OPTIMISING THE NETWORK - EMP HomeTwo_1450... · ITU-plan sponsorships Reselling . GVF Training and...

Radio Frequency Interference:

Prevention & Mitigation Strategies for

OPTIMISING THE NETWORK

Installation Training, Quality Assurance, Equipment Type Approval,

and Network Validation

Martin Jarrold

Chief, International Programme Development, GVF

Cristóvam Nascimento

Brazil Correspondent/Chief Trainer , GVF

16th April 2014

GVF Training and Certification Program

Meet the Contributors

2

Global VSAT Forum

www.gvf.org

David Hartshorn

[email protected]

Martin Jarrold

[email protected]

Cristóvam Nascimento

[email protected]

SatProf, Inc.

www.satprof.com

Ralph Brooker

[email protected]

Greg Selzer

[email protected]

http://www.gvf.org/

mailto:[email protected]



http://www.satprof.com/





Meet the Contributors

3

Global VSAT Forum

www.gvf.org

MRA Working Group

Colin Robinson

[email protected]

Network Validation Lead

Riaz Lamak

[email protected]

http://www.gvf.org/


http://www.satprof.com/


Radio Frequency Interference: Prevention & Mitigation Strategies for





Connectivity requires linking the VSAT…

5


…with the right satellite…

6


…in this case, the right GEO

7

Interference source: Adjacent Satellite (ASI) Training objective: Balanced antenna pointing technique


Spot beams permit smaller, cheaper terminals.

With hardware costs below $1000 per terminal, the affordable budget for installation services is very low!

The perfect storm: Small dishes (wide beams) x Cheaper labor x High volumes = INTERFERENCE INCIDENTS

But, interference can get in the way… Why?

8

TERMINALS DEPLOYED

SATELLITE SENSITIVITY

INTERFERENCE INCIDENTS

HARDWARE COST

INSTALLER FEES

1990 Today

As volumes grow, hardware costs are now well below $1000 per terminal. Over 100,000 Ku-band

VSATs are installed every year. Any one can cause serious interference.


Preventing Interference… overcoming a connectivity obstacle

9

INTERFERENCE GEOLOCATION TRAINING

CARRIER ID

EQUIPMENT QUALITY

REACTION PREVENTION


Solution: GVF Training… via online course delivery

Courses are self-paced, available 24 hrs

Automatic course and prerequisite linking for certification management

Registration self service or by order.

Dedicated student support staff

Requires only a moderate-speed Internet connection and browser with Flash player

Simulator skills assessments connect to LMS student scores

Multi-language instant-switch capability

10


Who is using GVF training?

11


Who we are

The association of the global satellite communications industry

Not-for-profit

200+ member organizations

All major satellite operators, manufacturers, & service providers

12

Experienced satellite systems engineers

Instructional designers & Flash developers

Partnered with GVF

Training content creation and program administration

Created content for and manages highly successful GVF training program (8000+ trainees, VSAT, marine, mobile)


Interference impacts all satcom users

13

Interference source: Adjacent Satellite (ASI) Training objective: Balanced antenna pointing technique



14

Interference source: Cross-pol interference Training objective: Feed alignment and cross-pol test skills



Interference source: Excess carrier power intermodulation Training objective: Transmit power lineup skills

15


Sample learning page (GVF 510)

16


Our mission:

Reach all VSAT installers!

17

8000+ worldwide have engaged in GVF training...

...but there may still be 20,000-40,000 untrained field technicians still out there.


