Date post: | 04-Jan-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | gerald-lynch |
View: | 230 times |
Download: | 5 times |
1
C30-20080417-005
3GPP2 TSG-C WG3
TITLE : UMB performance results
SOURCE:
TSG-C WG3 EMAH
Contact to: Satoshi Konishi, Vice-chair of EMAH [email protected]
ABSTRACT: This contribution provides performance results of UMB (Ultra Mobile Broadband) system. In addition, the EMAH (Evaluation Methodology Ad-Hoc) activities for the UMB characterization are also summarized in this contribution.
RECOMMENDATION: Review and adopt for the submission from TSG-C
©2008 3GPP2. All rights reserved.
2
C30-20080417-005
Outline
1. Introduction2. Background
Activities in TSG-C WG3 EMAH for performance evaluation of UMB system
Calibration process among companies
3. Simulation conditions for UMB performance evaluation4. Simulation results5. Conclusion6. Appendix:
A. Examples of link level simulation results B. System level simulation results for calibrationC. Backup slides for simulation results under NGMN setup
3
C30-20080417-005
Introduction
Standardization of UMB system March 2006 to February 2007: Decision of framework and components April, 2007: Publication of UMB Air Interface Specification Version 1.0 May to August, 2007: Revision of UMB Air Interface Specification September, 2007: Publication of UMB Air Interface Specification Version
2.0
However, UMB characterization has not been completed yet …
Necessity of Performance evaluation for UMB system!
4
C30-20080417-005
Background (1)~ History on Activities for Performance Evaluation of UMB ~
History: June, 2007: agreed upon to start UMB characterization July to August, 2007: preparatory work (e.g. outline of
simulation setting, parameters, timeline) August to December, 2007: Calibration of link curves December 2007 until now: Calibration of system level
simulation results
5
C30-20080417-005
Background (2)~ Calibration Processes for UMB Performance Evaluation ~
Link level simulations: From Aug., 2007, each company began to provide simulation
results Oct, 2007: confirmed that three companies (Samsung, Huawe
i, and KDDI) were aligned Nov. to Dec., 2007: another two companies (Qualcomm and
Alcatel-Lucent) were also aligned with the three companies
Appendix A: examples of link level simulation results
6
C30-20080417-005
Background (3)~ Calibration Processes for UMB Performance Evaluation ~
System level simulations: From Dec., 2007, companies (KDDI, Samsung, Nortel, Qualcomm, Huawe
i, and Alcatel-Lucent) began to provide simulation results In total, five rounds have been performed for calibration among companie
s so far March, 2008: confirmed that all the companies involved in the calibration
(KDDI, Samsung, Nortel, Qualcomm, and Huawei) were aligned on the full-buffer traffic model in the forward link (FL-FB)
April, 2008: confirmed that all the companies involved in the calibration were aligned on the VoIP traffic model in the both forward and reverse link (FL-VoIP and RL-VoIP)
Up to now: most of the companies have been aligned in the remaining simulation scenarios as follows
• Full-buffer traffic model in the reverse link (RL-FB)
• Full-buffer traffic model in the forward link with MIMO (FL-MIMO)
Appendix B: examples of system level simulation results
7
C30-20080417-005
Toward UMB Performance Evaluation
For the purpose of calibrations among companies, we use a set of simplified simulation models such as Simplified power control model compared to the UMB air inter
face specification No power control in the forward link No rank adaptation in the FL-MIMO simulations Etc.
This presentation provides actual performances both taking account of more realistic scenarios in contrast to above and using simulation parameters in the NGMN’s evaluation metho
dology document
8
C30-20080417-005
Simulation Parameters
ValueWrap-around model190.52.0
Path Loss ModelShadowing ModelFading Channel ModelBS Antenna PatternMS Antenna Pattern
-115204624-1745910
Noise Figure of MS [dB]
70 deg @ 3 dB beamwidth, 20 dB max.
