OUTDOOR MICROCELL
MEASUREMENTS AT 1700 MHZ
Henrik Borjeson Christian Bergljung Lars G. Olsson
Department of Applied Electronics at Lund University
Box 118 S-221 00 Lund Sweden
1 Abstract
The microcellular environment in the outdoor case a t
1700 MHz has been studied in different downtown ar-
eas. One set of narrow-band measurements has been
performed in an area with high buildings and streets
forming a rectilinear grid pattern. An other measure-
ment session has been made in a city center with a
more irregular surrounding and street pattern.
The measurements have been performed by placing
transmitters at different fixed locations and measuring
received power together with traveled distance from a
receiver mounted on a trolley. The sample rate was
varied between 1 and 20 samples per wavelength.
It is previously known that path loss in this type of
areas follows a dual slope with a breakpoint between
the slopes. This paper concentrates on determining
how different physical parameters affect the magnitude
of the slopes and the location of the breakpoint, both
for loss in line-of-sight (LOS) and in non-line-of-sight
(NLOS). A model for NLOS propagation using piece-
wise exponential functions is also presented. Multi-
parameter regression with the squared error between
calculated and measured loss as minimizing function is
performed t o give the optimum fit between measured
data and model parameters.
2 Introduction
These measurements have been made as input for path
loss models for outdoor microcellular systems in ur-
ban areas. As the cells shrink the problems with C/I
and when to make hand over becomes more appar-
ent. If it is possible to determine and use the loss
caused by buildings and other fixed shadowing objects,
it may also be possible to further decrease the repeti-
tion distance between cells using same channels. The
loss rate when turning around a corner determines the
time available to make hand-over as the loss is often so
927
0-7803-0673-2192$3.00 1992 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Purdue University. Downloaded on June 07,2010 at 04:45:00 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
large that it becomes impossible to keep contact with
the old base station.
Most work in this report is concentrated on describ-
ing the NLOS path loss, especially the part where one
just loses the direct ray from the transmitter, as this is
a part where a special set of models is most needed.
3 Scenario
The measurements have been made in two urban areas,
one in Stockholm (pop. 1 mill) and the other at Lund
(pop. 80 000). Transmitters with omnidirectional X / 4
antennas were placed at different sites in the measure-
ment area and received power was recorded by moving
a 1700 MHz receiver while sampling its AGC and S-
meter voltages from 1 to 20 samples per wavelength
(5-113 samples/meter). In Stockholm the receiver was
mounted in a van with the receiving antenna 2.1 m
above ground, at Lund a trolley was used with the an-
tenna mounted in a mast also at 2.lm. The distance in-
formation came from a odometer mounted on a wheel.
The city environments differ in that Stockholm has
much longer and wider streets and more right-angular
street crossings. The buildings along the streets are
also higher but this should not be of any significance
as the antennas are well below roof level in both cases.
From the AGC and S-meter values the received
power has been calculated on a workstation using a cal-
ibration curve. This gives a dynamic range from -14
to -112 dBm without needing to switch attenuators
ahead of the receiver.
4 Modelling t h e path loss
It was noticed very early during the measurements that
as the path loss changes radically according to if the
receiver is in LOS of the transmitter or NLOS. Calcu-
lation of the path loss as being only distance dependent
would be insufficient in this case, since the surround-
ing buildings contribute significantly to the loss. A dual
slope path loss model for 1700 MBr has b a n proposed
in [l]. In this model the LOS loss is described as in
equation 1 which is the same as free space loss at 1700
MHz if M = 37 dB and n = 2, z is the distance between
transmitter and receiver. These parameters have also
been used in [l] for the first part of the LOS loss.
Loss(2) = M - 2"
However, measurements show that in some cases the
loss does not follow a single slope but has an increased
loss factor after a certain distance. To be able to model
this, an additional losa term is added after a break-
point. Ignoring the constant factor M,the loss is now
as in equation 2 before and as equation 3 after the
breakpoint X L
LOSSLl(2) = znl
Parameters for the different models have also been
calculated using measured data as input. The param-
eters were derived by using the Nelder-Mead Simplex
method [2] with the square error between measured
and d e a l a t e d d s t r aa the function to minimize. Some
restrictions were made on the parameters to assure con-
vergence, for example no negative values were allowed.
(1) 5 Line-of-sight results
The parameters for the LOS breakpoint model, table
1, are based on the Stockholm measurements since this
is where data from distances larger than 100 m exist.
The results show that the loss is slightly larger than
free space (n=2) and that the breakpoint is unlikely to
occur at distancea shorter than 150 m. There is also a
small positive correlation between 712 and c~ i. e. the
(2) further away the breakpoint is, the larger the value of

LOSSL2(Z) = znl . (5) n2-n1 (3)

n2.

