This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been
fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/LCOMM.2019.2939470, IEEE
Communications Letters
Greenfield Design in 5G FWA Networks
Omar Kaddoura, José Outes-Carnero, Juan A. Garcı́a-Fernández, Rocio Acedo-Hernández, Maria Cerón-Larrubia,
Lorena Rı́os, Juan J. Sánchez-Sánchez, Raquel Barco
Abstract—With the arrival of 5G, Fixed Wireless Access,
which aims at providing households with broadband internet
access using mobile technology, has become a relevant use case.
Current greenfield design techniques are not optimal since they
target at optimizing the radiofrequency configuration for the
whole household, sometimes at the expense of other households.
However, optimizing only the spot where to install the antenna
of the customer premises equipment is enough for Fixed Wire-
less Access networks. This letter presents an enhancement of
automatic greenfield design methodology so that, apart from
finding the location where to deploy network base stations and
the optimal configuration of network parameters, the optimal
location where to deploy customer premises equipment is also
determined. A greenfield design exercise has been carried out in a
real scenario proving that the proposed method both improves the
final network performance and reduces the required deployment
economic costs compared with state-of-the-art methodology.
Index Terms—Greenfield design, FWA, ACP, radio network
planning, radio network optimization
I. I NTRODUCTION
VER the years, internet service providers have made
O efforts to bring broadband services to homes and in-
crease service data rates. Nowadays, with regards to the
last mile of connectivity between the network architecture
and homes, the technologies that enable broadband internet
access can be classified into two main groups: fixed and
wireless. In this context, fixed technologies use cables and
wireless technologies use air interface. Among these, fixed
technologies have predominated over wireless technologies to
bring broadband internet access to homes since they achieve
higher service data rates.
Especially, the growing demand for multimedia services has
been satisfied with the arrival of optical fiber, which has been
introduced into homes thanks to technologies like Fiber To The
Home (FTTH) [1]. However, bringing optical fiber to homes
is expensive due to the cost associated with infrastructure
deployment. Because of this, wireless technologies, which
eliminate the need of cabling, are considered as the best
alternative to fixed technologies. Fixed Wireless Access (FWA)
is one of the architectures designed to bring broadband internet
access to homes [2]. FWA consists in replacing the last mile
of cables by air interface so that a single network transceiver
provides broadband service to multiple homes provided with
specific Customer Premises Equipment (CPE).
Until the present, FWA has been discarded as an alternative
to fixed technologies since wireless technologies were not able
to reach data rates provided by optical fiber. Nevertheless, with
the advent of 5G and the standardization of New Radio (NR),
data rates that wireless technologies may reach can compete
with those provided by fixed technologies. This is mainly due
to two factors: better spectral efficiency achieved thanks to the
1089-7798 (c) 2019 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
1
appearance of smart antennas and the increase of the available
bandwidth thanks to the use of millimeter waves [3].
Particularly, the deployment of FWA networks is relevant
in suburban and rural areas, where the distances between
homes are larger than in urban areas, so that the amount of
cable required to provide homes with broadband services is
higher. In addition, suburban and rural areas are favorable to
millimeter waves, since these require the absence of obstacles
between transmitter and receiver [4]. The utilization of milli-
meter waves also requires that FWA CPEs have their antennas
mounted on the rooftops of the households and connected to
indoor 5G Wi-Fi routers.
In order to minimize the costs required to deploy the infra-
structure of a network, a proper planning exercise is needed.
This planning consists in selecting the locations where to
install the network elements and designing their corresponding
configuration to maximize the final network performance.
A planning exercise with no legacy networks is known as
greenfield design. Greenfield design activities aim at finding
the best network configuration to satisfy the demand of users
while minimizing the cost of the network deployment. Green-
field design is composed of two main and independent stages:
radio network planning (i.e., selecting the proper locations
where to install the base stations) and radio network optimiza-
tion (i.e., selecting appropriate values for network parameters
like power allocation, height of antennas, azimuth of antennas,
tilt of antennas, mobility thresholds, ...).
This letter proposes the enhancement of existing greenfield
design methods so that they can also be applied to FWA
networks. In addition, in this letter, the optimality of the results
of state-of-the-art methods is improved by adding an iterative
algorithm which combines both radio network planning and
radio network optimization stages. Moreover, the proposed
method suits operators’ demands to efficiently perform green-
field design activities thanks to employing greedy algorithm.
This letter is organized as follows. Section II reviews state-
of-the-art greenfield design techniques for mobile commu-
nication networks and highlights the problem of using these
to design FWA networks. In Section III, a greenfield design
method customized for FWA networks is described. Finally,
Section IV addresses the goodness of the proposed method for
greenfield design of NR FWA networks when applied to a real
suburban environment.
