for example, 4.8 MHz, 4.6 MHz, 4.4 MHz, 4.2 MHz, 4.0 MHz, or 3.8 MHz,
nonstandard spacing is used between two UMTS carriers.
The smaller the spacing between the center GSM and UMTS frequencies or between the
center UMTS frequencies is, the greater the co-channel or adjacent-channel frequency
interference between different RATs is. As a result, the impact on relevant KPIs is greater.
Not all the GSM cells use ARFCNs with nonstandard frequency separation after the 900 MHz
Refarming solution is implemented. In fact, the GSM uses ARFCNs with nonstandard
frequency separation according to different frequency reuse modes. 3 shows the application of
small frequency separation.
3

Application of small frequency spacing

In 3, the UMTS bandwidth is 4.2 Mbit/s, the GSM is in S2/2/2 mode, and ARFCNs with the
separations of 2.2 MHz, 2.4 MHz, and 2.6 MHz are distributed in each cell in 4 x 3 reuse
mode. The minimum GU frequency separation of each cell varies with the GSM ARFCNs.
Not all the cells have the same GU frequency separation. As shown in 2I111, in the UMTS4.2
M solution, the GU frequency separation of a cell can be 2.2 MHz, 2.4 MHz, or 2.6 MHz

Application Scenarios for GU Small Frequency Separation


Since UU small frequency spacing only applies to UMTS co-located sites, this chapter only
compares differences between co-located and separate sites for GU small frequency spacing.
In the case of GU joint networking, the coverage range of the GSM differs from that of the
UMTS due to the two RATS's
differences in receiver sensitivity, transmit power, and demodulation threshold. Therefore, GU
co-located sites or UMTS sites can be used for UMTS network construction. For details, see
the reference[3].
spacing

Separate sites
Separate UMTS sites have the following advantages:
Compared with the GSM, the UMTS supports a larger coverage range. If separate
UMTS sites are used, fewer UMTS sites are required and the equipment investment is
reduced, so that the equipment investment on UMTS sited is decreased.
Separate UMTS sites, however, also have the following disadvantages:

If separate UMTS sites are used, the network cannot be deployed according to the
original cell structure. Therefore, the original site resources cannot be used in most cases
and a large number of new sites must be constructed. The auxiliary investment increases
(currently, the site investment occupies a large percentage of the operation expenditure).

Mutual interference between the GSM and the UMTS increases.


As shown in 1, if a terminal (user equipment or mobile station) of either system is
located at the edge of a cell of the local system but near to the base station of another
system, the terminal generates the severest interference to the uplink of the other system
when initiating a call. At the same time, the terminal is also interfered by the downlink of
the other system. This is called "near-far effect". Therefore, the standard UMTS
bandwidth of 5 MHz is recommended for separate UMTS sites.
The UMTS sites of an operator are not located on the same site with the GSM sites of
another operator in most cases. The networking solution should be designed according to
the worst condition. To avoid interference between UMTS sites of one operator and the
GSM sites of another operator, the GU frequency separation should be kept 2.6 MHz at
least.

"Near-far effect" in the case of separate UMTS sites

Co-located sites
GU co-located sites have the following advantages: The auxiliary investment is reduced
because no new site must be constructed.
GU co-located sites, however, also have the following disadvantage:
Compared with separate UMTS sites, GU co-located sites require more UMTS
equipment. Therefore, part of the equipment investment is wasted in the early stage when
the UMTS service is not widely required.

Interference between a terminal of a RAT and the co-located base station of another RAT

For the scenario of GU co-located sites, the impact of "near-far effect" is small since the
free space path loss from a terminal to its local system is the same as that from the
terminal to the other system.
Therefore, if the nonstandard UMTS bandwidth is used, it is recommended that one
UMTS900 network be deployed in each GSM900 site. For some GSM900 cells where
UMTS900 cannot be deployed, the GU small frequency spacing cannot be applied.
Otherwise, strong interference between the two systems will occur.
The standard UMTS 5 MHz bandwidth is recommended when GSM and UMTS sites are
uncoordinated. In this scenario, the impact of GU small frequency spacing on network

performance cannot be assessed because we cannot access the interference between the
two systems.

Analysis of Interference Between the GSM and the UMTS


Both the GSM and the UMTS are deployed on the 900 MHz frequency band. The GSM
uplink is close to the UMTS uplink, and the GSM downlink is also close to the UMTS
downlink. The interference analysis focuses on the interference between BSs and terminals.
The following describes interference analysis based on the adjacent channel selectivity (ACS)
and the adjacent channel leakage power ratio (ACLR).
As shown in 1, the interference between the GSM and the UMTS for 900 MHz Refarming is
classified into four types according to interfered and interfering objects.
1

Interference between the GSM and the UMTS

GSM BTS

UMTS BS

(4)
(1)

(3)
(2)

GSM MS

UMTS UE

The green arrows indicate wanted signals and the red arrows indicate interfering signals. In
the case of SRAN networking, the GSM BTSs are generally co-located with the UMTS
NodeBs. They are separated in the figure only t
The figure shows that the following types of inter-system interference exist when the
UMTS900 coexists with the GSM900:

Interference caused by the GSM BTS to the downlink of the UMTS UE: This
interference depends on ACLR of the GSM BTS and ACS of the UMTS UE.

Interference caused by the GSM MS to the uplink of the UMTS NodeB: This
interference depends on ACLR of the GSM MS and ACS of the UMTS NodeB.

Interference caused by the UMTS NodeB to the downlink of the GSM MS: This
interference depends on ACLR of the UMTS NodeB and ACS of the GSM MS.

Interference caused by the UMTS UE to the uplink of the GSM BTS: This interference
depends on ACLR of the UMTS UE and ACS of the GSM BTS.

Interference caused by the UMTS UE to the uplink of the GSM BTS is small because the
transmission power of the UE can be better controlled in the UMTS network.

The power received by the interfered system from the interfering system equals the transmit
power of the interfering system minus the ACIR in Refarming scenarios. Therefore, the
interference severity depends on the ACIR. The ACIR, however, is limited by the small one
between the ACLR of the interfering system and the ACS of the interfered system.
The interference bottlenecks can be analyzed according to the ACLR and the ACS of Huawei
SRAN BSs in the GSM and the UMTS modes and those of GSM MSs and UMTS UEs. 1 lists
interference bottlenecks when the GU frequency separation is 2.2 MHz.
1

Interference bottleneck analysis

No.

Interference
Type

BS
Indicato
r

MS or UE
Indicator

Interference Bottleneck When


the GU Frequency Separation
is 2.2 MHz

GSM BTS interfering


with the UMTS
downlink

GSM BTS
ACLR

UMTS UE ACS

UMTS UE ACS

UMTS NodeB
interfering with the
GSM downlink

UMTS
NodeB
ACLR

GSM MS ACS

No bottleneck exists because no


performance loss occurs.

GSM MS interfering
with the UMTS
uplink

UMTS
NodeB
ACS

GSM MS
ACLR

UMTS NodeB ACS**

UMTS UE interfering
with the GSM uplink

GSM BTS
ACS

UMTS UE
ACLR

No bottleneck exists because no


performance loss occurs.

The GU frequency separation is 2.2 MHz are obtained from an analysis of GSM BTSs, GSM MSs,
UMTS BSs, and UMTS UEs.

The interference caused by a GSM MS to the UMTS uplink is limited by the ACS of the UMTS
NodeB, but the simulation data shows that the adjacent-channel interference suppression is greatly
improved upon filter optimization. The excessive pursuit of improvement of adjacent-channel
interference suppression will result in significant loss of wanted signals. In such cases, the
throughput loss in the UMTS uplink is higher than that caused by the interference from GSM MSs.

Impact of the GU/UU Small-Frequency Spacing on Network


Performance
For details about the impact of the UMTS non-standard bandwidth on network performance, obtain
relevant documentation from MO of SRAN Solution Design Department.

UMTS 4.2 MHz bandwidth

GU small-frequency spacing of 2.2 MHz. The network-level GSM mean opinion score
(MOS) and throughput of EDGE services decrease by less than 5% compared with those
in the 5 MHz UMTS only network.

The network-level throughput of services processed by the HSDPA-enabled category 8


UEs decreases by less than 5% compared with that in the 5 MHz UMTS only network.
The network-level throughput of services processed by the HSDPA-enabled category 10

UEs decreases by less than 10% compared with that in the 5 MHz UMTS only network.
The figure disclosed to Indian customers is 10%.

The network-level throughput of services processed by the HSUPA-enabled category 6


UEs decreases by less than 5% compared with that in the 5 MHz UMTS only network.
The figure disclosed to Indian customers is 10%.

The network-level throughput of services processed by the HSDPA+(64QAM)-enabled


UEs increases by 3% compared with that of services processed by the HSDPA(16QAM)enabled UEs in the same network.

The network-level throughput of services processed by the DC(64QAM)-enabled UEs


increases by 5% compared with that of services processed by the HSDPA(16QAM)enabled UEs in the same network.
The gain of services processed by the 64QAM-enabled UEs is calculated compared with the 16QAMenabled UEs in the same network.

UU small-frequency spacing of 4.2 MHz

The network-level throughput of services processed by the DC(64QAM)-enabled UEs


(without MIMO) increases by 6% compared with that of services processed by the DC
(16QAM)-enabled UEs (without MIMO) in the same network.

The downlink peak throughput of services processed by the 16QAM-enabled UEs


decreases by less than 5% compared with that in the 5 MHz UMTS only network. The
network-level throughput of services processed by the 16QAM-enabled UEs decreases
by less than 3% compared with that in the 5 MHz UMTS only network.

