1 / 18

Validation of 802.11n Channel Models

This paper presents the validation of 802.11n channel models using Intel's measurements. It compares the RMS delay spread and capacity of different models and provides conclusions based on the findings.

cfaye
Download Presentation

Validation of 802.11n Channel Models

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. November 2003 Validation of 802.11n Channel Models Qinghua LiCommunications Technology LabIntel Corporation November 2003 Qinghua Li, Intel Corporation

  2. November 2003 Outline • Overview of 802.11n Channel Model • Overview of Intel’s measurements • RMS delay spread • Capacity comparison • Conclusion Qinghua Li, Intel Corporation

  3. Medbo’s SISO model Cluster decomposition and angle assignment Angular power delay profile for all taps Integration over all angles for each tap Correlation matrixes seen from Rx and Tx for each tap Kronecker product of Rx and Tx correlation matrixes Correlation matrix for channel matrix entries and for each tap Cholesky decomposition Generate channel matrix from i.i.d. Gaussian random variables for each tap November 2003 Vinko’s Model • Developed in a special committee within IEEE 802.11 HTSG • Extended from Medbo’s SISO models for HIPERLAN/2 • Three companies are doing validation [1—3]. Qinghua Li, Intel Corporation

  4. November 2003 Multipath profile seen from receiver Qinghua Li, Intel Corporation

  5. November 2003 Multipath profile seen from transmitter Qinghua Li, Intel Corporation

  6. November 2003 Correlation matrix on transmit (receive) side • 4x4 MIMO channel transmit and receive correlation matrices are Correlation matrix of channel matrix entries and its approximation where h = vec[ H] Qinghua Li, Intel Corporation

  7. November 2003 Channel Matrix for Each Tap • Channel matrix H for one tap • It can be shown that • The model delivers time domain channel impulse response for each Tx/Rx antenna pair. Qinghua Li, Intel Corporation

  8. November 2003 Intel Measurements • One (typical) office environment • Distance 5-25 m and RMS delay 23-79 ns • Two 4-by-4 grids of positions are on both Tx and Rx • The transmit/receive antenna steps through 16 positions. • Channels in 5.15—5.4 GHz band are captured. Qinghua Li, Intel Corporation

  9. 12m 5m 7m 9m 3m 25m 14m 18m 13m November 2003 Measurement Locations Qinghua Li, Intel Corporation

  10. November 2003 Pair measurement and model by delay spread • Mean and standard deviation of RMS delay spreads in measurements • RMS delay spreads in Vinko’s models • Model B: 15 ns residential S16 • Model C: 30 ns small office S15, S17 • Model D: 50 ns typical office S6 • Model E: 100 ns large office S9 Qinghua Li, Intel Corporation

  11. November 2003 Compare capacity of for 4x4 channels • 4x4 channel with 20 MHz bandwidth and 4’’ spacing • Capacity mean and standard deviation at SNR 15dB • Model error is less than 9% Qinghua Li, Intel Corporation

  12. November 2003 Compare 1x1 and 4x4 channel capacity • 1x1 and 4x4 measured channels with 20 MHz bandwidth • Capacity mean at SNR 15dB • MIMO factor is about 3.5 for model C, D, E and their corresponding measurements Qinghua Li, Intel Corporation

  13. November 2003 Conclusion • Three office models (C,D,E) match measurements. • The residential model (B) doesn’t match measurement well. • 4x4 capacity is more than 3.5 times of 1x1’s for model C, D, E and their corresponding measurements • The capacity means of model C,D,E are greater than the measured by about 4%. • STDs of all models are about 20% smaller than the measured. • Means for measured channels are less than that of IID channel by less than 8%. • Model E (large office) has smaller capacity means than model D (typical office). Qinghua Li, Intel Corporation

  14. November 2003 References • [1] V. Erceg, et al, “Indoor MIMO WLAN Channel Models,” IEEE Doc. No. 802.11-03/161r2, Sept. 2003. • [2] N. Tal, “Time Variable HT MIMO Channel Measurements,” IEEE 802.11-03/515r0, July 2003. • [3] A. Jagannatham, V. Erceg, “Indoor MIMO Wireless Channel Measurements and Modeling at 5.25 GHz,” Document in preparation, Sept. 2003. Qinghua Li, Intel Corporation

  15. November 2003 Backup • CDF of 1x1 and 4x4 channel capacity for model B. Qinghua Li, Intel Corporation

  16. November 2003 Backup • CDF of 1x1 and 4x4 channel capacity for model C. Qinghua Li, Intel Corporation

  17. November 2003 Backup • CDF of 1x1 and 4x4 channel capacity for model D. Qinghua Li, Intel Corporation

  18. November 2003 Backup • CDF of 1x1 and 4x4 channel capacity for model E. Qinghua Li, Intel Corporation

More Related