II. R ELATED WORK AND PROBLEM FORMULATION
FWA greenfield design methodology aims at finding the best
combination of deployed base stations, CPEs antennas location
and network parameter configuration. Therefore, finding the
best network configuration is translated into a combinatorial
optimization problem.
Among the total number of candidate locations L where to
deploy base stations, any subset of l base stations corresponds
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/LCOMM.2019.2939470, IEEE
to a possible network configuration. Therefore, the size of
the search space of all possible base stations configurations
is represented as follows:
L  
X L
(1)
l for FWA networks must find not only the optimum location
l=0
Regarding the configuration of parameters, being P the total
number of parameters to be configured and Npl the number of
possible values that parameter p in base station l may have, the
size of the search space of parameter configuration is described
as follows:
P
Y optimum network configuration.
Npl
p=1
In conventional networks, (1) and (2) can be combined
to calculate the size of the search space. However, in FWA
networks, the combinatorial problem is increased since the
possible location of CPEs antennas must be taken into con-
sideration. Thus, being Nk the number of demand nodes in
household k and being K the total number of households, the
size of the search space of possible locations where install
network CPEs antennas is represented as follows:
K
Y method finds proper locations where to install network trans-
Nk
k=1
Therefore, the size of the search space of FWA greenfield
design is as follows:
 !l  K
L   Y P
X L Y with the parameter values assigned to each cell), automatic
 Npl  Nk (4)
l radio network planning and network optimization methods
l=0 p=1 k=1
Since the evaluation of the full search space in mobile
communication networks is not feasible, initially, greenfield
design was carried out by skilled engineers in the field of
Radio-frequency (RF), who evaluated the impact of different
network configurations over the final network performance.
However, the great success of mobile technologies boosted
the growth of these networks so that manual design became
unfeasible. Therefore, to overcome the previous, computer
assisted methods known as Automatic Cell Planning (ACP)
[5] arose and played a crucial role.
Regarding the automation of radio network planning, in [6],
three primitive alternatives were presented to find optimum
base station locations. However, over time, new technologies
were standardized and radio network planning was modified
to consider interference [7], throughput [8] or cell loading [9].
With respect to radio network optimization, metaheuristic
algorithms as well as artificial neural networks were proposed
to find the best configuration of network parameters [10].
According to the state of the art, greenfield design methods
are based on discrete population models for the traffic descrip-
tion [11]. In these models, the locations where users can be
found are discretized into bins known as demand nodes. This
discretization allows evaluating the performance of a given
network configuration as the aggregation of the performance
in all the demand nodes into which the network is divided.
1089-7798 (c) 2019 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Communications Letters
2
Nevertheless, as analyzed by authors in [12], this model is
not valid in FWA networks, since the location of the CPE
antenna is unknown in advance. This is, the traffic demanded
by a given household cannot be assigned to a specific demand
node. In fact, since automatic greenfield design techniques
and configuration of network equipment but also the best
spot where to install the CPE antenna, a new methodology
is required. Moreover, radio network planning and radio net-
work optimization are executed as two independent phases
of current greenfield design techniques. However, they could
be combined so they cooperate with each other to find the
(2) Therefore, the next section presents a modification of ACP
methods so that the location of CPEs antennas is also op-
timized. In addition, next section also presents an iterative
algorithm which combines both radio network planning and
radio network optimization to enhance state-of-the-art green-
field design techniques for FWA networks.
III. P ROPOSED METHOD
The automatic method herein described allows performing
greenfield design activities in FWA networks. The proposed
(3) ceivers (base stations and CPEs antennas) as well as it optim-
izes the configuration of network parameters.
A. FWA cost function
Being S a network state (i.e., a list of active cells together
aim at finding the optimal network state Sbest . This is, the
minimum number of base stations and the optimal config-
uration of network parameters which maximize the network
performance. For this, these methods define cost functions to
describe a figure of merit of the network performance. Thus,
the classical optimization problem is reduced to finding Sbest
which minimizes the cost function Φ (S) [5], [13]:
Sbest = argmin (Φ (S)) (5)
S
N
X M
X
Φ (S) = αi ωj δij (S) (6)
i=1 j=1
(
0, if objective for performance indicator is met
δ (S) = (7)
1, otherwise
where N is the number of demand nodes in the network and
M is the number of performance indicators (i.e., coverage,
capacity, quality, ...). The traffic demanded in demand node i
is represented as αi . The relevance of performance indicator
j is indicated by weight ωj . δij (S) is the value of function
δ (S) for performance indicator j at demand node i.
Unlike classical greenfield design, finding the optimum CPE
antenna location is part of greenfield design in FWA networks.
Therefore, final locations of households’ demand nodes are
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/LCOMM.2019.2939470, IEEE
Communications Letters
3