The uplink peak throughput of services processed by the UPA(QPSK)-enabled UEs


decreases by less than 5% compared with that in the 5 MHz UMTS only network. The
network-level throughput of services processed by the UPA(QPSK)-enabled UEs
decreases by less than 3% compared with that in the 5 MHz UMTS only network

UMTS 3.8 MHz bandwidth in rural areas

UMTS 3.8 MHz bandwidth

In the case of GSM 1x1 or 1x3 frequency reuse pattern with FRLOAD of 50%, the
network-level average rate of services processed by the HSDPA-enabled category 8 UEs
decreases by 25% compared with that in the 5 MHz UMTS only network; the networklevel average rate of services processed by the DC(64 QAM)-enabled category 24 UEs
decreases by 35% compared with that in the 5 MHz UMTS only network; the networklevel average rate of services processed by the HSUPA-enabled category 6 UEs
decreases by 30% compared with that in the 5 MHz UMTS only network.

In the case of GSM 4x3 frequency reuse pattern, the network-level average rate of
services processed by the HSDPA-enabled category 8 UEs decreases by 15% compared
with that in the 5 MHz UMTS only network; the network-level average rate of services
processed by the DC(64QAM)-enabled category 24 UEs decreases by 30% compared
with that in the 5 MHz UMTS only network; the network-level average rate of services
processed by the HSUPA-enabled category 6 UEs decreases by 18% compared with that
in the 5 MHz UMTS only network.

In a 3.8 MHz UMTS network, services processed by the 64QAM-enabled UEs have no
gains compared with services processed by the 16QAM-enabled UEs. 64QAM-enabled
UEs can only achieve low-speed data rates of 16QAM-enabled UEs.

The network-level throughput of services processed by the DC(64QAM) UEs increases


by 3% compared with that of services processed by the HSDPA(16QAM) UEs in the
GUU2.0 MHz network.

Impact of the 3.8 MHz UMTS network on the GSM network:


The MOS decreases by 0.15, and the coverage decreases by 0.2 dB. Assume that the antenna
height is 30 meters. The coverage radius decreases by 1.3%, and the coverage area decreases
by 2.58%.
Although the UMTS 3.8 MHz network has a performance loss compared with the 5.0 MHz
UMTS network, the 3.8 MHz UMTS network has gains compared with the 3.8 MHz GSM
network. Focus on the benefits of the 3.8 MHz UMTS network when explaining it to
customers.
The 3.8 MHz GSM network can use the S3/3/3 cell configuration. The following table
compares the gain of the 3.8 MHz UMTS network compared with the EDGE network. In this
table, the peak and average EDGE data rates are calculated based on MCS-9 and MCS-6,
respectively.
1

Gains provided by the 3.8 MHz UMTS network compared with the EDGE network
HSDPA CAT8

HSUPA
CAT6

UMTS3.8 MHz Peak rate increment compared


with EDGE

252%

144%

Average rate increment of the worst cell


applying UMTS3.8 MHz network compared
with EDGE

418%

201%

Average rate increment of UMTS3.8 MHz


network compared with EDGE

475%

245%

2 Frequency Allocation Between GSM and UMTS


Networks
Two frequency allocation modes are available, depending on the operator's internal spectrum
resource usage: edge frequency allocation and sandwich frequency allocation.
3.2.2.1 GU Edge Frequency Allocation
1 shows the GU edge frequency allocation mode.
1

Edge GU frequency allocation mode

The UMTS and the GSM are arranged side by side on the relevant frequency band, and
UMTS and GSM allocated side by side. The center frequency separation (f 1) between the
UMTS and the GSM of the same operator can be configured to the minimum spacing
supported by the SRAN 3.0. For the impact on the network performance, see "Impact of the
GU/UU Small-Frequency Spacing on Network Performance." The center frequency
separation (f 2) between the UMTS and the GSM of other operators should be 2.6 MHz at
least for the following reasons:
If the adjacent frequency separation between the UMTS and the GSM of another operator is
lower than 2.6 MHz, the UTMS bandwidth is 4.2 MHz and but the terminal still uses a
bandwidth of 5 MHz; consequently, the frequency resources of another operator are occupied.
Additionally, the GU nonstandard frequency separation may interfere with the GSM because
the GSM RF performance is unknown. The GSM of another operator may interfere with the
UMTS either, especially when the GSM is used at BCCH frequencies or PDCH because the
power control function is not enabled.

Advantages
If the edge frequency allocation mode is adopted, the center frequency separation between the
UMTS and the GSM of the same operator and between the UMTS and the GSM of other
operators should be considered. Because of the continuous spectrum of GSM, Refarming will
not increase complexity for frequency replanning. And there's no change requirement when
UMTS enlarge to the second carrier in future.
Generally, before the UMTS is deployed, a guard band (f) that is often one ARFCN (200 kHz)
may be available between the frequency band of the operator and that of another operator. If
the GU frequency separation is 2.6 MHz, Huawei SRAN 3.0 supports satisfactory network
performance as if no interference exists between the GSM and the UMTS (see the
interference analysis in chapter 4). In this case, the UMTS of an operator can be located
adjacent to GSM carriers of another operator, the guard band included in f2, no special
reservation, which will save frequency resource and improve the utilization ratio. (Note: if the
guard band is a public frequency, sharing between two operators, the frequency is still
remained and cannot by use by the Refarming operator.)

Disadvantages
If the edge frequency allocation mode is adopted, the interference between the new UMTS
and the adjacent GSM of other operators must be considered. In GU co-located sites, it is
relatively easy to analyze and adjust the interference between the UMTS and the GSM. The
interference between the UMTS and the GSM of other operators, however, must be
considered according to the worst scenario.
If the adjacent frequency is used by a CDMA system of another operator, the UMTS located
at the edge, compared with the GSM at the edge, suffers severer interference from the CDMA
system. For example, the blocking requirement of the GSM is 16 dBm, while that of the
WCDMA system is 47 dBm. To resist the interference from the CDMA system, the system
isolation is required to be improved by a higher filter suppression value or adjusted
engineering parameters of the UMTS.
For the edge frequency allocation, the interference between UMTS and other neighboring
operator's GSM. To prevent the conflicts related to interference, the center frequency
separation between UMTS and other operator's GSM should be kept 2.6 MHz at least, there
are 2 frequencies can be saved at most when the flexible bandwidth feature of SRAN3.0

3.2.2.2 GU Sandwich Frequency Allocation


1 shows the GU sandwich frequency allocation mode.
1

GU Sandwich frequency allocation mode

Inside the frequency band of an operator, the UMTS is arranged in the middle and the GSM is
arranged at both sides. If the center frequency separation f1 or f2 is smaller than 2.6 MHz, the
GSM and the UMTS can share the frequency resources with low power density at both sides
of the UMTS. In this way, the number of additional GSM carriers is twice that in the edge
frequency allocation mode. In the sandwich allocation mode, the UMTS carrier can be
arranged at any location (unnecessarily at the center) in the spectrum resources of the
operator, depending on the operator's strategies. For later capacity expansion of the UMTS,
the operator may allocate more frequencies to support two UMTS carriers. To avoid adjusting
the previous UMTS frequency, asymmetric frequency allocation can be adopted to make one
side of the UMTS carrier near either edge of the spectrum. In this way, the continuous GSM
spectrum at the other side is larger than 5 MHz, which facilitates expansion to the second
UMTS carrier. The asymmetric frequency allocation also facilitates the GSM BCCH
planning. Generally, a guard ARFCN must be reserved between the BCCH and the TCH.
Only one guard ARFCN is needed for the undivided BCCH frequencies. Two guard ARFCNs
may be needed if the BCCH frequencies are divided into two sections.
Compared with the GSM, the UMTS supports weaker resistance against interference from the
CDMA system. Therefore, the UMTS carrier should be located away from the CDMA
systems of other operators as far as possible to avoid interference from the CDMA systems.

Advantages
For an operator, if the sandwich frequency allocation mode is adopted, the UMTS frequencies
are allocated inside its own frequency resource without interference to the GSM or other
systems of other operators on the adjacent frequency bands. If the reserved buffer zone is
configured according to the specific requirements, normal operation of both systems is
ensured.
Compared with the edge allocation mode, the sandwich allocation mode supports one more
ARFCN if the GU frequency separation is 2.4 MHz. The sandwich allocation mode supports
two more ARFCNs if the center frequency separation is 2.2 MHz. 1 lists the comparison of
KPIs between two GSM networks with the same base station (BS) configuration but different
numbers of ARFCNs (one GSM network supports two more ARFCNs than the other GSM
network does). The BS configuration supported by the GSM network with more ARFCNs
may be higher than that supported by the other GSM network. In addition, the KPI

comparison shows that, in the case of the same BS, the GSM network with more ARFCNs has
higher network performance and Refarming has less impact on the GSM network.
1 KPI comparison between two GSM networks with the same BS configuration but different
numbers of ARFCNs
KPI

(I) S4/3/3*

(II) S5/5/4**

5.2 MHz

5.6 MHz

7.0 MHz

7.4 MHz

Immediate Assignment Success


Rate

96.16%

96.55%

96.25%

96.43%

SDCCH Drop Rate

0.69%

0.37%

0.67%

0.36%

TCH Assignment Success Rate

96.51%

96.96%

96.60%

96.81%

Call Setup Success Rate

92.80%

93.78%

92.98%

93.46%

TCH Call Drop Rate (including


Handovers)

0.84%

0.49%

0.82%

0.49%

TCH Call Drop Rate

1.15%

0.72%

1.13%

0.71%

Handover RF Success Rate

94.75%

95.64%

94.93%

95.36%

In example I, the Refarming solution comes from IDEA in India. After the Refarming, the spectral
bandwidth used by the GSM is 5.6 MHz. The BCCH adopts 4 x 3 and the TCH adopts 1 x 3. The
typical BS configuration is S4/3/3.