M/dB tal n2 zL/m'

Average 36.3 2.24 5.58 254.8
To get a smooth transit from equation 2 to equation 3, Variance 3.38 0.24 0.53 72.5
these two equations are combined into equation 4
Table 1 Parameters for the dual slope LOS model eztracted
LOSSL(2) = [LOSSLl(Z)P + LOSSL2(2)P]+ (4) from measured data.

The factor p is a form factor determining the sharpness

of the knee in the breakpoint where the two dopes meet
and is not really critical. In this report a value of 4 is 6 Non-line-of-sight results
chosen for p. Note that at the breakpoint where 2 = Z L
equations 2 and 3 reach the same value. The results show that the loss does not occur imme-
The additional loss that occurs when leaving LOS diately after the corner but further down the street as
can be modelled as in equation 5 assumed in the NLOS model. It has been proposed that
this behaviour could be modelled solely by equation 6
'LOSSN(Y) = [U(Yl) - U(Y2)l f ( Y 2 ) multiplyed by a proper constant [3].
.(lodar) - lO!I(Yl)) +

log(&) - lOg(Y1)
0
-5
where U(.) is the step function and -10
-15
f(Y) = 10 * log (E + 1)" [dB] -20
-25
y I z,the travelled direction in LOS. -30
The model is based on the observation that there is
a short distance ( 9 1 ) after the corner where the signal
-35
level still is of the same magnitude as in LOS, further -40 1
down the street there is a rapid increase in the loss
until the signal finally (&)converge to an n:th order
power law, equation 6, where m is the point where the
asymptote of f(z) = 0 dB. Figure 1 Measured data together with loss equations

928

Authorized licensed use limited to: Purdue University. Downloaded on June 07,2010 at 04:45:00 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 As shown in figure 1this will yield an additional error 7.1 Distance from wall
close to y1, on the other hand fewer parameters are
Fitting data to equation 7 gives the result in table 3.
needed. Using only equation 6 will give a small increase
to the squared error between data and calculated levels
as most of the data points are from distances larger
Level(z) = C + 10 . n . log(z) [dB] (7)
than yz meters; the same is valid for the 4-parameter
NLOS models in [l]. The fact that the levels from all Tx Distance from n C
the three tracks in figure 2 converge implies that there wall /m
must be some kind of common contributor t o the signal
level, regardless of track. This contributor may be the
wave diffracted a t corner Q3 [4], the diffraction term
from corner Q1 is, as proposed in [3], too small to be
of any influence.
3 1 0.5 -1.65

-1.78
-19.9

-17.54
1
Table 3 Variation of parameters with distance between
N, Tx Tz-QI/m n zo/m zllm xzlm receiver and wall W1.
1 1 62 1.69 0.80 1.02 1.06
1 2 62 2.02 0.67 0.70 1.16 In LOS the distance to the closest reflecting wall
2 I 1 I 62 1.8 0.96 1.20 I 2.71 seems to show low correlation with the regression pa-
I I I
I 21 21 62 I 2.15 I 0.97 I 0.97 I 1.03 I rameters according to these measurements.
3 1 62 2.11 1.81 1.83 10.6 In NLOS it becomes more important with the dis-
3 2 62 1.94 0.75 0.93 7.0 tance to the wall closest to the transmitter, wall W1
6 1 120 1.56 0.50 0.50 0.51 in figure 2, as this will determine how far down in the
6 2 120 2.3 1.73 1.74 1.78 crossing street reflexes from the LOS street walls will
8 1 150 2.02 3.42 3.44 74 reach. When turning around the corner close to the
8 2 150 1.8 3.33 3.57 58.8

Tx 2 0
~4 I
1

A diffraction from this point should give a loss fac-

tor, n , close to free space (n=2) far down the street,
which corresponds well with the results in table 2. If
one assumes that the level in the part close to the cor-
ners is mainly determined by waves reflected in the
walls along the LOS street, then it may also be pos-
sible to calculate the values of yoa,yland y~ from the
physical dimensions of the measurement area. From
this together with a diffraction term from corner Q3 a
complete NLOS model can be made.
7 Influence from physical pa-
rameters
Contrary to the macro-cellular environment where an-
tennas are placed above roof level, the orientation of
the surrounding buildings becomes most critical in mi-
crocells [5], as the buildings will shadow, reflect and
diffract the waves from the transmitter. To make an
accurate path loss model for this type of areas it is nec-
essary to differ between when there exists a LOS path
and when not, the errors may otherwise be of a magni-
tude in excess of 30 dB. Different antenna placings and
heights may also influence the path loss.
Txln- . -
Q1
w1
t
1 2,6 3
Figure 2 Measurement area in Lund for determining loss
around corner
wall the loss rate will increase as soon as the LOS path
is lost while further away from the wall the additional
loss will be delayed for some distance. Far down the
NLOS street the differences seem to even out as the loss
now is mainly determined by corner diffraction rather
than reflexes. The most distant wall, W 2 , does not
seem to contribute much to the loss in NLOS, even
though reflexes should occur from this wall as well. The
difference is that the angle of incidence towards W2 is