unknown in advance. To overcome this, a new automatic Algorithm 1: Automatic FWA greenfield design
algorithm needs to described so that the cost function is Input : Households demand nodes location
influenced only by the best CPE antenna location found in Candidate CPE antenna locations
every household. This letter proposes a modification of the Weights and objectives
cost function used to evaluate the network performance. Thus, Output: Best network configuration Sbest
1 C ← ΦFWA (Sinitial ) // Initial cost
for FWA networks, the cost function in (6) is transformed into 2 S ← Sinitial // Initial network state
the next: 3 repeat
4 done ← true
L
X /* Radio network planning */
αk · min Tk (S)


ΦFWA (S) = (8) 5 A←∞
k=1 6 foreach candidate base station do
where 7 Sbs
cand := S adding
candidate base station
8 B ← ΦFWA Sbs cand
Tk (S) = R1k (S) , R2k (S) , ..., RN
k
 
k
(S) (9) 9 if B < A then
10 A←B
and Sbs bs
11 best ← Scand
M
X 12 end
Rik (S) = ωj δij (S) (10) 13 end
j=1 14 S ← Sbs best
/* Radio network optimization */
where L is the number of households in the network, Nk is
15 A←∞
the number of candidate demand nodes in household k and M 16 foreach candidate value of every parameter do
is the number of performance indicators. The traffic demanded 17 Spcand := S including candidate value
by household k is represented as αk . Vector Tk (S) represents 18 B ← ΦFWA (Spcand )
the collection of costs associated with each candidate demand 19 if B < A then
20 A←B
node in household k, and Rik (S) represents the cost of
21 Spbest ← Spcand
candidate demand node i in household k. 22 end
Contrary to other state-of-the-art cost functions Φ (S), FWA 23 end
cost function ΦFWA (S) relies on a vector Tk (S) which rep- 24 S ← Spbest
resents all the candidate demand nodes of a household (i.e., 25 D ← ΦFWA (S)
the candidate CPE antenna locations). Hence, from all these 26 if D < C then
27 C←D
locations, the one providing the lowest cost is considered as 28 done ← false
the demand node of the entire household and then used in the 29 end
evaluation of the system cost function. 30 until done;
31 return S
B. FWA greenfield design algorithm
IV. R ESULTS
As previously explained, greenfield design is composed of
two main stages: radio network planning and radio network The method proposed in this letter was evaluated in a
optimization. Commonly, these two phases are carried out suburban 3x3 km2 area at King County, Washington (United
separately. Firstly, all the locations where to deploy network States of America). This activity consisted in providing broad-
base stations are identified. Secondly, optimization algorithms band access to 4520 households using NR as enabling air
are used to configure network parameters to achieve superior interface technology. To achieve this goal, a total of 1373
network performance. lampposts were identified as candidate locations where to
Unlike other state-of-the-art methods, this letter proposes install base stations. Trisector antennas with fixed azimuth
an automatic iterative greedy algorithm which combines both separation of 120 degrees were chosen to be deployed at
radio network planning and radio network optimization. In candidate base station locations. RF spectrum was configured
every iteration, firstly the algorithm searches the best location to be deployed in frequency band n257 [14], using 28 GHz
where to add one new base station and secondly, all network carrier frequency for both DL and UL and 200 MHz band-
parameters are optimized taking into consideration the new width. Drive tests were carried out to perform RF propagation
addition. The algorithm finishes once the cost function cannot measurements used to calibrate Planet R
3D Model [15] so
be improved, returning the best locations where to deploy that losses from candidate base station locations to candidate
CPEs antennas and network base stations as well as the CPE antenna locations were estimated. Finally, drive test data
optimum configuration of network parameters. were rasterized in 2D grids per candidate base station. The
One might think that this algorithm does not guarantee demand nodes of the grids represent RF measurements in the
global optimality. However, as stated in [10], since networks rooftops of the households. 2x2 m2 was considered as high
are designed to present low cell coupling so that their perform- enough resolution to assume that propagation conditions will
ance is maximized, greedy algorithm yields very good results not change inside every demand node.
faster than other metaheuristic algorithms. Table I summarizes the configuration and constraints of the
Automatic FWA greenfield design is summarized in Al- main optimization parameters. By applying these to (4), one
gorithm 1. can observe that the search space consists of approximately