In example II, the Refarming solution comes from Operator D in Country Y. After the Refarming,
the spectral bandwidth used by the GSM is 7.2 MHz. The BCCH adopts 4 x 3 and the TCH adopts 1
x 3. The typical BS configuration is S5/5/4.

Disadvantages
If the sandwich frequency allocation mode is adopted, both the center frequency of the UMTS
and the GSM frequencies must be adjusted during the later capacity expansion of the UMTS.
This problem, however, can be avoided by predetermining the location of UMTS ARFCNs
according to the operators' strategies.
If RF hoping is used for GSM system, the BCCH cannot be allocated continuously in the
sandwich frequency allocation mode. As a result, the available MA composing of remaining
frequencies is not continuous, which bring some difficulties in GSM frequency planning.
3.2.2.3 Recommended GU Frequency Allocation
The sandwich frequency allocation mode is preferred for 1:1 GU co-located site scenarios
according to the comparison between the two frequency allocations modes and the
interference data in the case of nonstandard GU separation. The reasons are as follows:
The sandwich frequency allocation mode results in severer inter-system interference, but the
impact caused by the interference on the network performance is acceptable in 1:1 GU colocated site scenarios due to the improved RF counters of Huawei SRAN 3.0.

The sandwich frequency allocation mode doubles the number of GSM ARFCNs saved in the
edge frequency allocation mode. Therefore, the frequency efficiency is improved and the
impact on the GSM is mitigated.
The inter-system interference between the UMTS and other operators systems must be
considered in the case of edge frequency allocation but not to be considered in the case of
sandwich frequency allocation. If the UMTS is adjacent to the CDMA system of another
operator in the case of edge frequency allocation, the operator has to pay a high cost for
suppressing the inter-system interference.
In the case of sandwich frequency allocation, the UMTS ARFCN can be flexibly located to
facilitate capacity expansion and inter-system interference suppression.
3.2.2.4 Frequency Allocation after the Refarming
After the GU 900 MHz Refarming, the GSM frequency must be replanned. And the feature of
flexible bandwidth used to minimize the influence on GSM as far as possible will bring the
interference problem between the GSM900 and UMTS900. Therefore, necessary interference
mitigation methods should be taken in the network planning phase. This chapter gives some
suggestions from the angle of decreasing the interference between G900 and U90, and gives
elaborate description for each method.

Frequency Planning for the BCCH


The protocol specifies that the power control function is disabled at all timeslots of the
BCCH carrier during service initiation to guarantee successful access of subscribers. The
GSM ARFCN with power control disabled causes severe interference to both the uplink
and the downlink of the adjacent UMTS.
Therefore, the GSM ARFCN adjacent to the UMTS carrier should not be configured as a
BCCH carrier. Instead, the BCCH should be deployed at a GSM ARFCN that is at least
2.6 MHz away from the UMTS ARFCN.

Frequency Planning for the PDCH


In the GSM network, frequency planning of the PDCH should meet strict requirements.
The PDCH is often deployed at the BCCH carrier. In the case of huge demands for data
services, operators may configure an independent GPRS or EDGE carrier. In such cases,
a loose frequency reuse pattern is required to mitigate interference. The PDCH does not
support downlink power control, and the PDCH deployed at a GSM ARFCN adjacent to
the UMTS interferes with the UMTS downlink. Therefore, the SRAN 3.0 designed for
the UMTS900 R10 requires that the PDCH should not be deployed at GSM ARFCNs
adjacent to the UMTS.

Interference Suppression Methods When the GSM ARFCN Adjacent to the UMTS Is
Configured as the TCH Carrier
If the GSM ARFCN adjacent to the UMTS is configured as the TCH carrier, the GSM
power control functions must be enabled in both the uplink and the downlink to reduce
the interference caused by the GSM to the UMTS. According to the statistical data of the
live network, the transmit power of Huawei GSM MSs with 3.5G power control enabled
is decreased by about 5 dB (compared with that of Huawei GSM MSs with third
generation (3G) power control enabled). The transmit power of Huawei GSM BTSs with
3.5G power control enabled is decreased by about 3 dB (compared with that of Huawei
GSM BTSs with 3G power control enabled). For details, see [15]. In this way, the
interference caused by GSM MSs to UMTS BSs and that caused by GSM BSs to UMTS
UEs are reduced.
Other functions such as frequency hopping, DTX, and half rate (HR) can be enabled to
reduce inter-system interference. When the GSM system processes the PS service, the PS

open-loop power control function must be enabled to reduce the interference between
GSM900 and UMTS900.

Avoiding Non-Standard-GU-Separation ARFCNs in the Same Cell in the Case of


Sandwich Frequency Allocation
If the sandwich frequency allocation mode is adopted, GSM ARFCNs adjacent to the
UMTS appear in pairs. If several GSM ARFCNs adjacent to the UMTS are configured in
the same cell, the cell is more easily interfered by the UMTS. As a result, the
performance of the cell is much lower than that of other cells. In addition, the UMTS cell
sharing the same coverage with the GSM cell is severely interfered. If the GSM
ARFCNs adjacent to the UMTS are distributed in different cells, the mutual interference
between the GSM and the UMTS can be equalized. Therefore, GSM ARFCNs adjacent
to the UMTS should be separated geographically to equalize the network quality and to
avoid poor performance (much poorer than the overall network performance) in one or
two cells due to severe interference.

Frequencies with Nonstandard Separation Not Used in Indoor GSM Cells


UMTS900 can be used for deep coverage in urban areas, that is, the macro base station
covers is used for indoor coverage. Generally, GSM900 uses a special indoor coverage
solution. If the frequencies with nonstandard separation are used for GSM indoor
coverage, the GSM indoor base station may cause interference to UMTS terminals. The
UMTS terminal located in the GSM indoor coverage area receives rather weak signals
because the signal strength decreases significantly after penetrating the building and
distributing in indoor environment. However, there is no attenuation for GSM signals
dedicated for indoor areas. Therefore, the UMTS terminal receives rather strong GSM
signals. In this case, GSM frequencies with nonstandard separation may cause great
impacts on the UMTS terminal. To avoid the serious impacts, it is recommended that
frequencies with nonstandard separation should not be used in indoor GSM cells.

Coverage of indoor GSM cells

Frequencies with Nonstandard Separation Not Used in Cells Requiring Large UMTS
Capacity
To reach a high data throughput, the UMTS system must use a high-order modulation
coding scheme, for example, HSDPA using 16QAM using or HSDPA+ using 64QAM.
The high-order coding scheme requires high-quality signals and is more sensitive to
interference signals. According to the performance tests of the GU frequencies with
nonstandard separation in the lab, the small-spacing frequencies bring greater impacts on
high coding rates. Assume that the transmit power of the GSM system and UMTS

system is 20 W. When the channel quality indicator (CQI) is 30 in edge allocation mode,
the GU performance loss of 64QAM is 30% to 40% in GU co-site deployment scenario.
In the actual network, the UMTS cells require different capacities in the same area
because the uses are not evenly distributed in cells. To mitigate the impacts of the GU
frequencies with nonstandard separation on data throughput of the entire UMTS system,
it is recommended that frequencies with nonstandard separation should not be used in
cells with a high UMTS capacity during the GSM frequency planning. Enabling the
HSUPA algorithm for resisting strong interference can relieve the impacts of
instantaneous GSM interference to UMTS performance.

Enabling the HSUPA Algorithm for Resisting Strong Instantaneous Interference from
GSM (Optional)
The power control function is not enabled during the access of GSM terminals. In the
case of the access to the TRX using frequencies with nonstandard separation, GSM
terminals transmit signals at full power, greatly increasing the uplink background noise
of neighboring UMTS cells. The common scheduling algorithm of the UMTS system
uses the uplink load as the control threshold and measures the upload through Received
Total Wideband Power (RTWP). If the RTWP is raised to a specified load threshold, the
UMTS system will control the HSUPA scheduling rate and limit the uplink load within
the threshold. The great increase in RTWP of the UMTS system seriously affects the
uplink service rate of the UMTS system and leads to poor user experience.
The HSUPA algorithm for resisting strong interference differentiates instantaneous
interference causes by interference of other external systems for example, GSM. When
there is strong interference and the RTWP increases drastically, the scheduling algorithm
checks the RTWP and the load factor contributed by users in the local cell. If the load
factor does not reach the predefined threshold, the user rate can be increased even if the
RTWP exceeds the threshold. Therefore, if GU frequencies with nonstandard separation
are used, enabling the HSUPA algorithm for resisting strong interference can greatly
relieve the impacts of instantaneous strong interference of GSM users on the overall
UMTS performance. Based on lab testing results, the maximum continuous interference
supported by the HSUPA algorithm for resisting interference is 17 dB. If the continuous
interference is larger than 17 dB, the HSUPA algorithm for resisting interference is not
functional.
This algorithm is applicable to RAN13, SRAN6.0 or later, not supported by SRAN3.0.
In addition, because this algorithm is not verified, you are advised to confirm with the
SRAN Solution Design Department first before using this feature.

