Berkeley Wireless Research Center Why Theorists and Implementers Should Work Together Bob Brodersen...
Transcript of Berkeley Wireless Research Center Why Theorists and Implementers Should Work Together Bob Brodersen...
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Why Theorists and Implementers Should Work
TogetherBob Bob
BrodersenBrodersenDept. of Dept. of
EECSEECSUniv. of Univ. of
Calif.Calif.Berkeley Berkeley
http://bwrc.eecs.berkeley.edu
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
In particular 17 GHz of New Unlicensed Bandwidth…
The UWB bands have some use restrictions, but FCC requirements will allow a wide variety of new applications
The 57-64 GHz band can transmit up to .5 Watt with little else constrained
Cognitive Radio allocations in the regulatory process (400-800MHz band to start with) – maybe also in 3-10 like UWB?
How can we use these new resources?
0 10 20
UWB/CR?UWB/CR
UWBMm
WaveBand
30 40 50 60 GHzComm Vehicular CommID
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
New radio technologies- UWB, 60 GHz and Cognitive
Carrier Frequency (GHz)
Pea
k D
ata
Rat
e (b
ps)
1 G
100 M
10 M
1 M
100 k
10 k
HDTV motion picture,Pt.-to-Pt. links
NTSC video;rapid file transfer
MPEG video;PC file transfer
Voice,Data
Cellular
3G
802.11b
60 GHzPt.-to-Pt.
60 GHzWLAN
Bluetooth
0.1 1 10 100
802.11a
ZigBee
UWB
UWB
CognitiveRadios
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
New Challenges
Interference channel is the one of interest» How do we model this channel» What is its capacity» How do we best use this channel
Non-sinusoidal radios» How to analyze and design with impulses
Microwave Radios» The path to Gbit/sec links» Requires optimal antenna systems
Cognitive Radios» How do we sense signals» How do we design radios with large in-band interferers
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Lets start with UWB…
According to the FCC:
“Ultrawideband radio systems typically employ pulse modulation where extremely narrow (short) bursts of RF energy are modulated and emitted to convey information. … the emission bandwidths … often exceed one gigahertz. In some cases “impulse” transmitters are employed where the pulses do not modulate a carrier.”
-- Federal Communications Commission, ET Docket 98-153, First Report and Order, Feb. 2002
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Two basically different signaling approaches
Sinusoidal, Narrowband
Frequency
Time
Time
Frequency
Impulse, Ultra-Wideband
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
First Major Application Area
High Speed, Inexpensive Short Range Communications (3.1-10.6 GHz)» FCC limit of -41dBm/Mhz at 10 feet severely
limits range – Power level roughly 1 mW– For short range communications this may be OK –
e.g. line of sight from 10 feet for connecting a camcorder to a set-top box, “wireless Firewire”
» Advantage is that it should be less expensive and lower power than a WLAN solution (since 802.11a > 100 Mbits/sec for short range)
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Status of High Rate, Short Range UWB
Major standards battle in IEEE 802.15.3
Two competing approaches» Frequency hopping OFDM
– Exploits the wide bandwidth to provide higher rates with lower precision hardware (e.g. reduced A/D accuracy, linearity requirements)
– Uses a well understood technique (802.11a/g)
» Impulse radios – New approach, so somewhat unknown ultimate
performance and efficiency
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
OFDM or Impulse?
OFDM strategy makes sense from a theoretical standpoint (deals with multipath)
But what about the implementation ??
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Lets compare to an 802.11a chip
What can we eliminate?
ADC/DACViterbi
Decoder
MAC Core
Time/FreqSynch
FFTDMA
PCI
AGCFSM
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
How about using Impulses?