1089-7798 (c) 2019 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/LCOMM.2019.2939470, IEEE
Communications Letters
4

Table I: OPTIMIZATION PARAMETERS

5 100
Parameter Configuration
Number of households 4520
300 m2 4 80

Performance indicator (% households)

Average household area
Number of candidate locations 1373
Frequency band 28 GHz Cost - Classical - Waterfall
Propagation model Drive test Cost - FWA - Waterfall
Cost - FWA - Combined
Bandwidth 200 MHz 3 Coverage - Classical - Waterfall 60
Coverage - FWA - Waterfall

Radio unit equipment
Demand node size
Traffic demand forecast
Reference Signal Tx Power
Base station antenna height
Minimum inter base station distance
Parameter to optimize
Antenna azimuth values
Cost [105]
Ericsson Air 5121
2x2 m2 Coverage - FWA - Combined
Dominance - Classical - Waterfall
100 Mbps / household Dominance - FWA - Waterfall
10 dBm 2 Dominance - FWA - Combined 40
7-9 m Capacity - Classical - Waterfall
Capacity - FWA - Waterfall
200 m Capacity - FWA - Combined
Azimuth
Range: [-60o , 60o ] 1 20
Step: 5o

Table II: OPTIMIZATION OBJECTIVES 0 0

Indicator Weight Objective
Coverage 10 RSRP
Dominance 0.1 Relative interfering RSRP
Number of interferers
Capacity 100 Cell traffic
R
1.89 · 108475 possible network configurations among which
to find the best one. Therefore, the need for optimization
algorithms is highlighted as extremely significant.
An Ericsson internal optimization tool was used to carry out
the exercise. Two different test cases were defined to validate
the improvement achieved by the proposed method. The first
test case allowed evaluating the network performance in FWA
networks when using the proposed cost function. The second
test case allowed assessing the proposed iterative algorithm
that combines both radio network planning and radio network
optimization. In order to perform the evaluation of the results,
the demand node presenting the best cost per household was
chosen as the selected CPE antenna location.
Three different boolean performance indicators were used
to evaluate the cost function in this activity:
• Coverage. Good coverage is determined by a threshold
which specifies the minimum required received signal
strength. Coverage is used to identify areas where the
received signal strength is enough so connection estab-
lishment can be guaranteed.
• Dominance. Good dominance is determined by two con-
ditions. The first condition is the minimum received
signal strength of a cell to be considered as interfering
the best server. The second condition is the maximum
number of cells interfering the best server. Dominance is
used to identify how cells in the network interfere to each
other. Specially, how the best server (i.e., the cell received
with highest signal strength) is interfered by others. Since
network performance is usually limited by interference,
dominance is useful to estimate the quality of service.
• Capacity. Good capacity is determined by a peak data
rate value supported by a cell. Capacity is used to
identify cells providing coverage to demand nodes which,
together, require more resources than available and cause
congestion issues.
Thus, these objectives were used to evaluate the network
performance in all the tests carried out. For this, the calibrated
0 20 40 60 80 100
Condition Iteration
> -120 dBm Figure 1: Evolution of cost function and performance indicat-
> -6 dB
<3 ors during the optimization.
< 2.5 Gbps
Planet
3D Model along with Ericsson Air 5121 radiation
patterns were used to calculate RF changes produced by
modifications in antenna azimuths. The values and weights
for all these objectives are summarized in Table II.
A. Test case A. FWA cost function
This test case consisted in performing the classical green-
field design waterfall algorithm where radio network planning
and radio network optimization are executed separately using
two different cost functions: the classical cost function in (6)
and the proposed FWA cost function in (8). Unlike FWA cost
function where traffic is evaluated per household, in classical
cost function, household traffic was uniformly distributed
among all its demand nodes (i.e., candidate CPE antenna
locations) and, finally, the one in which the cost function is
minimized was chosen as the final CPE antenna location.
Fig. 1 depicts the evolution of the cost and the performance
indicators during the optimization exercise. According to its
weight, the capacity indicator drove the optimization and,
therefore, it correlates with the evolution of the cost. The
traffic demanded per household in this exercise was forecast
to 100 Mbps and every base station was composed of 3 cells
of which capacity objective was set to 2.5 Gbps. Therefore, a
maximum of 75 households (i.e., 1.66% of the total) could be
successfully served per base station. This effect was observed
during the first iterations of radio network planning in which
the capacity indicator increased 1.66% every iteration. How-
ever, mainly due to the constraints imposed to base stations
locations (i.e., the number of predefined locations and the
minimum distance among the selected ones), the cost function
converges logarithmically. Finally, a step can be observed at
the end of the curves of this test case due to the azimuth
optimization after the radio network planning phase.
Once the radio network planning and radio network optimiz-
ation finished, resulting network configurations were evaluated
in terms of target performance indicators as summarized in
Table III. All coverage, dominance and capacity performance
indicators presented better figures when the proposed cost