3 GU Intra-Frequency Buffer Zone Planning


This section provides only a simple description about the concept, principles, and solution of the buffer
zone planning. For more details, see the GU Refarming Bufferzone Solution.

3.2.3.1 Definition
Some frequencies used by the UMTS network in the Refarming area are still used by the
GSM network outside the Refarming area. As a result, co-channel interference between the
GSM and UMTS network may occur at the Refarming area edge. For more details, see
reference [1]. A buffer zone can be established to reduce such interference. As shown in 1, the
same frequency can be used in Area A (UMTS900) and Area C while frequencies used in Area
A cannot be used in Area B, which is called the buffer zone.

Buffer zone

The area where UMTS900 is deployed and the buffer zone that implement frequency
replanning are called Refarming area. To ensure that the GSM900 sites where Refarming is
not implemented are not affected, the frequency of some sites outside the Refarming area may
be adjusted. Therefore, the actual frequency replanning area is larger than the defined
Refarming area.

Theoretical Analysis
The modeling of theoretical interference analysis is shown in 1. The seven sites in the two
layers at the center are BTSs. The outmost layer indicates the GU co-located sites. Layers 3
and 4 indicate the buffer zone where the GSM frequencies shared by the UMTS must be
cleared (Clearing frequencies means not use).
1

Modeling of theoretical interference analysis

The theoretical analysis is performed based on the coverage analysis using appropriate
propagation model and considering the particular service requirements. The theoretical
analysis shows that the interference is acceptable for 3-sector BSs if two layers of GSM BTSs
whose frequencies are shared by the UMTS are cleared. For details, see reference [16].
The theoretical analysis in reference [16] is based on the standard network structure which
may differ from actual network conditions. Therefore, the impact caused by the interference
varies with actual network conditions for example, propagation loss that varies with
terrains and ground features, parameter settings, cell size, and cell location. The degraded
network quality in one or two BSs can be optimized through adjustment of RF parameters.
In addition, the theoretical derivation in reference [16] is based on BSs with directional
antennas. For BSs with omnidirectional antennas, a larger buffer zone may be required
because the coverage is hard to control.
The simulation is based on the regular network structure. The following conclusions are
drawn according to the simulation data:

Assume that the C/I is 12 dB and that the acceptable coverage loss due to co-channel
interference is within 3%. Two layers of GSM BTSs whose frequencies are shared by the
UMTS must be cleared. In the case of GSM 4 x 3 frequency reuse pattern, while three
layers of GSM BTSs must be cleared in the case of GSM 3 x 3 frequency reuse pattern.

Assume that the C/I is 9 dB and that the acceptable coverage loss due to co-channel
interference is within 3%. Two layers of GSM BTSs must be cleared in the case of either
GSM 4 x 3 or 3 x 3 frequency reuse pattern.

A tighter GSM frequency reuse pattern results in severer self-interference and greater
influence from the UMTS, requiring a larger buffer zone between the GSM and the
UMTS.

3.2.3.2 Buffer Zone Planning and Application Scenarios


Currently, buffer zone can be planned through simulation, traffic statistics, and original
Measurement Reports (MRs). Each planning method has its own advantages and
disadvantages. 1 shows the comparison.
1

Comparison of the three methods for buffer zone planning


Based on Simulation

Based on Traffic
Statistics

Based on
Original MRs

Principles

Defining the buffer zone by


using U-Net to predict coverage
based on the pre-set receive
level

Defining the buffer zone


based on the counters and
engineering parameters in
the live network

Defining the buffer


zone based on the
original MRs and
engineering
parameters in the live
network

Data Input

Detailed engineering
parameters, data map, and
parameters in the live network

Detailed engineering
parameters and counters

Detailed engineering
parameters and
original MRs

Application
Scenarios

All Scenarios

Scenarios where equipment


is provided by Huawei or
any vendor except for ZTE

Scenarios where
equipment is provided
by Huawei

Based on Simulation

Based on Traffic
Statistics

Based on
Original MRs

Accuracy

Low, not considering the traffic


distribution in the live network

High, considering the


traffic distribution in the
live network

High

Complexity

Simple, requiring knowledge


about the U-Net

Simple, having low


requirement on skills of
using tools

Complex, requiring
the use of professional
tools in automatically
analyzing large
quantities of MR data

Maturity

Mature, with detailed case


verification

Mature, with detailed case


verification

Immature, not fully


verified

Advantages

Applied to all scenarios

Easy to implement with


high accuracy

With high accuracy

Disadvantages

With low accuracy which relies


on the accuracy of digital maps
and engineering parameters

Cannot be implemented in
the ZTE network and takes
one week to obtain relevant
data in the live network

Difficult to obtain and


analyze the required
data

Different methods of buffer zone planning apply to different scenarios. Planning based on
traffic statistics is recommended. If relevant traffic statistics cannot be obtained or the
vendor's traffic statistics cannot be analyzed by Actix, the planning based on simulation is
recommended. Do not use the planning based on the original MRs unless required by the
frontline personnel or operators.

4 GUL Inter_Rat Mobility Solution


This section introduces the GUL inter-RAT mobility solution. For more details, see the GUL Inter-Rat
Mobility Solution.

The general solution is as follows:


A multi-mode cell phone preferentially camps and initiates a service in a network with a
higher priority. By default, the LTE has higher priority than the UMTS and the GSM has the
lowest priority.

CS Services
1)

The GSM or UMTS network carries CS services initiated by camping terminals. A


terminal initiating a CS service in the UMTS network can be handed over to the
GSM network based on coverage and this CS service will not be handed over back
to the GSM network when the call is proceeding.

2)

When IMS is not deployed in the LTE network, CS services need to be transferred
to the UMTS network by CS Fallback (CSFB).

3)

When IMS is deployed in the LTE network, the Single Radio Voice Call Continuity
(SRVCC) feature works to convert the VoIP services in the LTE network to CS
services in the UMTS network. This ensures continuous voice services.

PS Services

1)

PS services of LTE terminals are preferentially carried by the LTE network. When a
UE in the middle of a PS service in the LTE network moves out of the LTE
coverage, a PS handover or re-direction will be performed to transfer the UE to the
UMTS network or the GSM network (if the UE moves out of the UMTS coverage.)
The choice between a PS re-selection and a PS handover depends on the capability
of the UE.

2)

PS services of GU dual-mode terminals are preferentially carried by the UMTS


network. When a UE in the middle of a PS service in the UMTS network moves out
of the UMTS coverage, a PS re-selection or handover will be performed to transfer
the UE to the GSM network.

3)

When a multi-mode terminal in connected mode moves back to an area covered by


multiple RATs, the terminal will not fall back to the LTE network since the terminal
cannot measure the signal quality of the LTE neighboring cells. Instead, PS reselections or handovers will be performed between the GSM and UMTS networks.
After the CS service is released, the terminal will fall back to the LTE network
through re-selection.

Combined Services
1)

The policy for CS services applies to the traffic transfer from the UMTS network to
the GSM network. Service-based handovers will not be performed for combined
services.

2)

For combined services, traffic needs to be transferred from the LTE network to the
UMTS or GSM network only if a CS service is initiated while a PS service is
performed in the LTE network. In this case, the CSFB feature is enabled on the base
station.

GUL inter-Rat mobility strategy

5 GSM Traffic Transfer Solution


This section provides only a general introduction to the GSM traffic transfer policy. For more details, see
the GU Refarming traffic migration Guide.

The GSM frequency resources are reduced after the GU 900 MHz Refarming is implemented.
To keep the GSM network quality, the cell configuration in the GSM network must be
changed. Due to the low penetration rate of UMTS900 terminals or other factors, the GSM
traffic volume may not decrease fast within a period after the Refarming. The following
methods can be adopted to prevent the GSM network performance from deteriorating and
keep the frequency reuse coefficient without causing traffic congestion:
Improving efficiency of TRXs
Transferring GSM900 traffic to another RAT
3.2.5.1 Configuration Goal of the GSM900 Network
The goal is to implement the maximum average cell configuration based on the available
GSM 900 MHz resources and the frequency reuse coefficient after the Refarming. If it is
promised that KPIs do not deteriorate after the Refarming, the frequency reuse coefficient
must remain the same. Otherwise, you have to assess the network performance deterioration
caused by tightening of the coefficient. The assessment must be reviewed by Huawei KPI
Auditing committee through the exceptional KPI auditing process.

Allocating frequencies to BCCHs and TCHs separately


In this case, BCCHs and TCHs have different frequency reuse coefficients. Assume that
the frequency reuse coefficient for BCCHs is X*3, that for TCHs is Y*3, and the
available bandwidth is W MHz. The maximum average cell configuration is as follows:

AverageCellTrxNum = (Rounddown ((W/0.2),0)-X*3)/(Y*3) + 1 if the frequency


hopping mode of TCHs is None FH or Baseband FH

AverageCellTrxNum = Rounddown ((Rounddown((W/0.2),0)-X*3)/(Y*3)/2) + 1 if


the frequency hopping mode of TCHs is RF FH

Allocating frequencies to BCCHs and TCHs combinedly


In this case, BCCHs and TCHs have the same frequency reuse coefficient. Assume that
the frequency reuse coefficient is Z*3, the available band width is W MHz. The
maximum average cell configuration is as follows:
AverageCellTrxNum = Rounddown ((W/0.2),0)/(Z * 3)
Rounddown ((W/0.2),0) in the preceding equation indicates the number of available GSM frequencies
after the Refarming. If there are any dedicated frequencies in the network (for example, dedicated
frequencies for indoor coverage or EDGE TRXs), the number of such frequencies should be excluded
from the result.