Basically pulsed rate data transmission – sort of optical fiber without the fiber…
Key design problem, as in wireline transmission, is synchronization
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Time (nS)
Magnitude (
V)
“1” “0”Biphase signalling
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Front-end is very simple
Mostly Digital Radio Architecture: - Wideband antenna - Wideband amplifier / matching network - RF bandpass filtering (low Q filter) - High bandwidth sample and track - High-speed and low resolution ADC - Sampling Clock generator - DSP
UWB attenna
BpLNA
ADC
DigitalBackend
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Receive match filter
Basic approach is to create a match filter for the above received pulse shape
This collects all the energy associated with the waveform
PN0 PN1
Nripple<= 64 ns
Trep10ns ~ 100ns
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Sampling Offset Effects
Unfortunately a small timing offset results in a very different waveform so the match filter output is very dependent on the timing
150 160 170 180 190 200
-1
0
1x 10
-4 0Ts
150 160 170 180 190 200
-1
0
1x 10
-4 0.125Ts
150 160 170 180 190 200
-1
0
1x 10
-4 0.25Ts
150 160 170 180 190 200
-1
0
1x 10
-4 0.375Ts
150 160 170 180 190 200
-1
0
1x 10
-4 0.5Ts
150 160 170 180 190 200
-1
0
1x 10
-4 0.625Ts
150 160 170 180 190 200
-1
0
1x 10
-4 0.75Ts
150 160 170 180 190 200
-1
0
1x 10
-4 0.875Ts
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
A solution to this… (Mike Chen)
Convert the single baseband pulse into an analytic signal (real and imaginary parts) via a Hilbert transformation.
The analogy is the use of the I and Q channel for sinusoidal systems
ADC
AnalyticMF
Hilbert
ShapeEst
Ave DetPulse
in (real)
Imag
Real
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
UWB impulse signal processing
Research into the signal processing for impulse detection is just beginning – so lots of opportunities
Analytic impulse signal processing also achieves
a timing resolution below the sampling period, what can this be used for?
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Second Major Application Area
Low Data Rate, Short Range Communications with Locationing (< 960 MHz)» Round trip time for pulse provides range
information – multiple range estimates provides location
» Used for asset tracking – a sophisticated RFID tag that provides location
» Can be used to track people (children, firemen in buildings)
» Sensor networks
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Location Determination Using UWB
UWB provides» Indoor measurements
» Relative location
» Insensitivity to multipath
» Material penetration (0-1 GHz band)
Time of flight
Transmit short discrete pulses instead of Transmit short discrete pulses instead of modulating code onto carrier signalmodulating code onto carrier signal– Pulses last ~1-2 nsPulses last ~1-2 ns
– Resolution of inches Resolution of inches
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900-10
-5
0
5
10
Signal processing for ranging
The problem is to determine the leading edge of the response
Simple averaging…
“Clean” algorithm (iterative best fit of time delayed waveforms)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 800
0.005
0.01
0.015
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Many new questions…
What are the limits on locationing accuracy and what are the dependences
What algorithms can be used to achieve these limits
How do we coordinate networks of devices and what advantages can we obtain
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Next lets look at the 60 GHz band…
0 10 20
UWB/CRUWBCR
UWBMm
WaveBand
30 40 50 60 GHzComm Vehicular CommID
Microwave communications
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Why is operation at 60 GHz interesting?
Lots of Bandwidth!!!» 7 GHz of unlicensed bandwidth in the U.S. and Japan » Europe CEPT “there is an urgent need to identify and
harmonize civil requirements in the frequency range 54–66GHz.”
57 dBm
40 dBm
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Why isn’t 60 GHz in widespread use?
The technology to process signals at 60 GHz is expensive
Misconceptions about path loss and propagation at 60 GHz
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Why isn’t 60 GHz in widespread use?
The technology to process signals at 60 GHz is expensive
Misconceptions about path loss and propagation at 60 GHz
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
VGS = 0.65 V
VDS = 1.2 V
IDS = 30 mA
W/L = 100x1u/0.13u
CMOS can do it - 130-nm CMOS has a gain of 7dB at 60 GHz
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
40-GHz and 60-GHz CMOS Amplifiers
Design and modeling can be incredibly accurate…. Power consumption: 36 mW (40 GHz), 54 mW (60 GHz)
18-dB Gain@ 40 GHz
11.5-dB Gain@ 60 GHz
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
A Leap Forward for CMOS
• CMOS offers two orders of magnitude cost reduction while providing higher integration and reliability
• Each new process generation moves it 20-40% higher
X Where we are nowwith 130 nm
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Why isn’t 60 GHz in widespread use?
