1

Calculation of C/I for Mobile Satellite System

MARIO REYES-AYALA
1
, EDGAR ALEJANDRO ANDRADE-GONZALEZ
1
,
JOS ALFREDO TIRADO-MNDEZ
1
, HILDEBERTO JARDN AGUILAR
2

1
Electronics Department
Metropolitan Autonomous University
San Pablo 180, Col. Reynosa Tamaulipas, Azcapotzalco, ZIP Code 02200, Mexico City
MEXICO
2
Section of Communications
CINVESTAV-IPN
Av. IPN 2508, Col. San Pedro Zacatenco, Zip Code 07360 Mexico City
MEXICO

Abstract: - In this paper, the satellite interference is calculated for mobile FDMA digital satellite
communications systems. The main parameter of performance is the carrier-to-interference (C/I) evaluated for
regenerative and non-regenerative systems. In addition to this, the pointing losses are evaluated for parabolic
antennas, where antenna patterns are employed for any off-axis angle.

Key-words: - Interference, Satellite, Multiple Access, FDMA, Link budget, Mobile satellite services.

1 Introduction
A lot of satellite systems have segments with
multiple earth and space stations. In a system like
this, the performance of its digital links are
determined by the interference power level in both,
up-link and down-link. In fact, the contribution of
each station is normally different to each other, then
it is necessary to evaluate the interference sources
individually.

In the Figure 1 a typical architecture of a multi-user
satellite system is shown, where white stations are
intentionally linked, but dark stations interfere the
system.



Fig. 1 Desirable links in a satellite system.

The dark stations can be a member of the system, but
the link conditions might contribute to decrease the
carrier to noise ratio.

There many unwanted links in Figure 1, because it is
necessary only one dark station involved.
Nevertheless, in this work the links between earth
stations only are ignored. The antenna pointing, and
carrier frequencies, moderate the interference. The
links between satellites only are also ignored.

The Figure 2, shows the unwanted links in the
system.



Fig. 2 Undesirable links in a satellite system.

There are many strategies to reduce the interference
power level system. In this way, the parameter to
Proceedings of the 10th WSEAS International Conference on COMMUNICATIONS, Vouliagmeni, Athens, Greece, July 10-12, 2006 (pp498-501)
2
consider are: the kind of the interference sources
(same satellite system, same segment, etc.), angular
separation, antenna gain patterns, the type of
modulation, multiple access system, etc [1], [3].

2 Carrier to Interference Ratio
If the satellite up-link or down-link involves N
transmitters, the interference power level can be
obtained by eq. (1).

=
=
N
i
i t
I I
1

(1)

Where I
t
is the Interfering total carrier power, W,
and I
i
is the i-th Interfering carrier power, W.

The total carrier to interference ratio is determined
by eq. (2).

1 1
3
1
2
1
1
1

|
|

\
|
+ +
|
|

\
|
+
|
|

\
|
+
|
|

\
|
= |

\
|
N
I
C
I
C
I
C
I
C
I
C
L

(2)

Where (C/I) is the Total carrier to interference ratio
and, (C/I
i
) is the Carrier to interference ratio caused
by the interfering i-station.

In other words, the total carrier to interference ratio
may be evaluated by the link elements of each
interfering station, (3).

( )

=
|

\
|
N
i i i
i i
Y L
G E
C I
C
1
1
1
(3)

Where (C/N)
T
is the Total carrier to noise ratio, C is
the Carrier power of wanted station, W; E is the
E.I.R.P. of interfering i-station, W; and, G(
i
) is the
Gain of the wanted station in the direction of
interfering i-station; L
i
is the Free space losses in the
direction of interfering i-station; Y
i
is the
Depolarization discrimination factor due to i-station.

In that case, the performance of the links is
calculated by eq. (4). In this equation, the effect of
noise and interference reduces the total carrier to
noise ratio.

1 1 1
|

\
|
+
|

\
|
=
|

\
|
I
C
N
C
N
C
T
(4)

Where (C/N)
T
is the Total carrier to noise ratio, and
(C/I) is the Total carrier to interference ratio.

Equation 4 is one of the most widely used equation
in satellite system engineering. Once the kind of
modulation is chosen, the total carrier to noise ratio
can be used to determine the performance of the link.
The probability of bit error predicts the performance
in a digital satellite communications system, but the
noise and interference must satisfy the central limit
theorem. This approach requires that the sum of
noise and interference can be represented for only
one Gaussian source. Besides, eq. 4 determines the
type of the link: noise-dominant or interference-
dominant; when carrier to noise ratio is less or
greater than carrier to interference ratio.

3 Pointing Factor
One of the most important parameter in the carrier to
interference ratio is the antenna gain. The change of
antenna gain from an interference source is the same
in comparison to pointing losses. The interference
source has an angular separation in comparison with
the wanted signal, where this separation depends on
the type of orbit [2].

The Fig. 3 shows the angular separation between the
desired and unwanted sources.



Fig. 3 Antenna Pattern.

The antenna gain pattern allows to calculate the
antenna gain considered for the interference source.
The antenna gain is a function of the off-axis angle
. For a paraboloid reflector the normalized gain
pattern for a uniform aperture distribution, is given
by eq. 5.