Certification paths

18

SPB GVF 510

Basic Satellite Professional

HOST-B

SPA GVF 521 GVF 520

Advanced Satellite Professional

GVF 503x SPxx

Specialist

Satellite Professional (Fixed/VSAT)

GVF 561 SPxx

GVF 562x

Marine Operator

Marine specialist operator

Marine specialist professional

GVF 520 GVF 503x SPxx

Marine Professional


Examiners worldwide

19


Leveraging Training

20

INTERFERENCE GEOLOCATION TRAINING

CARRIER ID

EQUIPMENT QUALITY

SERVICE QUALITY

COST SAVING

DIFFERENTIATION

CUSTOMER RETENTION

MARKETING OUTREACH CSR


Integrated Training

21

Standard GVF training courses

GVF industry certifications

Organization training paths and in-house certifications

Dedicated portal with custom branding

Special reports and admin services

On-site class administration

Document repository

Custom courses for your organization

Individual student accounts

Convert existing PPT training to online

Standard GVF program Enhanced services

Integrated training program for your satellite communications

staff and customers

In-house GVF qualified Examiners

Direct sponsorships

ITU-plan sponsorships

Reselling


ITU-supported Scholarship Program

22

ITU-supported GVF Scholarship Program home page

gvf.org/training

Scholarship application form

Trainee full details

Trainee is awarded

Sponsor is notified

Trainee progress Trainee selection filter process


Accreditation Accredited Organization for Training (AO/T)

Means that your organization maintains a well-trained staff through rigorous training relevant to their duties.

90% of applicable* staff must have completed, or be actively enrolled in, the appropriate GVF training

70% must hold a current GVF certification or have completed appropriate GVF courses

May use AO/T seal in marketing and advertising

23

Staff member title or function Minimum GVF training or certification

VSAT field technician/engineer GVF Advanced Satcom Professional Certification

SNG uplink technician GVF/RFI-EUI Advanced Technical Operator or

GVF/RFI-EUI Basic Technical Operator

Marine VSAT technician/engineer GVF Marine VSAT Specialist

Satellite systems or network engineer GVF 520 (Fundamentals of Satcom)

Sales, Marketing, or Management of satellite

communications products or services

GVF 500 (Introduction to Satellite Communications)

Operator of auto-point VSAT or uplink system GVF/RFI-EUI Auto Point Operator Certification

Operator of Marine VSAT terminal GVF Marine VSAT Operator Certification






Quality Assurance

The Satellite Environment Today

Historical Industry Approach

Financial Impact:

COST TO SATELLITE OPERATORS

COST TO NETWORK & SERVICE PROVIDERS

COST TO USERS OF SATELLITE SERVICES

Corrective Actions – The Role of the GVF

Product Quality Initiative

Long Term Goals & Objectives

25


The Satellite Environment Today

26


History… to Remedy… 1

Early Days:

• ENGINEERS OFTEN TENDED TO SPECIFY / OVER-DESIGN HARDWARE FOR COMMERCIAL SATELLITE SERVICES

• SATELLITE OPERATORS IMPLEMENTED RIGOROUS IN-HOUSE QUALITY AND EQUIPMENT APPROVAL PROGRAMS

• THESE TRENDS RESULTED IN RELIABLE BUT HIGH COST SOLUTIONS

• A NUMBER OF MANUFACTURERS SAW A COMMERCIAL BENEFIT IN HAVING “APPROVED HARDWARE”

• MAJOR SATELLITE OPERATORS { INTELSAT, ASIASAT & EUTELSAT ETC. } WERE EARLY ADOPTERS OF THE CALL FOR HIGH STANDARDS

Other Satellite Operators Follow:

• MANY FOLLOW-ON OPERATORS ADOPTED THE RECOMMENDATIONS PUBLISHED BY THE LEAD SATELLITE OPERATORS WITHOUT REQUIRING THEIR OWN INTERNAL QUALITY AND TYPE APPROVAL PROGRAMS

• NO REQUIREMENT FOR EQUIPMENT TYPE APPROVAL BECOMES THE NORM FOR MANY OPERATORS

27



Competitive Pressures:

• THE SATELLITE INDUSTRY HAD ESTABLISHED A REPUTATION FOR PROVIDING RELIABLE COMMUMICATIONS SERVICES

• PRESSURES TO REMAIN COMPETITIVE CAUSED A NUMBER OF LEADING OPERATORS TO QUESTION THEIR STRICT QUALITY AND TYPE APPROVAL PROCEDURES