1089-7798 (c) 2019 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/LCOMM.2019.2939470, IEEE
Table III: TEST CASES RESULTS
Cost function Classical
Algorithm Waterfall Waterfall
Bad coverage (% households) 0.2
Bad dominance (% households) 0.15
Bad capacity (% households) 3.81
Congested (% cells) 13.19
Number of base stations 96
function was used. Moreover, the proposed cost function
resulted in the selection of fewer base stations than when
using classical cost function, which decreases the deployment
costs. In addition, despite the reduction in the number of base
stations, the number of congested cells also decreased when
the proposed cost function was used. Therefore, the proposed
cost function resulted in the best network performance.
The classical cost function aims at improving network
performance assuming users are located in all demand nodes
of the household. However, since the proposed cost function is
focused on improving the network performance in final CPE
antenna locations, the results meet the expectations.
B. Test case B. FWA greenfield design algorithm
This test case consisted in evaluating the combined al-
gorithm proposed in Algorithm 1. For this, the classical
greenfield design waterfall algorithm was compared with the
proposed one where radio network planning and radio network
optimization are executed iteratively.
Since, test case A proved the proposed cost function to
provide better results than the classical approach, then the
proposed cost function for FWA networks was used to evaluate
the network performance in this test case.
As for test case A, Fig. 1 depicts the evolution of the
cost and the performance indicators during the optimization
exercise. In overall, all the performance indicators as well as
the cost presented better figures when using the proposed cost
function and the combined algorithm than when not using
them. Moreover, the step observed at the end of the curves
when radio network planning and radio network optimization
were executed separately disappeared when both phases were
combined into a single iterative algorithm.
Regarding the final performance indicators, again, Table III
shows that all coverage, dominance and capacity performance
indicators decreased significantly. Moreover, the number of
required base stations to achieve these figures is lower than
the best obtained in test case A. These results have proven
that the combined algorithm outperforms the results obtained
by the classical waterfall algorithm.
V. C ONCLUSIONS
This letter has presented an automatic method to perform
greenfield design activities for FWA networks using NR
technology which, unlike other state-of-the-art methods, also
finds the optimal CPE antenna locations that improve the final
network performance.
R
The proposed method has been evaluated using data from a
real suburban environment. The results obtained have demon-
strated that the final network performance is improved with
1089-7798 (c) 2019 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Communications Letters
5
Test case A Test case B
FWA FWA FWA
Waterfall Combined
Relative gain (%) Relative gain (%)
0.04 80 0.04 0.02 50
0.09 40 0.09 0.02 77.78
2.88 24.41 2.88 2.43 15.62
8.74 33.73 8.74 5.61 35.81
89 7.29 89 86 3.37
respect to state-of-the-art methods while the deployment costs