929

Authorized licensed use limited to: Purdue University. Downloaded on June 07,2010 at 04:45:00 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
very small and the result will be a diffuse wave that are very small and irregular, the only parameter that
may contribute to the fading but not to the mean path changes proportionally with the height is the break-
loss. The received power in three different NLOS paths, point z ~ The. parameters are calculated from data
1, 2,and 3 in 2 were measured with one transmitter on with distance between antenna and receiver larger than
each side of the LOS street. The results from transmit- 30 m. At shorter distances between transmitter and
ter 1 are shown in figure 3. There is an increase both of receiver the elevation of the main lobe of the antenna
y1, the point where the power starts to decrease, and becomes significant and here the antennas height to-
y2, where the curve converge towards the level in track gether with its vertical radiation pattern will determine
I. the path loss. This can however be used to reduce the
relative level/dB required dynamics of the radio equipment as omnidi-
rectional antennas, as the ones used in these measure
I I I
ments, often have a lower gain below the ground plane;
0 in this particular case about -20 dBi.
-5
7.3 Distance between corner &I and
-10
transmitter in NLOS
-15 An increasing distance between corner and transmit-
-20 ter should have a similar effect on the NLOS loss as
decreasing the distance to W1 in figure 2. Two mea-
-25 surements, number 2 and 6 in table 2 can be directly
-30 compared as they are measured in the same track but
with antennas a t different distance from the corner.
I I Here it can be noted that ~ 0 , y land do not only con-
0.1 1 10 verge when the antenna distance is increased but may
distancelm also decrease, as when transmitter 1 was used. This
Figure 3 Measured power in track 1,2 and 3 relative to
supports the theory that the reflections are determin-
the power between corners &I to 9 2 ing the level close to the corner and some other term
is determining the level further down the street.

Track Track - &I /m n zo/m zl/m z2/m

1 1.0 1.69 0.80 1.02 1.06 ~
8 Conclusions
2 4.5 1.80 0.96 1.68 3.01
3 8.8 2.11 1.81 1.83~ 10.6 Microcellular measurements have been performed in

Table 4 Parameters for the NLOS model eztracted from and NLOS. The measurements have shown that LOS
measurements in three trucks. path loss can be described as approximately free-space
loss and is fairly insensitive to placing in the street as
well as antenna height of the transmitter. For NLOS
7.2 Antenna height loss the placing in the street, the distances between
transmitter and corner as well as between corner and
The parameters in table 5 are derived for the LOS receiver are of great importance. A promising model
model, equations 2 to 4. for NLOS path loss has been proposed that takes these
I Antenna I nl I nz I 21, I parameters into consideration. It is based on measured
height/m m results that show that the additional loas does not occur
3.0 2.5 5.4 223 immediately as LOS is lost but some distance further
4.0 2.3 5.1 194 down the street. This distance is determined by sur-
I 1
I

I
5.0 I 2.4 1 5.4
I
I 191 I
ro'unding obstacles and transmitter placing and should
therefore be possible to calculate. After this there is
Table 5 Variation of parameter values for the dual slope an immediate loss that gradually converges towards an
LOS model with antenna height. exponential loss with an exponent close to two and a
reference point close to the point were the direct path
The LOS measurements were done in the same street was lost.
with the antennas at different height. The differences

930

,
Authorized licensed use limited to: Purdue University. Downloaded on June 07,2010 at 04:45:00 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Acknowledgements References
The authors would like t o thank Professor Sven-Olof [l] Jan-Erik Berg.
Ohrvik a t our department for initiating this work, Mr Path loss and fading in microcells.
Per-Owe Klingvall and Mrs Katarina Borjeson for as- In TD(90) 065. COST, October 1990.
sistance during the measurement campaigns, Ericsson [2] J . A. Nelder and R. Mead.
Radio Systems for giving us radio equipment and Mr A simplex method for function minimization.
Jan-Erik Berg whose ideas and suggestions have been Computer Journal, (7):308-313, 1965.
most valuable. [3] Y. Nagata, Y. Furuya, E. Moriyama, M Mizuno,
This work was supported by the National Swedish I. Kamiya, and S. Hattori.
Board for Technical Development under contract no Microcellular propagation measurements in an ur-
88-01-357P. ban environment.
In International symposium Personal, Indoor and
Mobile Radio Communication, pages 341-346,
Kings College London, UK, September 1991.
IEEE.
[4] C. Bergljung and L. G. Olsson.
Rigorous diffraction theory applied to street micro-
cell propagation.
In Proc. IEEE Global Telecommunication Confer-
ence, 1991.
[5] J . H . Whitteker.
Measurement of pathloss at 910 mhz for proposed
microcell urban mobile systems.
IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, pages
125-129, August 1988.

931

Authorized licensed use limited to: Purdue University. Downloaded on June 07,2010 at 04:45:00 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.