• IN-HOUSE DECISIONS WERE MADE TO REDUCE COSTS BY CUTTING OR REDUCING THESE PRACTICES

The Result:

• THE INDUSTRY EXPERIENCED A GRADUAL INCREASE IN LOWER QUALITY, LOWER COST HARDWARE ENTERING THE MARKET. THIS LED TO INCREASING OCCURRENCES OF INTERFERENCE TO SATELLITE SERVICES

• THE MAJOR OPERATORS REPORTED SIGNIFICANT LOSSES IN REVENUE DUE TO:

– UPWARDS OF $10 MILLION REQUIRED TO TRACK DOWN AND REMEDY INTERFERENCE INCIDENCES

– PAYMENT OF LARGE REFUNDS TO CUSTOMERS FOR DEGRADED SERVICES

– INCREASED COSTS ON PART OF THE END USES TO MAINTAIN REPAIR FACILITIES AND DEPLOY SERVICE TECHNICIANS TO THE FIELD

28



GVF Product Quality (QA) Framework:

• THE SATELLITE INDUSTRY HAS SHOWN A RESURGENCE OF INTEREST IN WORKING TOGETHER TO MITIGATE THE GLOBAL INTERFERENCE PROBLEMS

• THE GVF IS SEEN AS PIVOTAL IN BRINGING TOGETHER ELEMENTS OF THE SATELLITE

OPERATOR, MANUFACTURER AND REGULATORY COMMUNITIES • PRIORITY FOCUS IS PLACED ON PROMOTING HIGH QUALITY PERFORMANCE

PRODUCTS AND WORKING WITH SATELLITE OPERATORS AND MANUFACTURERS TO DEVELOP ROBUST TYPE APPROVAL TEST PROCEDURES

• APPROVAL TESTING TO BE WITNESSED AND VALIDATED BY AN INDEPENDENT QUALIFIED TEST ENTITY [ATE]

• WITNESSED TEST RESULTS CONDUCTED ON BEHALF OF ONE SATELLITE OPERATOR ARE TO BE RECOGNIZED BY OTHER OPERATORS WITHOUT THE NEED TO REPEAT MEASUREMENTS

• ENCOURAGE CERTIFICATION OF CHINESE GVF ATE’s FOR CONDUCTING TYPE APPROVALS IN THE ASIAN REGION

29


GVF Product Quality Assurance Implementation

Short Term:

• EXPAND PARTICIPATION OF SATELLITE OPERATORS, MANUFACTURERS AND REGULATORS IN THE PROGRAM

• PROMOTE THE VALUE OF TYPE APPROVALS AND BEST QUALITY PRACTICES

• ENCOURAGE DISEMINATION OF INFORMATION WITHIN SATELLITE OPERATOR COMMUNITY AND WORK TOWARDS HARMONIZING SPECIFICATIONS

Medium & Long Term:

• ESTABLISH A COHERENT INDUSTRY / SATELITE-BASED CORE CAPABILITY, COMPRISED OF EXPERTS TO BEST SERVE THE OBJECTIVES OF THE SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS COMMUNITY

• SOLIDIFY THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE GVF TRAINING, MRA TEST PROCEDURES, APPROVED TEST ENTITIES AND CARRIER ID AS THE KEY COMPONENTS OF THE QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM

• ELEVATE THE PERCEIVED VALUE OF A SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SOLUTION AS THE “SOLUTION OF CHOICE”. ATTRACT MORE INVOLVEMENT FROM CHINESE SATELLITE OPERATORS IN THE REGION

30






Equipment Type Approvals

THE EVOLUTION OF THE TYPE APPROVAL PROCESS

BENEFITS TO SATELLITE OPERATORS & MANUFACTURERS

REVIEW OF THE GVF-MRA DOCUMENTS:

GVF-101 COVERS TEST PROCEDURES AND THE MRA PROCESS

GVF-102 CROSS REFERENCE TO SPECIFICATIONS

GVF-103 DUTIES OF THE AUTHORIZED TEST ENTITY

GVF-104 AUTO-DEPLOY TERMINALTEST REQUIREMENTS

GVF-105 COMMS-ON-THE MOVE

GVF-107 APPLICATION FOR GVF TYPE APPROVAL

LONG TERM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

32


The Evolution of the Type Approval Process

Historical Perspective:

• MANUFACTURING PRACTICES AND TOLERANCES AVAILABLE IN THE LATE 1980’s AND EARLY 1990’s WERE PRIMARILY TARGETED RECEIVE ONLY (RxO) ANTENNAS

• EARLY RxO ANTENNAS TYPICALLY EXHIBITED POOR SIDELOBE AND CROSS POL (XPD) PERFORMANCE

The Entry of VSAT Antennas:

• PERFORMANCE FOR TWO-WAY (TRANSMIT / RECEIVE) ANTENNAS REQUIRED REDUCED SIDELOBES TO INITIALLY SATISFY THE 32-25 Log () THEN 29-25 LOG () ITU ENVELOPES. XPD PERFORMANCE WAS TYPICALLY SPECIFIED IN THE 25 TO 30 dB RANGE

• Tx-Rx VSAT ANTENNAS REQUIRED TO SATISFY ADDITIONAL PERFROMANCE CRITERIA INCLUDING Tx-Rx ISOLATION, RETURN LOSS VALUES (Γ)OF BETTER THAN 17.7 dB AS WELL AS PRESCRIBED G/T PERFORMANCE FOR SOME OPERATORS

• THE SATELLITE OPERATORS (ASIASAT, EUTELSAT, INTELSAT AND OTHERS) FOLLOWED ITU RECOMMENDATIONS AND ISSUED RIGID SPECIFICATIONS THAT SATISFIED LINK REQUIREMENTS WHILE PREVENTING INTERFERENCE TO ADJACENT SATELLITE SERVICES USING 2-DEGREE ORBITAL SPACING

33


Product Qualification - Validation

THE INTELSAT APPROACH, PHASE-1

• VSAT MANUFACTURER WOULD APPROACH INTELSAT WITH A REQUEST TO QUALIFY A PRODUCT FOR USE ON THE INTELSAT FLEET

• THE MANUFACTURER WAS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT DESIGN, MANUFACTURING, QA AND MEASURED RF PERFORMANCE DATA TO INTELSAT FOR EVAULATION. THE DOCUMENT CONTAINING THIS INFORMATION WAS REFERRED TO AS THE PHASE-1 REPORT

• INTELSAT EVALUATED THE PHASE-1 REPORT INDICATING ITS CONCLUSION IF THE APPLICANTS PRODUCT MET INTELSAT’S SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENTS

• IF SUCCESSFUL, THE APPLICANT MOVED ON TO PHASE-2

34


Product Qualification - Validation

THE INTELSAT APPROACH, PHASE-2

• REQUIRED APPLICANT TO PREPARE AT LEAST FIVE ANTENNA SAMPLES. INTELSAT WOULD SELECT THREE SAMPLES AT RANDOM FOR TESTING

• REQUIRED WITNESSED Co & XPD PATTERN TESTS, G/T TESTS, PORT-PORT ISOLATION TESTS AND RETURN LOSS TESTS ACROSS THE Tx & Rx BANDS. XPD TESTS CONDUCTED USING SWEPT FREQUENCY IN A NINE-POINT BOX

• IN CONJUNCTION WITH PRODUCT TESTING, THE INTELSAT REPRESENTATIVE EVALUATED THE MANUFACTURER’S PRODUCTION FACILITIES AND MANUFACTURING PROCESSES. THE KEY MEASURE WAS CONSISTENCY IN PERFORMANCE

• MANUFACTURER WOULD PREPARE AND SUBMIT A PHASE-2 REPORT TO INTELSAT FOR EVALUATION. POSSIBLE INTELSAT CONCLUSIONS WERE:

PRODUCT FOUND SUITABLE FOR OPEN ENDED TYPE APPROVAL

PRODUCT RECEIVED “BATCH APPROVAL” (LIMITED NUMBER)

APPROVAL DENIED. OPPORTUNITY FOR APPLICANT TO CORRECT ANY DEFICIENCIES AND RE-SUBMIT

INTELSAT ISSUED APPROPRIATE TYPE APPROVAL CERTIFICATE

35


Requirements differ between Satellite Operators

Similarities:

• ALL REQUIRE A FULL DESCRIPTION OF THE ANTENNA AND ITS SPECIFIED PERFORMANCE, BILL-OF-MATERIALS, MFG MODEL NUMBERS & VARIANTS THEREOF

• ALL REQUIRE CO AND XPD ANTENNA PATTERNS ON MULTIPLE SAMPLES AT THREE OR MORE FREQUENCIES IN THE Tx & Rx BANDS

• ALL REQUIRE ANTENNA GAIN MEASUREMENTS

• SOME REQUIRE BEAM-POINTING ERROR MEASUREMENTS UNDER STATIC AND DYNAMIC LOADS

• SOME REQUIRE MEASUREMENTS TO ESTABLISH MAXIMUM RADIO LOADS WITHOUT VIOLATING PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATION

• SOME REQUIRE MEASUREMENT OF G/T & ANTENNA NOISE TEMPERATURE AS A FUNCTION OF ELEVATION ANGLE

• SOME REQUIRE MEASUREMENT OF THE Tx FREQUENCY & EIRP STABILITY, SPURIOUS EMISSIONS & SPECTRUM PURITY

TYPICAL COSTS FOR CONDUCTING A SINGLE TYPE APPROVAL RUN BETWEEN US$30K AND US$60K

36


The GVF MRA Formed

As the demand for lower cost satellite services grew in the early 1990’S, it was quickly realized that a more effective solution was required for approving VSAT terminals, other than “ONE-TERMINAL-AT-A-TIME”

The Solution:

AN INVITATION WAS EXTENDED TO THE SATELLITE OPERATORS WHO HAD ESTABLISHED FORMAL TYPE APPROVAL PROGRAMS AS WELL TO THE LEADING VSAT EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURERS. THREE PRIMARY AGENDA OBJECTIVES WERE ESTABLISHED:

1. EXPLORE THE VARIOUS SATELLITE OPERATOR SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENTS

2. ARRIVE AT A MUTUAL AGREEMENT BETEEN THE REQUIREMENTS

3. DEVELOP A STRATEGY FOR REDUCING TYPE APPROVAL COSTS TO FOR BOTH THE SATELLITE OPERATORS AND MANUFACTURERS ALIKE

The Conclusion:

1. ESTABLISHED A FRAMEWORK WHEREBY INDEPENDENTLEY WITNESSED TESTS, CONDUCTED ON BEHALF OF ONE SATELLITE OPERATOR, WOULD BE RECOGNIZED BY OTHER OPERATORS WITHOUT THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL TESTING

2. THE GVF-MRA WAS CREATED TO ACT AS A NON-ALIGNED, INDEPENDENT ENTITY TO FACILITATE THE PROCESS

3. WORKING TOGETHER, THE GVF-MRA AND SATELLITE OPERATORS DEVELOPED TYPE APPROVAL TEST DOCUMENTATION

37


GVF-101… The First MRA Document

38

LIST OF PROCESSES

1. APPLICANT REPORT

2. SSOTA REVIEW

3. APPLICANT TEST PLANS

4. SSOTA REVIEW

5. PHASE-1 REPORT

6. SSOTA REVIEW &

ACCEPT

7. APPLICANT CONDUCT

PHASE 2 TESTS

8. ATE CONFIRMS

ACCURACY

9. APPLICANT PREPARES

PHASE 2 REPORT

10. SSOTA REVIEWS FINAL

REPORT AND ISSUES

APPROVAL.