Methods of Traffic Migration


Increasing the half-rate service proportion
1

This is the simplest method. The proportion can be as high as 100% with the customer's
permission. To increase this proportion, decrease the values of the TCH traffic busy
threshold, AMR TCH/H Prior Cell Load Threshold, and Max Ratio of AMR-HR
parameters.

Transferring the GSM900 traffic to the UMTS900 or UMTS2100 network

The volume of GSM900 traffic that can be transferred to the UMTS network can be
calculated based on the penetration rate of UMTS900 terminals mentioned in section
.
Besides, more GSM900 traffic can be transferred to the UMTS network by modifying
the traffic carrying policy between GSM and UMTS networks as well as the
corresponding parameters.
3

Transferring the GSM900 traffic to the GSM1800 network


The GSM1800 network cannot absorb all the GSM900 traffic due to its relatively weak
coverage. The maximum GSM900 traffic that can be absorbed by the GSM1800 network
is determined by the proportion of GSM900 traffic that can be transferred to the
GSM1800 network. To transfer GSM900 traffic to the GSM1800 network, do as follows:
1)

Obtain the value for the Rx level distribution of the GSM900 cells.

2)

Calculate the proportion of GSM traffic that meets the inter-layer handover
requirement based on the preceding Rx level and HO signal level threshold from
G900 to G1800. This proportion is equal to the proportion of GSM900 traffic that
can be absorbed by the GSM1800 network.

3)

Change the layer HO threshold or HO signal level between overlaid layer and
underlaid layer as needed.
This method involves the GSM1800 network deployment and expansion, which is the
key to successful Refarmings. Before the Refarming, inform the customer about
relevant materials to be prepared and configurations to be made in the live network.
Besides, the GSM900 traffic can be transferred to the GSM1800 network by splitting
cells or adding indoor base stations, base stations in streets, Micro base stations, and
Pico base stations.

Enabling the tight frequency reuse features


If the GSM900 TRX configuration cannot be changed as required, the following GSM
features can be enabled to keep the GSM network quality:

Frequency Hopping (RF hopping): changing the frequency reuse method to enhance the
supported TRX configurations

ICC, EICC, and SAIC: improving the anti-interference capability of the network to
enhance the supported TRX configurations

VAMOS: improving the TRX usage

UISS+IBCA: improving network quality when the Frequency Hopping (RF hopping)
feature is enabled and the FRLOAD is higher than 50%, enhancing the supported cell
configurations without requiring more frequency resources
The GSM900 network performance quality cannot be kept only by enabling the tight frequency reuse
features. The most effective way is to transfer the GSM900 traffic to the expanded or newly deployed
GSM1800 network.

3 Implementation
1 Delivery Solutions
Currently, there are two scenarios: Refarming for base stations provided by Huawei and
Swapping&Refarming for base stations provided by other vendors.
For the first scenario, skip this section.

For the second scenario, there are two delivery solutions.


Delivery solution 1
The delivery process of this Refarming solution is as follows:
1

Replan the GSM900 network and frequencies on the live network to ensure the
frequencies required by the UMTS900 are idle.

Monitor KPIs of the GSM900 network for one or two weeks. If the KPIs are greatly
affected, it is recommended that the RF optimization be performed on the GSM900
network. If the impacts on KPIs are acceptable, swap the GSM900 network.

After the KPIs of the GSM900 are stable, activate the UMTS900.
The advantages of this Refarming delivery solution are as follows: Separate the two
factors affecting the networking performance and divide the network performance
optimization process into two stages: (1) Impact on the GSM network performance when
the frequency spectrum is changed from tight to loose. (2) Impact of the interference
between the GSM900 and UMTS900 on the network performance after the UMTS900
network is activated. This helps to analyze and identify the causes affecting KPIs. If the
GSM network performance is reduced after the Refarming is implemented on the
equipment provided by other manufacturers, it indicates that this problem is a common
phenomenon and is not caused by the swap to Huawei equipment. In this way, the early
stage of Refarming can be smoothly implemented.
The first stage of this solution, however, is risky. If the GSM network performance is
substantially reduced after frequency replanning, operators may question the feasibility
of Refarming and the network swapping may be affected. If operators or third parties
perform the frequency replanning based on the existing equipment, the frequency
replanning may not meet the requirements of the GSM900 network after Refarming
served by Huawei equipment, especially when ARFCNs with nonstandard frequency
separation are used and some special network planning strategies for optimal network
performance are used. In this case, the frequency replanning must be adjusted again. In
addition, the frequency replanning based on the existing equipment may affect the usage
of Huawei equipment. For example, the existing equipment adopts the baseband FH
mode to use the cavity combiner. Therefore, the baseband HF mode must remain
unchanged during network swapping. That is, the RF FH mode cannot be used, affecting
the optimization of network performance. If Huawei performs the frequency replanning
based on the existing equipment, the KPI requirements of the network after Refarming
may not be met because Huawei is not familiar with the performance of the existing
equipment and the related algorithm.
In this case, with respect to delivery solution 1, it is recommended that you promise that
the GSM KPIs remain unchanged after the UMTS900 network is activated.

Delivery solution 2
The delivery process of this Refarming solution is as follows:
1

Swap the GSM network according to 1:1.

Customers check and accept the GSM swapping.

Communicate with customers about the UMTS900 Refarming on the basis that the
frequency replanning is sold to customers as a service.

Sell the UMTS900 license to customers and activate the UMTS900 network.
This Refarming delivery solution features little risk. Huawei can determine the methods
for improving the network quality because Huawei performs the network swapping and
frequency replanning again. This increases the flexibility of network optimization. In
addition, Huawei deserves the extra service cost and license cost involved in the

subsequent frequency replanning from operators. The standard for promising KPIs in this
delivery solution, however, is not as clear as that in delivery solution 1. In this case,
ensure that you warn customers in advance about the decline in performance due to GSM
tight frequency reuse in large configuration scenarios. In addition, the process of KPI
optimization of delivery solution 2 is more complicated than that of delivery solution 1.
Delivery solution 2 has another type, which does not require the network acceptance
after the GSM network swapping. Instead, the network is checked and accepted after the
entire project is completed. In this way, the GSM network can be adjusted again after the
UMTS900 network is activated. In common delivery solution 2, however, to ensure the
KPIs of the GSM network after acceptance, the GSM network cannot be adjusted again
after the UMTS900 network is activated. In this case, if the co-antenna solution is
adopted, the RF parameters and other parameters must be adjusted according to the
performance of the UMTS900 and GSM900 networks, affecting the original KPIs of the
GSM network. The delivery solution where the KPIs are checked and accepted after the
entire project is complete is more flexible. Specifically, after the UMTS900 network is
activated, the GSM network can still be adjusted as long as the ultimate KPIs are
ensured.
Table 3.1.2.I.1.2.1.1 Comparison between UMTS900 Refarming delivery solutions 1 and 2
Solution 1
Solution
descripti
on

Replan the GSM900 network and


frequencies on the live network to
ensure the frequencies required by
the UMTS900 are idle.
Monitor KPIs of the GSM900
network for one or two weeks and
determine the performance baseline
after frequency replanning. If the
KPIs are greatly affected, it is
recommended that the RF
optimization be performed on the
GSM900 network.

Solution 2

Problem: How to charge for


frequency replanning and RF
optimization?

Swap the GSM900 network.


Activate the UMTS900 network if
the KPIs of the GSM900 are
normal.

Swap the GSM network


according to 1:1.
Customers check and accept the
GSM swapping (signing the PAC
is recommended). After that, sell
the frequency replanning of the
UMTS900 network Refarming to
customers as a service.
Replan the frequencies of the
GSM network to ensure that the
frequencies required by the
UMTS900 are idle.
Whether to adopt solution (2) or
solution (2') depends on the
result of negotiation.

Activate the UMTS900 network


after the frequency replanning is
complete.

Solution 1
Solution
advanta
ges

The performance of the GSM


network after Refarming is degraded.
The performance comparison
baseline before and after the network
swapping, facilitating the ultimate
acceptance of the network quality.

Solution 2

You can work around the


potential risks due to the
frequency replanning based on
the equipment from the third
party before Refarming.
Customers can flexibly deploy
the network and do not need to
implement the Refarming before
the network swapping. In
addition, the frequencies are not
required before the UMTS
network is deployed.
The frequency replanning is
facilitated and is more suitable
for Huawei Refarming solution.

Based on the analysis of solutions described in Table 3.1.2.I.1.2.1.1, the following network
swapping strategies for Refarming scenarios are recommended.
Solution 1 is recommended for Golden Cluster, and solution 2 is recommended for project
swapping.

2 Implementation Procedures
The following figure shows the implementation flowchart.

Figure 3.1.2.I.1.2.2 Implementation flowchart

The detailed procedures are as follows:


1

Make the configuration plan for cells in the GSM900 and GSM1800 networks based on
the Refarming policy.

Expand the GSM1800 network or deploy a new GSM1800 network and gradually
transfer GSM900 traffic to the GSM1800 network based on the specific solution in
section 2.

Make the following GSM900 frequency re-planning solutions:

GSM900 TRXs whose sectors are reduced use the UMTS900 frequencies after the
Refarming.

GSM900 TRXs whose sectors are maintained use the GSM frequencies after the
Refarming.

Implement the GSM900 frequency re-planning solution.