( )
( )
2
1
4
u
u J
G
u
= (5)

Where J
1
(*) is the first-order of the Bessel functions
of the first kind , u is determined by eq. 6.

( )

sin
D
u =
(6)
Proceedings of the 10th WSEAS International Conference on COMMUNICATIONS, Vouliagmeni, Athens, Greece, July 10-12, 2006 (pp498-501)
3

Where D is the aperture diameter, m; is the wave-
length of the carrier, m; and is the off-axis angle of
the antenna pattern.

But, if the aperture distribution is parabolic, then the
normalized antenna pattern is determined by eq. 7.


( )
( )
2
2
2
64
u
u J
G
p
= (7)

Where J
2
(*) is the second-order of the Bessel
functions of the first kind , u is determined by eq. 6.

The final antenna gain is the product of normalized
antenna gain and on-axis antenna beam G
0
, see eq. 8.

( )
( )
( )

=
aperture parabolic
aperture uniform
0
0

p
u
G G
G G
G (8)

4 Performance of the link
The performance of the link is evaluated by
equations (9) and (10), where EIRP is the Effective
Isotropic Radiated Power..

( ) ( ) G EIRP EIRP
I
C
u
log 10 *+ =
|

\
|

(9)

( ) ( ) G EIRP EIRP
I
C
s s
d
log 10 '+ =
|

\
|

(10)

Where EIRP is the EIRP of the Origin Earth Station
(dew), EIRP* is the EIRP of the interference source
(dew), Ears is the EIRP of the interfered satellite in
the direction of Destination Earth Station (dew), and
Ears is the EIRP of the interfering satellite in the
direction of Destination Earth Station (dew).

Then, the total carrier to interference ratio, can be
calculated by esq. (11).

d u
I
C
I
C
I
C
|

\
|
+
|

\
|
=
|

\
|

(11)

There are many approximations to simplify the
computation of antenna gain pattern reduction. In eq.
12, a simple formula for antenna gain (dB) is shown.

( )
( )
( )

<
<
<
<
=
180 48 10
48 2 . 9 log 25 32
2 . 9 7 8
7 1 log 25 29
'

G (12)

5 Results
In Figure 4, the normalized antenna gain pattern is
shown for a uniform distribution aperture antenna,
where the aperture diameter is 1 m, and the carrier
frequency is 1.4 GHz.


Fig. 4 Normalized Antenna Pattern.

The Fig. 5 illustrates the antenna gain pattern for a
parabolic aperture distribution, where aperture
diameter and carrier frequency are 1 m and 1.4 GHz.


Fig. 5 Normalized Antenna Pattern

The Fig. 5 shows the carrier to interference ratio as a
function of the number of interference sources.
Proceedings of the 10th WSEAS International Conference on COMMUNICATIONS, Vouliagmeni, Athens, Greece, July 10-12, 2006 (pp498-501)
4


Fig. 6 Carrier to Interference Ratio

In Fig. 6, the power level of interference sources is
the same, because this case will occur in the rest of
satellites or earth stations in one satellite system.

6 Conclusions
The performance of a modern digital satellite system
may change as a result of the presence of
interference sources. Because, a lot of satellite
systems have a large number of earth stations and
satellites.

It is important to determine if the satellite is
interference-dominant or noise-dominant, in order to
select the best multiple access scheme. The angular
separation between interference sources, must be
calculated carefully.

The complexity of carrier to interference ratio
calculation can be reduced significantly, if the
normalized antenna gain pattern are used.

It is important to emphasize the importance of carrier
to interference ratio, where average power is the
main parameter. But, the interference must be also
analyzed in an statistical point of view, in order to
enlarge the knowledge of the system [4], [5], [6].

References:
[1] De Gaudenzi, R., Giannetti, F., Luise, M. L.,
Advances in satellite CDMA transmission for
mobile and personal communications,
Proceedings of the IEEE, January 1996.
[2] Butzien, P. E., Radio System Interference from
Geoestationary Satellites, IEEE Transactions
on Communications, Vol. COM-29, No. 1,
January 1981.
[3] Huang, T. C., Omura, J. K., Biederman, L. Bit
Error Rate Comparison of Repeater and
Regenerative Communication Satellites, IEEE
Transactions on Communications, Vol. COM-
28, No. 7, July 1980.
[4] Fortes, J. M. P., Sampaio-Neto, R., Goicochea, J.
M. O., Fast computation of interference
statistics in multiple non-Geo satellite systems
environments using the analytical method, IEE
Proceedings on Communications, Vol. 151,
No.1, February 2004.
[5] Gidony, D., Kalet, I. Adjacent Channel
Interference Cancellation for MSK-Type Signals
Using Antenna Diversity in Rayleigh Fading
Environment, IEEE Transactions on
Communications, Vol. 52, No. 2, February 2004.
[6] Panagopoulos, A. D., Margoni, M.,
Kanellopoulos, J. D., Carrier to Interference
Ratio Statistics of an Earth-Space System
Interfered by an adjacent satellite system and a
point-to-point microwave system under rain
fades, IEEE Africon Conference, 2002.

























Proceedings of the 10th WSEAS International Conference on COMMUNICATIONS, Vouliagmeni, Athens, Greece, July 10-12, 2006 (pp498-501)