Design Philosophy

Own your design Keep relative heights uniform within clusters:

Avoid mixing tall sites with average height sites Avoid mixing high elevation sites that overlook many sites

Interference and Capacity need to be managed on every sector with the appropriate RF Design. Maximize coverage where needed and reduce coverage where not needed.
Select appropriate antenna and optimize tilt

slide 1

C O N N E C T I N G P E O P L E . S I M P L Y.

RF Design Targets
90% probability of coverage with 1 wall penetration on 1st floor
We average < 5% RF pullbacks in CW USA

C/(I+N) > 10 dB @ -78 dBm RSL throughout sector

Sectorization
Markets with < 6 available contiguous channels
3 sectors, avoid mixing with 4 sectors Use 90 degree pattern to minimize interference 3 sectors typically (4 sectors for high density) 90 degree pattern preferred for 3 sectors; 65 deg for 4 sectors

Markets with > 6 available contiguous channels

Propagation Model uses 30m terrain data

For base station antenna heights < 480 HAAT
Propagation model = TIREM-EDX Margin = 11.4 dB Propagation model = Anderson 2D version 1.00 Margin = 8.4 dB

For base station antenna heights > 480 HAAT

AMOD Distro Target :

30% 4QAM, 20% 16QAM, 30% 64 QAM, 20% 16QAML

slide 2

C O N N E C T I N G P E O P L E . S I M P L Y.

Sites in a Cluster Must have Uniform Heights

Hogan site: ~60 taller than adjacent sites

Plot of customer locations and their serving BTS

slide 3
C O N N E C T I N G P E O P L E . S I M P L Y.

Avoid the Hill Top Boomers

Average Terrain Elevation ~2600

BOI040 Elevation 3642

Sector radius is proportional to AGL

slide 4
C O N N E C T I N G P E O P L E . S I M P L Y.

Boomer Sites can cause Capacity and Interference Issues

slide 5

C O N N E C T I N G P E O P L E . S I M P L Y.

4 Sectors vs. 3 Sectors

90 Deg Panels 60 Deg Panels

4 sec 90 deg vs. 3 sec 90 deg coverage = 1:0.86

4 sec 60 deg vs. 3 sec 60 deg coverage = 1.17:0.95

Coverage reference based on 4 sector using 90 deg panels 1:1

slide 6
C O N N E C T I N G P E O P L E . S I M P L Y.

Capacity Overlays - 90 deg vs. 60 deg Panels

90 Deg Panels 60 Deg Panels

4 sec 90 deg vs. 4 sec 60 deg coverage = 1:1.17

3 sec 90 deg vs. 3 sec 60 deg coverage = 0.86:0.95

Coverage reference based on 4 sector using 90 deg panels 1:1

slide 7
C O N N E C T I N G P E O P L E . S I M P L Y.

Capacity Overlay problems

Capacity Overlays are a double edged sword:
Can cause more interference. Boomer sites can perpetuate more congestion if the RF design is flawed.

Address RF design flaws

Control coverage Capacity sites may be needed

slide 8

C O N N E C T I N G P E O P L E . S I M P L Y.

Sectorization and Overlay Comparisons

Pros 4 Sector site 3 Sector site 90 Deg panel stack 60 Deg panel stack
-More coverage -More capacity

Cons
-Difficult frequency planning with few channels

-Easier frequency planning -Less coverage -Long term: easier to control -Less initial capacity capacity and interference -More horizontal null fill coverage -Coverage matches initial coverage -More boresite coverage. -Easier to control interference
slide 9

-Difficult frequency planning with few channels

-Less horizontal null fill coverage -May not shed %50 traffic load.
C O N N E C T I N G P E O P L E . S I M P L Y.

Optimize Tilts to the Equal Power Boundary

Use Strongest Server Plot to determine where the Equal Power Boundary. Use Tilt to control coverage where needed and eliminate where undesired.

slide 10

C O N N E C T I N G P E O P L E . S I M P L Y.

Control Upper 3 dB to Reduce Interference

150 Site

Main beam Downtown Upper 3 db

Beam Distance in Miles

1st upper side lobe Upper 3 db Main Beam Lower 3 db

slide 11

C O N N E C T I N G P E O P L E . S I M P L Y.

Control Far Field Interference using Suppressed Upper Side Lobe Antennas

Pros: -Over 30 dB Front to Back -30 dB cross polar rejection -20 to 24 db down for upper side lobes using SUS5 Cons: -Poor construction inconsistently poor VSWR -No variable electrical tilt

slide 12

C O N N E C T I N G P E O P L E . S I M P L Y.

Kathrein Variable Electrical Tilt V-Pol

slide 13

C O N N E C T I N G P E O P L E . S I M P L Y.

Kathrein Variable Electrical Tilt Patterns

Pros: -Variable Electrical Tilt from 0-10 -Durable construction consistent VSWR -20 to 22 db down for 1st upper side lobes at 5 edt Cons: -Only 23 db Front to Back -15-20 db Cross Polar Rejection -Large upper sidelobe at 0 edt slide 14
C O N N E C T I N G P E O P L E . S I M P L Y.

Kathrein Variable Electrical Tilt X-Pol proto-type

slide 15

C O N N E C T I N G P E O P L E . S I M P L Y.

Summary
RF Design Targets are good to use for a baseline Individual sites need to be tailored to accommodate:
Desired coverage area Frequency availability and reuse Local terrain and clutter Coverage control for interference and capacity management.

Choose antennas suitable for the RF environment.

Stella Doradus for good Front to Back and Cross-Pol rejection but limited flexibility for electrical tilt and inconsistent VSWR Kathrein for good variable electrical tilt and solid construction but poor Front to Back and Cross-Pol rejection

slide 16

C O N N E C T I N G P E O P L E . S I M P L Y.

Sector Naming Convention Debate

Azimuth Independent
Sector A and Overlay Sector W First sector clockwise from True North. Typical 0

Azimuth Dependent

0 300

Sector A and Overlay Sector W from 301 to 60

60

240
Sector C and Overlay Sector Y Next sector clockwise from Sector B. Typical 240

120

Sector C and Overlay Sector Y from 181 to 300

Sector B and Overlay Sector X from 61 to 180

Sector B and Overlay Sector X Next sector clockwise from Sector A. Typical 120

180

slide 17

C O N N E C T I N G P E O P L E . S I M P L Y.