Deactivate GSM900 TRXs whose sectors are reduced and then activate the UMTS900
TRXs.
The following figure shows the implementation procedures for the SFR project in
France.

Implementation procedures for the SFR project in France

2 Network Optimization and Acceptance


1 Network Optimization
After 900 MHz Refarming, the decrease in frequency resources may cause serious impacts on
GSM network. To ensure network quality, you must replan and optimize the GSM network in
four aspects: performance and algorithm, basic network optimization, equipment and
engineering, and network architecture. As shown in 1Error: Reference source not found, the
four optimization aspects form a pyramid and the importance increases from the top to the
bottom. The adjustment in the network architecture is the basis for solution implementation.
The network optimization cannot be depending only on one or several algorithms.

GSM network optimization

Performance
Algorithm
Basic Network
Optimization

Equipment and
Engineering

Network Architecture

After the Refarming, the main problems for the GSM network are abnormal KPIs, such as
antenna connections, interference band, call drops, and voice quality. Troubleshoot these
problems by referring to the Refarming X Action and GSM Performance Optimization X
Action.

2 GSM Network Acceptance


After the Refarming, perform GSM network acceptance as required by the contract. No
special acceptance tests are required.

UMTS Part

1 Network Assessment
1 Assessment and Analysis of KPIs
1

Collecting KPIs of the live network


The following table shows the KPIs that need to be collected.

UMTS network KPIs

KPIs Assessment for the UMTS900 Network


Generally speaking, KPIs of the UMTS900 network are worse than those of the
UMTS2100 network. For the UMTS acceptance, use the UMTS900+UMTS2100 KPIs
after the Refarming to compare with the UMTS2100 KPIs before the Refarming. For
details about UMTS900 KPIs, see the KPI Influence of U900 Network.

2 UMTS900 Coverage/Capacity Assessment


U-Net can be used to provide a simple report on the UMTS900 coverage performance
assessment. Since this assessment can neither bring many gains to solution design and
implementation nor be sold as a service, implement this assessment only when customers
have strong demands.
If the customer requires a detailed report, the GU Refarming assessment service introduced in
SingleRAN 7.0 can be provided. There are two scenarios for this service: one is in blind or
weak UMTS coverage areas, the other is in UMTS capacity limited areas.

If the potential Refarming area has blind or weak UMTS coverage, give suggestions to
customers after doing the following:
1)

Identify areas with blind or weak UMTS coverage by using the tool for accessing
GSM and UMTS coverage.

2)

Assume that the service model of UMTS900 terminals and that of GSM terminals
are the same. Calculate the GSM900 PS traffic that can be transferred based on the
penetration rate of UMTS900 terminals. If most of the UMTS900 terminals are data
cards, the transferred data traffic can be increased accordingly.

3)

Calculate the GSM CS traffic that requires to be transferred based on the


penetration rate of UMTS900 terminals. Then provide the GSM1800 traffic transfer
solution by referring to the Refarming Traffic Migration Guide and make the GSM
configuration planning for the Refarming.

If the potential Refarming area has UMTS capacity limitation, suggest to customers after
doing the following:
1)

Identify the value areas for the Refarming based on the UMTS2100 traffic.

2)

Assume that the service model of UMTS900 terminals and that of UMTS2100 only
terminals are the same. Calculate the data traffic that can be transferred to the
UMTS900 network based on the penetration rate of UMTS900 terminals.

3)

Then provide the GSM1800 traffic transfer solution by referring to the Refarming
Traffic Migration Guide and make the GSM configuration planning for the
Refarming.

This assessment only applies to the network using Huawei equipment of versions later
than SRAN7.0 because the traffic map and UMTS900 terminal penetration rate are based
on Huawei GSM and UMTS equipment and only Huawei equipment of versions later
than SRAN7.0 support identifying UMTS900 terminals.
For more details, see the Technical Guide of the SRAN7.0 GU Refarming Evaluation
Service.

3 Identifying UMTS Value Areas


On U-Net, enable the GU Joint Coverage Plan function to identify the value areas for
Refarming. The value areas are identified based on the area priority order. The default priority
order is UMTS blind zones > Zones with weak UMTS and GSM > Zones with weak UMTS
and strong GSM. When you identify value areas, try to select sites near to each other.

BTS

BTS
NodeB

2 Solution Planning
MBTS

1 Antenna Solutions

BTS
BTS 4.2.1.1 Principles

SASU

In the Refarming scenario, the UMTS system is built on the basis of the existing GSM
system. In this case, the reuse of the existing antenna system can reduce the network
construction cost of operators; however, the impact of the co-antenna system on the
performance of the GSM and UMTS systems should be considered. The common antenna
solutions in the GU co-located scenario are as follows: GSM/UMTS separate antenna, GU
four-port co-antenna, and GU two-port co-antenna. In the scenario of SRAN deployment
based on the software designed radio (SDR) technology, generally, only the co-antenna
solution can be used because the GSM and UMTS signals are combined into one output. In
some special cases, however, the separate antenna solution can be adopted because the SRAN
can be configured in either GSM only mode or UMTS only mode. In the non-SRAN
deployment scenario, either the co-antenna or separate antenna solution can be adopted
according to actual network conditions and operator requirements.
1

GU separate antenna

Antenna Solutions

GU four-port co-antenna

GU two-port co-antenna

1 shows different antenna solutions with the macro BTSs as examples. These solutions also
apply to distributed base stations (DBSs) regardless of the product type. When the two-port
co-antenna solution is adopted, the combiner is required only if the non-SRAN is deployed. 1
shows both the SRAN and non-SRAN adopting the co-antenna solution (The co-frequency
combiner used by the non-SRAN is SASU.)
1 shows the comparison among different antenna solutions.

Comparison among different antenna solutions

Antenna
Solutions

Antenna Space

Cost

Performance

Implementation

O&M

GU separate
antenna

A lot of space
is required.

Additional
feeders,
antennas, and
poles are
required,
increasing the
network
construction
costs.

Azimuth angle,
electronic tilt,
and mechanical
downtilt can all
be modified
independently,
leaving little
impact on the
GSM and UMTS
network
performance.

It's difficult to
implement since
new antennas,
feeders, and
poles are
required.

The azimuths
and tilts of
GSM and
UMTS
networks can
be modified
independently.

The number of
antennas is
increased, which
easily attracts
attentions.

GU four-port
co-antenna

Additional
supports and
poles are not
needed, saving
space.

New four-port
antennas and
feeders are
required,
increasing cost.
However, this
solution saves
rent and
equipment cost
because
additional
supports and
poles are not
required.

The electronic
tilt can be
modified
independently.
However, the
GSM and UMTS
azimuth angle
must be
consistent.

Replace the twoport co-antenna


with the fourport one and add
new feeders. The
number of
antennas is
reduced.

The azimuths
of GSM and
UMTS
networks must
be consistent.

GU two-port
co-antenna

Additional
supports and
poles are not
needed, saving
space.

This solution
saves costs and
reduces workload
during
construction
because the
original antennas
and feeders can
be reused. This
solution also
saves rent and
equipment cost
because
additional
supports and
poles are not
required.

The GSM and


UMTS antenna
engineering
parameters must
be consistent,
impacting
network
performance.

You do not need


to add antennas,
feeders, or poles.
The number of
antennas is
reduced.

The azimuths
and tilts of
GSM and
UMTS
networks must
be consistent.

In summary, the main advantage of solution 1 is that engineering parameters of the GSM and
UMTS systems can be adjusted independently, and the performance of the GSM and UMTS
systems is not affected. The main disadvantage is that the cost of network construction is

increased. On the contrary, the main advantage of solution 3 is that the cost of network
construction is reduced. The main disadvantage is that engineering parameters of the GSM
and UMTS systems cannot be independently adjusted, and the network performance and
subsequent network optimization are affected. The advantage and disadvantage of solution 2
are somewhere in between of those of solution 1 and solution 3.
The co-antenna solution affects the performance of the GSM and UMTS systems to some
extent. Therefore, the impact on the performance is factored to determine whether co-antenna
solution is adopted. The following sections evaluate the impacts of co-antenna on the
performance in different scenarios based on the simulation of engineering parameters on the
live network.
4.2.1.2 Impact on Network Performance
The impact of co-antenna adoption on network performance is as follows:

For rural areas, the site distance is large and the traffic volume is small. After the
Refarming, the UMTS can use the antenna engineering parameters of the legacy GSM
network, causing little impact on UMTS network performance.

For urban areas, the site distance is small and the traffic volume is high. To reduce
interference, the downtilt is usually set to a large value. If the downtilt of the existing
GSM system is too large (such as 2 to 3), site distance is too small (less than 200 m),
azimuth angle is not standard (less than 90), and there are extra-high sites (higher than
45 m), coverage overlap will occur, causing serious interference which affects UMTS
network performance seriously.
To decide whether to adopt the co-antenna solution, check whether the downtilt, ISD,
azimuth angle, and site height of the legacy network are appropriate. Otherwise,
optimize the RF of the legacy network.
The impact of two-port co-antenna adoption on network performance is as follows:

For rural areas, the average throughput loss is smaller than 5% and the cell edge
throughput loss is smaller than 10%. The reason is that in rural areas, the traffic is small
and the site distance is large. In addition, if BTSs and NodeBs share all the sites, the
UMTS can use the engineering parameters of the legacy GSM network, causing little
impact on UMTS network performance.