(i.e., the number of required network base stations) are re-
duced. Therefore, the proposed method is proven to overcome
cutting-edge methods to perform greenfield design activities.
Moreover, this method may be subsequently used to adapt
FWA networks to the eventual changes of the RF environment.
R EFERENCES
[1] F. Council, FTTH handbook, Feb. 2018, accessed: 2018-10-30.
[Online]. Available: http://www.ftthcouncil.eu/documents/Publications/
FTTH%20Handbook 2017 V8 FINAL.pdf
[2] W. Webb, “Broadband Fixed Wireless Access as a Key Component of
the Future Integrated Communications Environment,” IEEE Communic-
ations Magazine, vol. 39, no. 9, pp. 115–121, Sept 2001.
[3] J. Du, D. Chizhik, R. Feick, G. Castro, M. Rodrı́guez, and R. A.
Valenzuela, “Suburban Residential Building Penetration Loss at 28 GHz
for Fixed Wireless Access,” IEEE Wireless Communications Letters, pp.
1–1, 2018.
[4] D. Soldani, P. Airas, T. Hoglund, H. Rasanen, and D. Debrecht, “5G to
the Home,” in 2017 IEEE 85th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC
Spring), June 2017, pp. 1–5.
[5] X. Huang, U. Behr, and W. Wiesbeck, “Automatic Cell Planning for a
Low-Cost and Spectrum Efficient Wireless Network,” in Globecom ’00 -
IEEE. Global Telecommunications Conference. Conference Record (Cat.
No.00CH37137), vol. 1, Nov 2000, pp. 276–282 vol.1.
[6] L. J. Ibbetson and L. B. Lopes, “An Automatic Base Site Placement
Algorithm,” in 1997 IEEE 47th Vehicular Technology Conference. Tech-
nology in Motion, vol. 2, May 1997, pp. 760–764 vol.2.
[7] W. Mai, H. Liu, L. Chen, J. Li, and H. Xiao, “Multi-Objective
Evolutionary Algorithm for 4G Base Station Planning,” in 2013 Ninth
International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Security,
Dec 2013, pp. 85–89.
[8] F. Gordejuela-Sanchez and J. Zhang, “LTE Access Network Planning
and Optimization: a Service-Oriented and Technology-Specific Perspect-
ive,” in GLOBECOM 2009 - 2009 IEEE Global Telecommunications
Conference, Nov 2009, pp. 1–5.
[9] J. Zhang, J. Yang, M. E. Aydin, and J. Y. Wu, “Mathematical Model-
ling and Comparisons of Four Heuristic Optimization Algorithms for
WCDMA Radio Network Planning,” in 2006 International Conference
on Transparent Optical Networks, vol. 3, June 2006, pp. 253–257.
[10] J. Ramiro and K. Hamied, Multi-Technology Self-Optimization. Wiley,
2011. [Online]. Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.
jsp?arnumber=8042858
[11] K. Tutschku, “Demand-Based Radio Network Planning of Cellular
Mobile Communication Systems,” in Proceedings. IEEE INFOCOM ’98,
the Conference on Computer Communications., vol. 3, March 1998, pp.
1054–1061 vol.3.
[12] S. M. Allen, S. Hurley, R. K. Taplin, and R. M. Whitaker, “Automatic
Cell Planning of Broadband Fixed Wireless Networks,” in IEEE VTS
53rd Vehicular Technology Conference, Spring 2001. Proceedings (Cat.
No.01CH37202), vol. 4, May 2001, pp. 2808–2812 vol.4.
[13] S. Hurley, “Planning Effective Cellular Mobile Radio Networks,” IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 243–253,
March 2002.
[14] 3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group
Radio Access Network; NR; Base Station (BS) Radio Transmission and
Reception, June 2018, 3GPP TS 38.104 v15.2.0.
[15] Planet
. [Online]. Available: https://www.infovista.com/products/
planet-network-planning-solutions