Frequency Reuse Factor
Omni
Pilot Format ID
Thermal Noise Density [dBm/Hz]Noise Figure of BS [dB]
Penetration Loss [dB]
Total Transmission Power of MS [dBm]Total Transmission Power of BS [dBm]
TU6 model with 3km/h
MS Antenna Gain [dBi]BS Antenna Gain [dBi]
Carrier Frequency [GHz]128.15+37.6log10(d ) [dB], d in kilometersLog-normal distribution with standard
No. of 3-sector cellsSite-to-Site Distance [km]
ParameterCell Structure Model in Simulations
9
C30-20080417-005
FL overhead
Overhead Value 10MHz full buffer 5MHz VoIP
Pilot 18 out of 128 14.1%
Guard band 32 subcarriers (992 used subcarriers for 10MHz and 480 used subcarriers for 5MHz with 9.6KHz subcarrier spacing)
4.77% (with respect to 10MHz)
7.84% (with respect to 5MHz)
Control overhead
96 subcarriers for full buffer and 64 subcarriers for VoIP
9.68% 13.3%
CP and windowing
6.51+3.26 μs out of 113.93 μs
8.58%
Superframe preamble
1 out of 26 frames 3.85%
Total 35.1% 40.0%
10
C30-20080417-005
RL overhead
Overhead Value 10MHz full buffer 5MHz VoIP
Pilot 18 out of 128 14.1%
Guard band 32 subcarriers (992 used subcarriers for 10MHz and 480 used subcarriers for 5MHz with 9.6KHz subcarrier spacing)
4.77% (with respect to 10MHz)
7.84% (with respect to 5MHz)
Control overhead
ACKCH 32 subcarriers 3.23% 6.67%
CDMA control
One CDMA segment (128 subcarriers) every 8 frames for full buffer, and one CDMA segment every frame for VoIP
1.61% 26.7%
CP and windowing 6.51+3.26 μs out of 113.93 μs
8.58%
Superframe preamble
1 out of 26 frames 3.85%
Total 31.6% 53.6%
11
C30-20080417-005
Simulation Conditions for Full Queue Traffic Model
System bandwidth – 992 subcarriers over 10MHz Overhead
Guard band – 32 subcarriers CP - 6.51 us Control overhead – 6 tiles (96 subcarriers) in FL with 10% power
overhead, one CDMA subsegment (128 subcarriers) every 8 frames and 2 tiles (32 subcarriers) for R-ACKCH every frame
Superframe preamble – one out of 26 frames (3.85%) Scheduler – Equal resource scheduler (similar to proportional
fair) Power control – No power control for FL. OSI-based power
control for RL with DataCtoI range [-3dB,10dB] and IoTtarget 7.5dB Antenna configurations
SIMO1x2 for FL and RL MIMO2x2 with precoding (64 precoding matrices used) and rank selection
for FL
12
C30-20080417-005
~ Full Queue Traffic Model ~ Simulation Results
Average sector throughput and
spectrum efficiency
Average user throughput and
spectrum efficiency
Cell-edge user throughput and
spectrum efficiency
Non-MIMO
(1x2)
12.5 Mbps 1.25 Mbps 0.38 Mbps
MIMO
(2x2)
13.3 Mbps 1.33 Mbps 0.50 Mbps
Forward link (Downlink)
Average sector throughput and
spectrum efficiency
Average user throughput and
spectrum efficiency
Cell-edge user throughput and
spectrum efficiency
Non-MIMO
(1x2)
9.46 Mbps 0.95 Mbps 0.36 Mbps
Reverse link (Uplink)
13
C30-20080417-005
Simulation Conditions for VoIP Traffic Model
System bandwidth – 480 subcarriers over 5MHz Overhead
Guard band – 32 subcarriers CP - 6.51 us Control overhead – 4 tiles (64 subcarriers) in FL with 26%
power overhead, 160 subcarriers in RL, including one CDMA subsegment (128 subcarriers) and 2 tiles (32 subcarriers) for R-ACKCH
Superframe preamble – one out of 26 frames (3.85%)
Power control – Target termination based power control.
Antenna configurations – SIMO1x2 for FL and RL
14
C30-20080417-005
~ VoIP Traffic Model ~ Simulation Results
VoIP capacity Average latency 95 percent tile of 98% packet delay
Non-MIMO
(1x2)
350+ 12ms 45ms
Forward link (Downlink)
VoIP capacity Average latency 95 percent tile of 98% packet delay
Non-MIMO
(1x2)
300 15ms 50ms
Reverse link (Uplink)
* Since the VoIP system is RL limited, though the FL VoIP capacity is far more than 350, we did not simulate to find the actual number.
15
C30-20080417-005
Conclusions
This contribution summarizes activities in TSG-C WG3 EMAH for UMB characterization Calibration of both link- and system-level simulations has bee
n almost completed
UMB performance results are provided using NGMN simulation conditions.
Some limitations in this set of simulations Subband scheduling is not used in the full buffer simulations Suboptimum link curves are used with Max-Log-Map decodin
g and suboptimum demapper Rate prediction loop is not optimized Control overhead can be optimized
16
C30-20080417-005
References
[1] 3GPP2, “Ultra Mobile Broadband (UMB) Air Interface Specification,” C.S0084-000~009 v.2.0, Sep. 2007.
[2] NGMN Alliance, “NGMN Performance Evaluation Methodology” Version 1.2, June 2007.