For urban areas, the downtilt is set to a large value. The reason is that traffic load is
heavy and the site distance is small. If the engineering parameters are appropriate, the
average throughput loss is smaller than 5% and the cell edge throughput loss is smaller
than 10% when the BTSs and NodeBs share all the sites. Otherwise, optimize the RF of
the legacy network.

4.2.1.3 Antenna Application Policy in Urban Areas

Scenario of GSM Swap and UMTS Swap


The antenna solution used before Refarming is adopted. That is, if GU co-antenna solution is
used before the Refarming, the GU co-antenna solution is still used after the Refarming. The
engineering parameters are not changed. If GU independent antenna solution is used before
the Refarming the GU independent antenna solution is still used after the Refarming. The
engineering parameters keep consistent with that before the Refarming.

Scenario of GSM Swap and UMTS Establishment


Based on the consideration of the affect on performance, maintenance, and optimization, you
are advised to use the independent antenna solution.

The co-antenna solution in which the co-antenna solution serves as the major solution with
some independent antennas deployed is cost-effective. For the cells where co-antenna solution
is used, certain optimization methods can be implemented to further improve the
performance.
4.2.1.4 Antenna Solution Optimization
The co-antenna solution does not apply to the following scenarios:
Pole space limited scenario: One operator may own multiple network systems. These network
systems may share one pole in some cells, or the network systems of two operators share one
pole. In this case, there may not be sufficient space on the pole for the installation of the
UMTS antenna. At the site, however, the addition of another pole is not allowed. Therefore,
the UMTS network must share the antenna with the original GSM network. Similar to the
space limitation scenario, the four-port co-antenna solution is preferentially adopted. The
azimuth angle of the four-port antenna is set according to the azimuth angle of the existing
GSM network, the GSM down tilt angle is set according to the down tilt angle of the live
network, and the UMTS down tilt angel is set according to the network planning.
Tower top bearing limitation scenario: In the actual project construction, the bearing
capability of the space or tower top may be limited. In this case, the two-port co-antenna
solution must be adopted to reduce the bearing of the space and tower, and the security is
ensured.
High GSM site scenarios: During the earlier stage of GSM network construction, some high
sites are established to perform broad coverage due to the lack of sites. When frequency
planning is performed, a group of independent ARFCNs are used for these high sites to avoid
frequency interference because the coverage scale is large. For the UMTS which frequency
reuse pattern is 1, the high sites usually lead to interference. This greatly affects the network
performance. For example, if the average antenna height is 30 m, an antenna of 45 m is a high
site, cross coverage and pilot pollution may occur. In practice, the high sites can be
determined by U-Net simulation, average height of building, and antenna height. For high
sites, the antenna height must be lowered by adopting the independent antenna (if no negative
effect is brought when GSM antenna height is lowered, co-antenna can be implemented after
the antenna height is lowered), or disable the UMTS on the site.
The azimuth angle is smaller than 90: When the azimuth angle is smaller than 90, the
number of overlapped areas between cells increases. In the UMTS which frequency reuse is 1,
mover overlapped areas indicate more interference. For GSM cells, a looser frequency reuse
pattern is used. Adjacent cells use different frequencies; therefore, frequency planning can be
implemented to mitigate interference. In this way, the engineering parameters of GSM cells
which azimuth angle is smaller than 90 are not applicable to the UMTS on the live network.
For these cells, GMS/UMTS separate antenna can be configured to control the number of
overlapped areas of two cells. If the azimuth angle of a cell is too small due to capacity
reason, another cell can be disabled, and the coverage can be completed by using the U2100.
The distance between sites is small: If the distance between sites is small, different ARFCNs
are configured for adjacent GSM cells to mitigate interference. However, for UMTS cells,
small distance between sites may cause pilot pollution. The coverage of these cells must be
strictly controlled by configuring separate antenna, or by disabling some sites on the premise
that the coverage is not affected.
When co-antenna is used, the following methods can be adopted to further improve the
UMTS network performance.
1

UMTS power optimization


In a cell where interference is severe, the pilot power can be reduced to control the cell
coverage and alleviate the interference between cells. The antenna does not need to be

adjusted and this operation does not affect the GSM performance while increasing the
UMTS network performance.
2

Control of down tilt angle in cells


In a cell where the down tilt angle causes stronger interference to the network
performance, the down tilt angle of antenna can be adjusted to reduce the interference
between UMTS cells. The adjustment of antenna affects the coverage of GSM. The GSM
carrier power can be optimized to reduce or avoid the impact on GSM performance.
Another option is to configure four-port co-antenna. In this way, the down tilt angle can
be independently adjusted. The GSM performance is not affected and the UMTS
performance is ensured. However, antenna cost and module cost must be increased.

Azimuth angle adjustment


In a cell where the azimuth angle causes stronger interference to the network
performance, the azimuth angel of antenna can be adjusted by configuring UMTS
independent antenna. In this way, the interference between UMTS cells is reduced.
However, the antenna cost and module cost are increased because a pair of antennas and
modules must be added.

2 UMTS Inter-Carrier Mobility Solution


1

Idle Mode
Idle UEs support bidirectional cell reselection between UMTS and GSM and camp on
UMTS900 or UMTS2100 cells randomly. For areas co-covered by UMTS2100 and
UMTS900 cells, the Qqualmin/Qrxlevmin or Offset from U900 to U2100 parameter
can be configured to change the number of UEs in idle mode.

CS Connected Mode
In the UMTS900 central area, when a UE initiates a CS service in the UMTS2100
network and moves out of the UMTS2100 coverage, the UE will be handed over to the
UMTS900 or GSM network based on coverage. A UMTS900 cell cannot be configured
as the neighboring cell of a UMTS2100 cell or a GSM cell. In the UMTS900 area edge,
a UE can be handed over between the UMTS900 network and the UMTS2100 or
GSM900 network based on coverage.

PS Connected Mode
In the UMTS900 central area, when a UE initiates a PS service in the UMTS2100
network and moves out of the UMTS2100 coverage, the UE will be handed over to the
UMTS900 or GSM network based on coverage. A UMTS900 cell cannot be configured
as the neighboring cell of a UMTS2100 cell or a GSM cell. In the UMTS900 area edge,
a UE can be handed over between the UMTS900 network and the UMTS2100 or
GSM900 network based on coverage.
Different operators have different quantity of UMTS2100 carriers as well as different
UMTS2100 inter-carrier mobility solutions. The Refarming solution should not affect the
existing UMTS2100 inter-carrier mobility solution.

3 Power Configuration Analysis


By default, transmit power at the top of the cabinet in the UMTS900 network is 20 W. When
the transmit power at the top of the cabinet in a co-sited GSM900 network is larger than 20 W,
set the transmit power in the UMTS900 network to be the same as that in the GSM900
network.
After the Refarming, not only the carrier configuration but also the power configuration
should meet the RF module requirements. If the current power configuration cannot meet the

RF module requirements, the GSM or UMTS power configuration should be modified or new
RF modules should be added.
1 lists the typical carrier power configuration for the RRU3908 V2 module.
1

Typical carrier power configuration for the RRU3908 V2 module


Numbe
r of
GSM
Carrier
s

Numbe
r of
UMTS
Carrier
s

Output
Power per
GSM Carrier
(W)

Output
Sharing Power
per GSM
Carrier (W)

Output Power
per UMTS
Carrier (W)

40

40

40

40

20

20

20

20

13

15

13

15

10

13

10

13

40

40

40

20

20

40

13

15

40

10

13

40

Power specifications of various RF modules are different. For power specifications of a


specific RF module, check the RF module's specifications.

To check specifications of an RF module, download the document by clicking


http://3ms.huawei.com/mm/docMaintain/mmMaintain.do?
method=showMMDetail&f_id=GSM201201310032.

4 Parameter Configuration
Parameters for UMTS900 and UMTS2100 cells should be configured consistently except for
interoperation-related and UMTS inter-carrier-mobility-related parameters.

3 Network Implementation
1 Policy for Deploying the UMTS900
The preceding analysis shows that the inter-system interference is the minimum when
GSM900 BTSs and UMTS900 BTSs are deployed in 1:1 mode. In addition, the more sites
sharing the antenna, the less impact on the performance. Therefore, it is recommended that
you guide customers to deploy GSM900 BTSs and UMTS900 BTSs in 1:1 mode. You can
guide customers in the following aspects.
Although the voice services served by the UMTS900 network are better than those served by
the GSM900 network, the same number of GSM900 BTSs are required to ensure the data
services at an appropriate rate.
A single module of Huawei SRAN BTS can provide both the GSM900 and UMTS900
networks. In addition, the GSM900 and UMTS900 networks can share the antenna system,
reducing the site deployment cost. In the segmental networking scenario where GSM900 sites
and UMTS900 sites are not deployed in 1:1 mode, the GSM900 and UMTS900 networks
cannot share the antenna system if the UMTS900 network requires continuous coverage. In
this case, two modules are required, doubling the site deployment cost.

Huawei SRAN3.0 consists of mRRU and mRFU. mRFU provides a higher maximum transmit power
through only one RF channel. If the GSM900 and UMTS900 networks use one module for networking
and share the antenna, the GSM900 and UMTS900 TRXs share the same PA, causing legal risks. mRRU
provides a maximum transmit power lower than that provided by mRFU through two RF channels. If the
GSM900 and UMTS900 networks use one module for networking and share the antenna, GSM900
TRXs and UMTS900 TRXs use two different PAs respectively, avoiding legal risks. In summary, mRFU
and mRRU have their own advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, you should choose the appropriate
module with the local rules and strategies of operators taken into account in the application of
Refarming solutions.