The technology to process signals at 60 GHz is expensive
Misconceptions about path loss and propagation at 60 GHz
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Typical path loss (Friis) formula is a function of antenna gain Gr and Gt:
But maximum antenna gain increases with frequency for the same antenna area, A
Path loss of line-of-sight transmission – is that a major problem?
22
4 r
GG
P
P tr
t
r
2
4
A
G
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Using the same effective area then…
There is an improvement by the frequency squared It is better to be at higher frequencies!
22
1
r
AA
P
P tr
t
r
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Material penetration Not that much worse for most materials
» Compensated for by larger receive antenna (> 5 cm2) » Exploit wider available bandwidths as need through stronger
coding (trade data rate for range)
Frequency (GHz)3 5 8 10 20 30 50 80 100 200
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Concrete Block Painted 2X6 Board
Clay Brick
3/4" Plywood
3/4" Pine Board
Wet Paper Towel
GlassDrywall
Asphalt Shingle
To
tal O
ne W
ay A
tten
uati
on
(d
B)
Kevlar SheetPolyethylenePaper Towel (Dry)Fiberglass Insul.
(from Bob Scholtz)
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
The future will need GBit/sec wireless links
What technology will get us there? Lets compare 3 systems links
» UWB – (OFDM)» 802.11n – (MIMO)» 60 GHz
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
802.11n (TgnSync an Wwise proposals)
Configuration Rate ½, 16-QAM
Rate ¾, 16-QAM
Rate 2/3, 64-QAM
Rate ¾, 64-QAM
Rate 5/6, 64-QAM
1 Tx, 40 MHz 54 81 108 121.5 135
2 Tx, 40 MHz 108 162 216 243 270
3 Tx, 40 MHz 162 243 324 364.5 405
4 Tx, 40 MHz 216 364 432 486 540
TgnSync
Wwise
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Comparison Lets take an antenna that has an effective
area of 5 cm2
Frequency AntennaGain
UWB (7 band mode) 5.092 GHz 2.4 dB
802.11n (highest range)
5 GHz 2.4 dB
60 GHz 60 GHz 24 dB
We can have 24 dB of gain on both antennas – or even more on the receive side
We can have 24 dB of gain on both antennas – or even more on the receive side
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Power limitations
In all three cases near limit of FCC regulation (much higher in Japan)
An advantage of from 17 to 43 dB
How about bandwidth?
Power Ant. Gain Tx power
UWB -6.6 dBm 2.4 dB -4.2 dBm
802.11n 20 dBm 2.4 dB 22.4 dBm
60 GHz 15 dBm 24 dB 39 dBm
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Bandwidth efficiency requirement for a Gbit/sec
The efficiencies required to meet the Gbit/sec goals are unrealistic for any approach but at 60 GHz
Bandwidth Efficiency needed
Actual Maximum
Design Goal
UWB 480 MHz 2 Bits/Hz 1 Bit/Hz (480 Mbits/sec)
802.11n 40 MHz 25 Bits/Hz 17 Bits/Hz (680 Mbits/sec)
60 GHz 2 GHz .5 Bits/Hz .5 Bit/Hz (1 Gbits/sec)
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
We now need adaptive beamforming algorithms
Very closely related to MIMO algorithms – similar problem, need to spatially localize transmission
Need to rapidly adapt to varying conditions
)(ty
ArrayProcessing
)(tx
ArrayProcessing
1st path, 1 = 1
2nd path, 2 = 0.6
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Multiple antenna beamforming hardware is straight-forward
Wavelength is 5mm, so in a few square inches a large antenna array can be implemented
The challenge is how to determine the coefficients of this beamformer to maximize range while minimizing interference
a1
b1
a0
b0
a2
b2
PA
PA
PASingle Channel
Transceiver
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
The open questions… How best to implement a flexible, adaptive
antenna system What is the best way to use 7 GHz of
bandwidth to implement a high datarate link?» Extremely inefficient modulation but at a very
high rate? (say 2 GHz of bandwidth for 1 Gigabit/sec) – requires analog processing
» Or use an efficient modulation, so lower bandwidth. e.g. OFDM – but needs digital processing and a fast A/D
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Last topic – Cognitive Radios
According to the FCC:
“We recognize the importance of new cognitive radio
technologies, which are likely to become more
prevalent over the next few years and which hold
tremendous promise in helping to facilitate more
effective and efficient access to spectrum”
- Federal Communications Commission,
ET Docket No. 03-108, Dec 30th 2003
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
The spectrum shortage….