17
C30-20080417-005
Appendix A~ Examples of link level simulation results ~
18
C30-20080417-005
Link level results (1)
FL, BRCH, 8 tiles, PF#10
1.E-03
1.E-02
1.E-01
1.E+00
0 5 10 15 20 25
Es/No [dB]
FE
R
H 1 H 2 H 3 H 4 H 5 H 6S 1 S 2 S 3 S 4 S 5 S 6K 1 K 2 K 3 K 4 K 5 K 6Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 5 Q 6A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6AV1 AV2 AV3 AV4 AV5 AV6
H: HuaweiS: SamsungK: KDDIQ: QualcommA: Alcatel-LucentAV: Averaged values
19
C30-20080417-005
Link level results (2)
RL, 1 tiles, PF#5
1.E-03
1.E-02
1.E-01
1.E+00
-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12Es/No [dB]
FE
R
H 1 H 2 H 3 H 4 H 5 H 6S 1 S 2 S 3 S 4 S 5 S 6K 1 K 2 K 3 K 4 K 5 K 6Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 5 Q 6A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6AV1 AV2 AV3 AV4 AV5 AV6
H: HuaweiS: SamsungK: KDDIQ: QualcommA: Alcatel-LucentAV: Averaged values
20
C30-20080417-005
Appendix B~ System level simulation results
for calibration~
21
C30-20080417-005
System level simulation results (1)~ FL, Full-buffer Traffic, Ped-B w/ 3km/h ~
Sector throughput
9
9.5
10
10.5
11
11.5
12
1
Mb
ps
KDDI
Samsung
Nortel
Qualcomm
Huaw ei
5% edge user throughput
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
1
kbp
s
KDDI
Samsung
Nortel
Qualcomm
Huaw ei
Packet format distribution
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Packet form at
pd
f
KDDI
Samsung
Nortel
Qualcomm
Huaw ei
Mobile throughput vs geometry
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25
geom etry (dB)
Mo
bile
th
rou
gh
pu
t (k
bp
s)
KDDI
Samsung
Nortel
Qualcomm
Huaw ei
22
C30-20080417-005
System level simulation results (2) ~ FL, VoIP Traffic, Ped-B w/ 3km/h ~
98% delay distribution
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0 0.05 0.1 0.15
98% delay (sec)
cdf
KDDI
Samsung
Nortel
Qualcomm
Huaw ei
Packet error rate cdf
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1
per
cdf
KDDI
Samsung
Nortel
Qualcomm
Huaw ei
Loading distribution
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Loading (%)
cdf
KDDI
Samsung
Nortel
Qualcomm
Huaw ei
HARQ distribution
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Transm ission
pd
f
KDDI
Samsung
Nortel
Qualcomm
Huaw ei
23
C30-20080417-005
System level simulation results (3) ~ RL, VoIP Traffic, Ped-B w/ 3km/h ~
98% latency distribution
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1
98% latency (sec)
cdf
KDDI
Samsung
Nortel
Qualcomm
Huaw ei
Packet error rate cdf
0.9
0.91
0.92
0.93
0.94
0.95
0.96
0.97
0.98
0.99
1
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1
per
cdf
KDDI
Samsung
Nortel
Qualcomm
Huaw ei
HARQ distribution
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Transm ission
pd
f
KDDI
Samsung
Nortel
Qualcomm
Huaw ei
Loading distribution
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Partial loading factor
cdf
KDDI
Samsung
Nortel
Qualcomm
Huaw ei
24
C30-20080417-005
Appendix C~ Backup slides for simulation
results under NGMN setup~
25
C30-20080417-005
~ Full Queue Traffic Model ~ Simulation Results (1)
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 50000
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Mobile Throughput (Kbps)
CD
F
FL, mobile throughput distribution
SIMO1x2
MIMO2x2
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 30
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Network Normalized Mobile Throughput
CD
F
FL, fairness
SIMO1x2
MIMO2x2
26
C30-20080417-005
~ Full Queue Traffic Model ~ Simulation Results (2)
0 500 1000 1500 2000 25000
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Mobile Throughput (Kbps)
CD
F
RL, mobile throughput distribution
SIMO1x2
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.50
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Network Normalized Mobile Throughput
CD
F
RL, fairness
SIMO1x2
27
C30-20080417-005
~ Full Queue Traffic Model ~ Simulation Results (2)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1410
-2
10-1
100
IoT distribution
IoT (dB)
CC
DF
SIMO1x2
28
C30-20080417-005
~ VoIP Traffic Model ~ Simulation Results (1)
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1FL VoIP, packet delay distribution
Packet Latency (sec)
CD
F
350 user/sector
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1FL VoIP, 98% packet delay distribution
98% Packet Latency (sec)
CD
F
350 user/sector
29
C30-20080417-005
~ VoIP Traffic Model ~ Simulation Results (2)
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1RL VoIP, packet delay distribution
Packet Latency (sec)
CD
F
300 user/sector
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1RL VoIP, 98% packet delay distribution
98% Packet Latency (sec)
CD
F
300 user/sector
30
C30-20080417-005
~ VoIP Traffic Model ~ Simulation Results (2)
0 2 4 6 8 10 1210
-2
10-1
100
RL VoIP, IoT distribution
IoT (dB)
CC
DF
300 user/sector