2 UMTS900 Hardware Installation


Before activating the UMTS900, you need to connect the physical cables of the network
properly and check whether the ports on WBBPs are sufficient. For details about the tools
used for connecting cables, visit http://3ms.huawei.com/mm/docMaintain/mmMaintain.do?
method=showMMDetail&f_id=GSM201103210059.
Some operators want to visit the site just once for hardware installation and cell
commissioning to reduce costs, such as the Australia OPTUS project. Since the GSM900 has
not released its frequencies, activating the UMST900 will cause a frequency conflict. As a
result, an alarm is reported on the base station. If operators want to activate the UMTS900 for
an intermodulation test, they can use the frequency of other operators' for the test. They need
to deactivate the UMTS900 immediately after the test and then change the UMTS frequencies
to activate the UMTS900 cells after the GSM900 frequency release.

3 Activating the UMTS900


1

Set up UMTS900 cells and set the correct pilot and maximum transmit power based on
the UMTS900 power planning.

Set the parameters related to camping, cell reselection, inter-frequency and inter-system
handovers, and load control for the UMTS900 based on the traffic bearer scheme.

On the NodeB LMT, run the SET FREQBWH command to set the minimum effective
bandwidth for the UMTS900.

Set UMTS900, UMTS2100, and GSM900 cells as neighboring cells for one another.

Activate UMTS900 cells.

4 Setting the UMTS Filter


Currently, the CME has not achieved in implementing frequency-based adjustment of the
UMTS filter settings. The default bandwidth of the UMTS filter is 5 MHz. When the
UMTS900 site is initiated, the settings of the UMTS filter should be optimized according to
the frequency configuration of the GSM900; otherwise, carrier alarms are generated or
network performance is degraded.
UMTS filter parameters are cell level ones. You can set these parameters by running the SET
FREQBWH command on the NodeB LMT. If the parameters are not set, the default UMTS
5.0 MHz filter is used. After setting the parameters, you can query the current UMTS filter
setting by running the LST FREQBWH command. 1 describes the UMTS filter settings for
different bandwidths.
1

Non-standard UMTS filter settings


Scenario

Principle for Setting UMTS


Filters

UMTS
networking
using 4.6 MHz

The minimum central


frequency point separation
between UMTS and GSM
is 2.4 MHz.

All UMTS filters are set to 4.4 MHz.

UMTS
networking
using 4.2 MHz

The minimum central


frequency point separation
between UMTS and GSM
is 2.2 MHz.

All UMTS filters are set to 4.2 MHz.

UMTS
networking
using 3.8 MHz

The minimum central


frequency point separation
between UMTS and GSM
is 2.0 MHz.

All UMTS filters are set to 3.8 MHz.

4 Network Optimization and Acceptance


1 UMTS Network Optimization
RTWP Optimization
According to project experience, the major performance problem after the UMTS900
activation lies in the RTWP. Therefore, the RTWP of each UMTS900 cell must be monitored.
If the RTWP is greater than -104 dBm, measures must be taken to handle the problem. For
details about the handling operations, see reference [13].
A high RTWP may be caused by any of the following:

Physical cable connections

If the problem is caused by hardware connections, engineers must check the physical
cable connections onsite.

Antenna intermodulation
If the problem is caused by the antenna intermodulation, an intermodulation interference
test must be conducted during off-peak hours. First start TRX idle timeslot test on GSM
to observe the RTWP of the UMTS900, and then start the test on UMTS900 to observe
the RTWP of the UMTS900. In indoor distribution scenarios, if antennas are co-sited
with GSM micro base stations, you can initiate services to several users, and raise the
download transmit power to observe whether the RTWP of UMTS900 cells is increasing.
If the RTWP increase is noticeable during the TRX idle timeslot tests on GSM and
UMTS900, for example, 3 dB, there is intermodulation interference, and engineering
personnel are required to handle the problem.

Improper antenna tilt


If the GU common antenna is used, after the UMTS900 is activated, the UMTS network
uses the antenna tilt used by the GSM network. In the UTMS900, if the KPIs are poor or
the RTWP is high, you need to conduct a drive test, check for the cross-cell coverage,
and optimize the antenna tilt.

External signal interference


If the problem seems to be caused by external signal interference, identify the source of
the external interference onsite.

Improper bufferzone planning


Check the bufferzone based on the planning to determine whether the bufferzone is too
small and consequently affecting the UMTS900 KPIs.

Interoperation Parameter Optimization


Check whether ping-pong handovers occur between GSM and UMTS networks by checking
whether the following condition is met:
Qqualmin + SsearchRat < FDDQMIN
If the penetration rate of UMTS900 terminals is high, the UMTS900 network absorbs large
traffic, causing heavy load. You need to change inter-frequency handover parameters between
the UMTS900 and UMTS2100 to balance the load between UMTS carriers.

Other UMTS KPI Optimization


Check other UMTS KPIs by following the UMTS KPI optimization action or using the
NPMaster. For details, visit
http://support.huawei.com/support/pages/editionctrl/catalog/ShowVersionDetail.do?
actionFlag=clickNode&p_line=&node=000001410349&colID=ROOTENWEB|
CO0000000174&

2 UMTS Network Acceptance


After the UMTS900 is activated, it is recommended that you accept the UMTS900 by
comparing the UMTS900 KPIs withUMTS900+UMTS2100 KPIs after the Refarming, not the
KPIs of the UMTS900+UMTS2100(before the Refarming).

Refarming Scenarios

The GU900 Refarming has been implemented at many sites. 1 lists the cases of Refarming on
live networks.
1

Cases of Refarming scenarios

No.

Telecom
Operato
r

Scenari
o

UMTS
Bandwidt
h

Traffic
Migration
Direction

GSM
Frequency
Reuse
After the
Refarming

New Feature

France SFR

Suburban
areas

4.2 MHz

GSM1800/UM
TS

Baseband
frequency
hopping

Hungary
Vodafone

Suburban
areas

4.2 MHz

Baseband
frequency
hopping

Thailand
AIS

Entire
network

5 MHz

Baseband
frequency
hopping

UMTS evolving
from one carrier to
two carriers

Egypt
Vodafone

Urban
areas

4.2 MHz

GSM900 tight
frequency
reuse

1x3 RF hopping

UISS+IBCA+VAM
OS

Hongkong
Hutchison

Urban
areas

4.6 MHz

GSM1800/UM
TS2100

Baseband
frequency
hopping

China
Unicom in
Guangzhou

Subways

3.8 MHz

Baseband
frequency
hopping

Poland P4

Urban
areas

3.8 MHz

RFU multi-site
cell networking

RFU multi-site cell

Reference Documents
[1] CommunicaAsia 2009 Summit: Spectrum for Mobile Broadband Low Frequency
Options, GSA.
[2] HSDPA capacity gain in the 900 MHz band, Nadia Khaji, Salah Eddine Elayoubi and
Frdric Marache, Orange Labs.
[3] UMTS900_GSM900 Networking Technical Proposal V1.2, an internal Huawei
document, Zhou Honggang, 2008.6
[4] Simulation Analysis for India IDEA, an internal Huawei document, Yang Liping, Zheng
Xiang, 2009.7
[5] RNPS SRAN3.0 Technical Clarification on Feasibility of Antenna Sharing by GSM and
UMTS V1.0, an internal Huawei document, Deng Shoufeng, Ji Yongjun, He Xiaomei,
Zhuang Yanli, Huang Shengli, Zheng Xiang, Yang Liping, 2009.09
[6] Co-Antenna Network Solution for GSM and UMTS Systems, an internal Huawei
document, Ji Yongjun, 2009.11
[7] 3GPP TS 25.816 V7.0.0, UMTS 900 MHz Work Item Technical Report
[8] 3GPP TS 45.005 V8.5.0 (2009-05) Radio transmission and reception (Release 8)
[9] 3GPP TS 25.104 V9.0.0 (2009-05) Base Station (BS) radio transmission and reception
(FDD) (Release 9)
[10] GU frequency Separation Analysis V1.8, an internal Huawei document, Lu Peng, Yang
Liping, Xiong Bin, 2009.4
[11] Analysis on GU Central Frequency Separation, an internal Huawei document, Yang
Liping, Xiong Bin, 2009.07
[12] "Impact on system performance from IM relaxation for MCPA application", GP-080231,
TSG GERAN #37, Erission.
[13] SRAN3.0 Impact of GU Coexistence on Performance, an internal Huawei document,
Yang Liping, 2009.10
[14] Impact of UMTS Flexible Bandwidth on Performance, an internal Huawei document
[15] Performance Improvement Plan and Solution for Refarming V1.0, an internal Huawei
document, Xiong Bin, 2009.08
[16] Analysis on Isolation Distance between UMTS and Co-Band Heterosystem V1.1, an
internal Huawei document, Guo Kuanxin, 2009.08
[17] GSM Frequency Planning Solution for Refarming V0.5, an internal Huawei document,
Li Guowei, 2009.07

Issue 3.0 (2012-09-28)

Huawei Proprietary and Confidential


Copyright Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.

48

[18] SRAN Refarming GSM-UMTS Buffer Zone Solution, an internal Huawei document,
Deng Shoufeng, 2010.4
[19] Risk Analysis in France SFR, an internal Huawei document, Xiong Bin, 2009.12
[20] GTS NTS Dept.Joint Sta.No. [2010] 011-Specifications of KPI Commitment in GSM
Refarming Service

Issue 3.0 (2012-09-28)

Huawei Proprietary and Confidential


Copyright Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.

49