phy performance evaluation with 60 ghz wlan channel models n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
PHY Performance Evaluation with 60 GHz WLAN Channel Models PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
PHY Performance Evaluation with 60 GHz WLAN Channel Models

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 14

PHY Performance Evaluation with 60 GHz WLAN Channel Models - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 115 Views
  • Uploaded on

PHY Performance Evaluation with 60 GHz WLAN Channel Models. Date: 2010-05-20. Authors:. Abstract.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'PHY Performance Evaluation with 60 GHz WLAN Channel Models' - javan


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
phy performance evaluation with 60 ghz wlan channel models
PHY Performance Evaluation with 60 GHz WLAN Channel Models

Date: 2010-05-20

Authors:

Alexander Maltsev, Intel

abstract
Abstract

This contribution presents the simulation results for PHY performance evaluation in terms of Packet Error Rate (PER) characteristics as functions of Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) over 60 GHz channel models for the Conference Room, Living Room, and Enterprise Cubicle environments describing in [1].

Alexander Maltsev, Intel

introduction
Introduction
  • The goal of this contribution is to illustrate PHY performance (PER vs SNR curves) over developed 60 GHz channel models for the Conference Room (CR), Living Room (LR) and Enterprise Cubicle (EC) environments [1].
  • Simulation results were obtained for OFDM modulation and FEC scheme which is a standard Convolutional Code with polynomials {1338,1718}.

Alexander Maltsev, Intel

phy channel impulse response assumptions
PHY Channel Impulse Response Assumptions

In accordance with EVM document [2]:

  • Channel impulse response should be normalized on an instantaneous basis (packet-by-packet). Instantaneous normalization of the CIRs is performed after application of beamforming.
  • Isotropic and basic steerable antenna model with directional antenna pattern defined as a Gaussian function with 300 mainlobe beamwidth and -20 dB backlobe may be applied on both TX and RX sides [1].
  • Directional TX and RX antenna patterns are steered toward the Maximum Power Ray (MPR beamforming) [1].

Alexander Maltsev, Intel

simulated channel models
Simulated Channel Models
  • AWGN channel model
  • Simulated scenarios for Conference Room channel model:
    • STA-STA sub-scenario, omni TX to omni RX, LOS, w/o beamforming, w/o polarization support
    • STA-STA sub-scenario, directional TX to directional RX, NLOS, MPR beamforming, w/o polarization support
    • STA-STA sub-scenario, omni TX to directional RX, NLOS, MPR beamforming, w/o polarization support

Note: Simulation results for STA-AP sub-scenario are not provided. STA-AP sub-scenario has the same PER vs SNR performance for MPR beamforming as an STA-STA sub-scenario due to the same intra cluster channel model parameters.

  • Simulated scenarios for Living Room channel model:
    • Omni TX to omni RX, LOS, w/o beamforming, w/o polarization support
    • Directional TX to directional RX, NLOS, MPR beamforming, w/o polarization support
    • Omni TX to directional RX, NLOS, MPR beamforming, w/o polarization support
  • Simulated scenarios for Enterprise Cubicle channel model:
    • Omni TX to omni RX, near STA location, LOS, w/o beamforming, w/o polarization support
    • Directional TX to directional RX, far STA location, NLOS, MPR beamforming, w/o polarization support
    • Omni TX to directional RX, far STA location, NLOS, MPR beamforming, w/o polarization support
  • Note: Hardware impairments, timing acquisition, preamble detection, channel estimation and other impairments are not considered.

Alexander Maltsev, Intel

slide7

Comparison of PER System Performance for LOS CR, LR, and EC Channel Models for Omni-to-Omni Antenna Configuration with AWGN Reference Curves

For PER=10-3 threshold:

  • CR PER curves for MCSs with code rate ½ have degradation in comparison with AWGN reference performance ~0.4-0.7 dB.
  • CR PER curves for MCSs with code rate ¾ have degradation in comparison with AWGN reference performance ~1.4-1.9 dB.
  • LR PER curves for MCSs with code rate ½ have degradation in comparison with AWGN reference performance ~1.2-1.6 dB.
  • LR PER curves for MCSs with code rate ¾ have degradation in comparison with AWGN reference performance ~3.5-4.0 dB.
  • EC PER curves for STA near location scenario demonstrate approximately the same performance as for LR model (the difference is less than 0.3 dB).

Alexander Maltsev, Intel

per system performance for different mcss for nlos cr channel model
PER System Performance for Different MCSs for NLOS CR Channel Model
  • d-d – directional TX to directional RX
  • o-d – omni TX to directional RX
  • For PER=10-3 threshold, CR PER curves for different MCSs for omni-to-directional antenna configuration in comparison with directional-to-directional case have performance loss ~0.3-1.5 dB.

Alexander Maltsev, Intel

per system performance for different mcss for nlos lr channel model
PER System Performance for Different MCSs for NLOS LR Channel Model
  • d-d – directional TX to directional RX
  • o-d – omni TX to directional RX
  • For PER=10-3 threshold, LR PER curves for different MCSs for omni-to-directional antenna configuration in comparison with directional-to-directional case have performance loss ~0.8-2.0 dB.

Alexander Maltsev, Intel

per system performance for different mcss for nlos ec channel model
PER System Performance for Different MCSs for NLOS EC Channel Model
  • d-d – directional TX to directional RX
  • o-d – omni TX to directional RX
  • For PER=10-3 threshold, EC PER curves (far location scenario) for different MCSs for omni-to-directional antenna configuration and directional-to-directioanal configuration have approximately the same performance (the difference is less than 0.2 dB).

Alexander Maltsev, Intel

slide11

Comparison of PER System Performance for NLOS CR, LR, and EC Channel Models for Directional-to-Directional Antenna Configuration with AWGN Reference Curves

  • d-d – directional TX to directional RX
  • For PER=10-3 threshold CR and LR PER curves demonstrate similar system performance. In opposite case, EC curves have sufficient degradation.
  • For MCSs with code rate ½:
    • CR (or LR) PER curves have degradation in comparison with AWGN reference curves equal to ~ 1.5-2.0 dB.
    • EC PER curves have degradation in comparison with AWGN reference curves equal to ~ 2.9-3.6 dB.
  • For MCSs with code rate ¾:
    • CR (or LR) PER curves have degradation in comparison with AWGN reference curves equal to ~ 3.5 – 4.0 dB.
    • EC PER curves have degradation in comparison with AWGN reference curves equal to ~ 6.3-7 dB

Alexander Maltsev, Intel

slide12
Comparison of PER System Performance for NLOS CR, LR, and EC Channel Models for Omni-to-Directional Antenna Configuration
  • o-d – omni TX to directional RX

For PER=10-3 threshold:

  • LR PER curves for different MCSs in comparison with CR PER curves have performance loss ~ 0.3 dB.
  • EC PER curves (far location scenario) for different MCSs in comparison with CR PER curves have performance loss ~ 1-1.8 dB.

Alexander Maltsev, Intel

conclusion
Conclusion
  • This contribution illustrates PHY performance evaluation in terms of Packet Error Rate (PER) characteristics as functions of Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) for OFDM modulation and simple FEC scheme over 60 GHz channel models for the Conference Room, Living Room and Enterprise Cubicle environments.

Alexander Maltsev, Intel

references
References
  • IEEE doc. 802.11-09/0334r8. Channel models for 60 GHz WLAN systems, A. Maltsev et al, Mar. 2010.
  • IEEE doc. 802.11-09/0296r16. TGad Evaluation Methodology, Eldad Perahia, Jan. 2010.

Alexander Maltsev, Intel