11. IF FINAL APPROVAL IS

DENIED, APPLICANT CAN

REPEAT PROCESS

The GVF MRA Process

Data Package

(with updates)

Secondary Operator

Review and compare

with performance

requirements

Secondary Operator

Issue Operator Type Approval and

Certification Number

Yes

No

Manufacturer

Revise design

and/or quality

control

Manufacturer

Negotiate ATE

services with

operator; repeat

tests as necessary;

revise Data

Package

ATE

Witness and sign

off any repeated

tests; sign off any

changes to the

Data Package

Pa

ss

?

Manufacturer

Prepare and submit

Final SSOTA

application to Secondary

Operator

LIST OF PROCESSES

1. APPLICANT SUBMITS PHASE

2 TEST TO SSOTA

2. SSOTA REVIEWS REPORT

AND GRANTS APPROVAL

OR:

3. SSOTA REQUESTS

ADDITIONAL TESTS AND

INFORMATION

4. APPLICANT CONDUCTS

ADDITIONAL ATE

WITNESSED TESTS

5. APPLICANT SUBMITS

REVISED REPORT TO SSOTA

6. SSOTA GRANTS APPROVAL

7. IT APPROVAL IS DENIED,

APPLICANT HAS THE

OPTION OF REPEATING

TESTS


Revisions to GVF-101 ALL GVF DOCUMENTS ARE CONSIDERED AS ‘LIVING’ DOCUMENTS AND MAY

BE REVISED WITH INPUT FROM THE MANUFACTURING COMMUNITY OR SATELLITE OPERATORS

ALL REVISIONS REQUIRE APPROVAL BY THE GVF MEMBER SATELLITE OPERATORS

GVF-101 IS CURRENTLY UNDERGOING SEVERAL REVISIONS THAT COVER:

THE PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM TO SIMPLIFY THE APPROVAL PROCESS

ADDITIONAL TESTING PROCEDURES FOR AUTO-DEPLOY AND COMMS-ON-THE MOVE TERMINALS

MODIFIED TEST PROCEDURES TO CHARACTERIZE NEW TECHNOLOGY VSAT TERMINAL ANTENNAS

EXAMPLES INCLUDE ELECTRONICALLY SCANNED PHASED ARRAYS IN WHICH THE PATTERNS AND GAIN CHANGE AS A FUNCTION OF SCAN AND SKEW ANGLES

REVISIONS TO GVF-101 ARE ALSO BEING EVALUATED TO BETTER DEFINE THE “COMPLETE TERMINAL PACKAGE” RATHER THAN THE ANTENNA, FEED AND OMT

40


GVF-102 Satellite Ground Equipment Performance Requirements –

Cross Reference

GVF-102 Covers the Following Elements:

LISTING OF SSOTA CONTACTS

DEFINITION OF EQUIPMENT LEVELS INCLUDING (i) ANTENNA MODEL, (ii) EARTH STATION MODEL AND (iii) VSAT TERMINAL MODEL

PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR EACH SATELLITE OPERATOR COVERING CO- & XPD SIDELOBE MASKS, XPD PERFORMANCE IN BPE OR 1 ‘dB CONTOUR, PORT-PORT ISOLATION, G/T PROFILES, ANTENNA GAIN AND FREQUENCY BANDS

DEFINITION OF PERFORMANCE CATEGORIES USING THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA:

– NO HARM – INTERFERENCE TO OTHER SIGNALS AND INTERFERENCE LEVELS

– INTEROPERABILITY – LINK PERFORMANCE, G/T, BER vs Eb/No, EIRP CAPABILITY

– SAFETY – VOLTAGE, RadHaz, WIND LOADING

– EMC / EMI

– QUALITY – ISO-9000 STATISTICAL PROCESS CONTROL

41


GVF-103 Duties of Authorized Test Entities under Mutual Recognition Arrangement Procedure

ATE Definition:

AN AUTHORIZED TEST ENTITY [ATE] IS DEFINED AS AN ORGANIZATION OR INDIVIDUAL, AUTHORIZED BY THE GVF-MRA, TO WITNESS TYPE APPROVAL TESTING AND TO CERTIFY THE ACCURACY OF THE RESULTS

ATE Qualifications:

ANTENNA MODEL ATE’S: POSSESS THOROUGH UNDERSTANDING OF ANTENNA MEASUREMENTS, THEORY AND PRACTICE, INCLUDING MEASUREMENTS OF Co & XPD PATTERNS, AXIAL RATIO, CROSS POL DISCRIMINATION, ANTENNA TEMPERATURE PROFILE AND POINTING / TRACKING ACCURACY

EARTH STATION ATE’S: IN ADDITION TO ABOVE SKILLS, EARTH STATION ATE’s MUST HAVE EXPERTISE IN EIRP FREQUENCY STABILITY MEASUREMENTS, SPURIOUS OSCILLATIONS. SPECTRUM PURITY, AMPLITUDE RESPONSE AND ON & OFF AXIS EMISSIONS MEASUREMENTS

VSAT TERMINAL ATE’S: ADDITIONAL SKILLS TO INCLUDE MEASUREMENTS OF SIGNAL BANDWIDTH, SPURIOUS EMISSIONS AND BER VS Eb/No

ATE Approval Process:

NOMINEE’S CREDENTIALS EVALUATED BY GVF-MRA AND ON APPROVAL, NOMINEE’S APPLICATION IS SUBMITTED TO ALL MEMBER SATELLITE OPERATORS FOR EVALUATION. SUCCESSFUL CANDIDATE MUST RECEIVE A UNAMINOUS APPROVAL

42


GVF-104 Performance & Test Guidelines for Type Approval of Auto-Deploy & VMES Satellite Communications Terminals

Overview:

DOCUMENT PRESENTS BEST PRACTICES FOR QUALIFYING AUTO-DEPLOY TERMINALS OPERATING WITH C, X, Ku & Ka BAND TERMINALS AND SATELLITES LOCATED IN A FIXED GSO ORBIT

ADITIONALLY, ANTENNA’s USED IN THE TERMINALS MUST SATISFY THE REQUIREMENTS OF GVF-101

Additional Performance Requirements:

SATISFY DESIGNATED Co- & X-POL OFF-AXIS EIRPSD MASKS

SATISFY VARIOUS SATELLITE OPERATOR XPD SPECIFICATIONS

SATISFY DESIGNATED BEAM POINTING ERROR LIMITS INCLUDING THE EFFECS OF MECHANICAL BACKLASH AND WING LOADING

DEMONSTRATE Tx INHIBIT FUNCTION IF THE BPE LIMITS ARE EXCEEDED FOR MORE THAN 500 ms (TYPICAL SPECIFICATION)

Most Recent GVF-104 Document RELEASED ON 28 February 2011

43


GVF-105 Performance & Test Guidelines for Type Approval of ‘COTM’ Satellite Terminals

Overview:

DOCUMENT PRESENTS BEST PRACTICES FOR QUALIFYING COTM TERMINALS OPERATING IN C, X, Ku & Ka BANDS WITH SATELLITES IN FIXED GSO ORBIT LOCATIONS

COTM TERMINALS ARE FULLY STABILIZED AND MAY BE OPERATED FROM LAND, SEA OR AIRBORNE MOVING VEHICLES

ADITIONALLY, ANTENNA’s USED IN COTM TERMINALS MUST SATISFY THE REQUIREMENTS OF GVF-101

Additional Performance / Test Requirements:

SATISFY DESIGNATED Co- & X-POL OFF-AXIS EIRPSD MASKS

DEMONSTRATE Tx INHIBIT FUNCTION IF THE BPE LIMIT OF 0.5º IS EXCEEDED FOR > 100 ms (TYPICAL SPECIFICATION)