All frequency bands up to 60 GHz (and beyond) have FCC allocations for multiple users
The allocation from 3-6 GHz is typical - seems very crowded….
3 4 5 6 GHz
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
The reality…
Even though the spectra is allocated it is almost unused Cognitive radios would allow unlicensed users to share the
spectrum with primary users The TV band is interesting, but higher frequencies are
even more attractive
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 GHz
The TV band
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
What is a Cognitive Radio? Cognitive radio requirements
» co-exists with legacy wireless systems» uses their spectrum resources » does not interfere with them
Cognitive radio properties» RF technology that "listens" to huge swaths of
spectrum » Knowledge of primary users’ spectrum usage as a
function of location and time» Rules of sharing the available resources (time,
frequency, space)» Embedded database to determine optimal
transmission (bandwidth, latency, QoS) based on primary users’ behavior
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Cognitive Radio Functions
D/APA
LNA A/D
IFFT
FFT
ADAPTIVELOADING
INTERFERENCEMEAS/CANCEL
MAE/POWER CTRL
CHANNELSEL/EST
TIME, FREQ,SPACE SEL
LEARN ENVIRONMENT
QoS vs.RATE
FEEDBACKTO CRs
Sensing Radio• Wideband Antenna, PA
and LNA • High speed A/D & D/A,
moderate resolution• Simultaneous Tx & Rx• Scalable for MIMO
Physical Layer• OFDM transmission
• Spectrum monitoring
• Dynamic frequency selection, modulation, power control
• Analog impairments compensation
MAC Layer • Optimize transmission
parameters
• Adapt rates through feedback
• Negotiate or opportunistically use resources
RF/Analog Front-end Digital Baseband MAC Layer
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Spectrum Sensing
Key challenge: detecting weak Primary user signals
Analog Processing
Digital Processing NetworkingA/D
Approach:
Spectrum Sensing is a cross-layer functionality
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Wideband Sensing Front-end
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 GHz
widebandantenna
A/D
RF Filter
LNA
Huge dynamic range
High speed A/D converter
Wideband Receiver
Nyquist sampling -> Multi-GHz A/D
Large dynamic range signal
Limitation: number of bits in A/D
E.g. 70dB dynamic range needs 12 bits
A/D figure of merit fs*2n
Need dynamic range reduction
Possible solutions
Tunable notch filters
Active cancellation
Spatial filtering using multiple antennas
AGC
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Sensing Radio Function
Subdivide the spectrum into sub-channels (say 1 MHz)
Detect primary user occupancy in each location/direction
Continually monitor for appearance of primary user
Provide information to MAC layer
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
x 109
-90
-85
-80
-75
-70
-65
-60
-55
-50
-45
-40
Frequency (Hz)S
ign
al
Str
en
gth
(d
B)
TV bands
Cell
PCS
Spectrum usage in (0, 2.5) GHz
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Spectrum Allocation and Access
What access scheme can assign
ANY sub-channel ANY CR user If we restrict one user per sub-channel:
» Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access (OFDMA)
More general solution:» One user to multiple non-contiguous subchannels (how?)
CR1 CR2 CR3
CR
4
Spectrum Allocation
Spectrum poolf1 fN
PU present
PU absent
Interference
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Summary
UWB – Need a new approach which yields high data rates with low complexity or new algorithms for positioning
60 GHz – Requires sophisticated adaptive antenna systems and modulation techniques which have reduced analog complexity
Cognitive radios – Requires sensing and highly adaptive transmission
Berkeley Wireless Research Center
Conclusion
Lots of New Opportunities That Require Close Cooperation
between Theorists and Implementers!!!