MAY USE COOPERATING ADJACENT SATELLITES FOR PRECISE ALIGNMENT

GVF-105 is the NEWEST Document RELEASED August 2013

44


Conclusions, Goals & Objectives

Conclusions THE GVF-MRA HAS ESTABLISHED ROBUST TEST PROCEDURES FOR QUALIFYING VSAT, AUTO-DEPLOY AND

COMMS ON THE MOVE TERMINALS. OVER THE YEARS, THE GVF HAS SEEN INCREASED INTEREST ON THE PART OF THE SATELLITE OPERATORS TO ADOPT GVF-MRA BEST PRACTICES

WITH THE INCREASING NUMBER OF Ka-BAND SATELLITES, IT IS CRITICAL TO ESTABLISH SOLID PRODUCT QUALIFICATION PROCEDURES IN ORDER TO PREVENT THE ASI PROBLEMS THAT HAVE BEEN EXPERIENCED IN THE LOWER C & Ku-BAND FREQUENCIES

THESE PROCEDURES HAVE BEEN EMPLOYED BY INTELSAT, EUTELSAT, ASIASAT, ANATEL, NIIR, PALAPA, CHINA ORIENT, APT & OTHER SATELLITE OPERTATORS

Long Term Goals & Objectives THE GVF-MRA IS SEEKING TO EXPAND THE REACH OF THE QUALITY ASSURANCE FRAMEWORK AND TO

INVOLVE THE PARTICIPATION OF MORE SATELLITE OPERATORS IN ORDER ENSURE THE CONTINUED SUCCESS OF THE SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS MARKET

THE GVF IS ACTIVELY SEEKING PARTICIPATION FROM MORE COUNTRIES IN THE AREA OF ANTENNA TYPE APPROVAL AND IN THE CREATION OF QUALIFIED AUTHORIZED TEST ENTITIES

45





GVF Training and Certification Program 47

Network Validation…

Examples... Improper Weights; Cabling &

Conduits; Rusted El jack without check nut;

Cement Block kept on IFL Cable, no guide

wire or conduit used


LoS and electrical interference; Water ingress in the feed horn; Rusted structure without Az check nut; No Ballast; Loose cables without weather proofing




49



50


Technical Vetting

1. Review Link Budget; Test Latency; Ping Response; Data from the NMS

2. Conduct field site visits to remote locations (selected or all sites). Assess the quality of Installation & Maintenance, physical installations, type of cable connectors used, weather-proofing of connectors, check wave guide, placement of the equipment: outdoor & indoor, Check power condition, grounding

3. Test Antenna Optimization, Pointing & Peaking; Verify interference (if any): identify source & suggest how to mitigate; Conduct tests on the link; Measure parameters with Spectrum Analyzer; Review Applications performance from the remote site (e.g. Video Conferencing, VoIP, Data Transfer, etc.)


Study of NMS

Link Budget Analysis (Sample screen shots)


Coordination

– Constantly interact with the Hub - NOC - End User SPOC and others (Service Provider/OEM/System Integrator), having equipment in the network: video conference / routing equipment; backhaul links on fiber or RF, etc

– Get the Service Provider & End-User into the room to discuss findings as well as explain suggested solutions

– Explain the limitations and capabilities of the network to set right the expectations by the end user


Reporting & Follow-on

1. Prepare comprehensive and consolidated report of the findings; Discuss solutions; Accepted by the Service Provider

2. Suggest recommendations to mitigate challenges

3. Submit hard and soft copy of the report

Advise on methodology and approach for follow-on efforts needed to have Optimum Performance of the Network.

1. Suggest use of Facilities Management Services (FMS), wherein experienced technical manpower can be posted at key customer locations and work alongside the end-user & service provider to ensure high up-times

2. Promote Capacity Building through Training & Certification





Thank You

Date post:	28-Jul-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	phamdan
View:	213 times
Download:	0 times

OPTIMISING THE NETWORK - EMP HomeTwo_1450... · ITU-plan sponsorships Reselling . GVF Training and...

Documents