Doc.: IEEE 802.15- Submission November 2000 Anand Dabak, Texas InstrumentsSlide 1 Project: IEEE...

doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Slide 1 Anand Dabak, Texas Instruments

November 2000

Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)

Submission Title: TI PHY Submission to TG3Date Submitted: November 6, 2000Source: Anand Dabak Company Texas InstrumentsAddress 12500 TI Blvd, MS 8632, Dallas, TX 75243, USAVoice:214.480.4389, FAX: 972.761.6967, E-Mail:[email protected]

Re: original document.

Abstract: Submission to Task Group 3 for consideration as the High Rate PHY for 802.15.3

Purpose: Evaluation of Proposal.

Notice: This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P802.15. It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein.Release: The contributor acknowledges and accepts that this contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may be made publicly available by P802.15.

November 2000

Anand Dabak, Texas InstrumentsSlide 2

doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Physical Layer Submission to Task Group 3

Anand Dabak

Texas Instruments

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

High Speed WPAN• Criteria document specifies the following data rates :

– Audio: 128, 448, 896, 1280, 1450, 1536 kbps

– Video: 2.5, 7.3, 9.8, 18 Mbps

– Computer graphics: 15, 38 Mbps

• Propose a 2.4 GHz ISM band high speed WPAN consisting of three modes

– Mode 1: Bluetooth 1.0

– Mode 2: Maximum data rate up to 3.9 Mbps

– Mode 3: Maximum data rate up to 44 Mbps

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Salient Features

• Interoperability with Bluetooth

• High throughput: Up to 41 Mbps throughput

• Coexistence with Bluetooth and 802.11b.

• Resistance to microwave, Bluetooth, 802.11b jamming

• Low cost: cost < 1.5 x Bluetooth

• Low sensitivity level: -86 dBm

• Low power consumption

• Designed for FCC compliance

• Compatibility with Bluetooth MAC

• Low risk approach

• 99 percentile coverage in a 10 m radius, same as Bluetooth 1.0

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Mode 3 System SpecificationsParameters 1 2 3 4 5

Filter spectrum 802.11b 802.11b 802.11b 802.11b 802.11b

Modulation QPSK QPSK 16 QAM 16 QAM 16 QAM

Scrambling codelength

256 (DSSS) 256 (DSSS) 256 (DSSS) 256 (DSSS) 256 (DSSS)

Symbol rate 11 Msps 11 Msps 11 Msps 11 Msps 11 Msps

Coding Rate ½,Turbo

None Rate ½,Turbo

Rate ¾,Turbo

None

ARQ Optional Optional Optional Optional Optional

Data rate 11 Mbps 22 Mbps 22 Mbps 33 Mbps 44 Mbps

Transmit power -4 dBm 8 dBm 1 dBm 5 dBm 6 dBm

Distance 10 m 10 m 10 m 10 m 5 m

Bit error rate 1e-8 1e-8 1e-8 1e-8 1e-8

Packet error rate 1e-4 1e-4 1e-4 1e-4 1e-4

Receiversensitivity

-91 dBm -79 dBm -86 dBm -82 dBm -72 dBm

Fading margin 17 dB 17 dB 17 dB 17 dB 17 dB

Noise figure 10 dB 10 dB 10 dB 10 dB 10 dB

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Link Margin

802.15.1 802.15.3Transmit power

0dBm 1 dBm

Propagation loss (10 m)

70 dB 70 dB

Received power (10 m)

-70 dBm -69 dBm

Fading margin 17 dB 17 dBRequired signal power

-87 dBm -86 dBm

Noise figure 10 dB 10 dBRequired C/N 17 dB 8 dBNoise floor - 114 dBm - 104 dBm

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Fading Margin

Points where required frame error rate is not met

10 m

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Fading Margin

• Fading margin of 17 dB offers 99 % coverage in 10 m radius

Fading margin (dB) Outage probability0 30 %10 4 %14 1.6 %17 0.8 %20 0.4 %

-70 dBm-80 dBm -60 dBm-90 dBm -50 dBmPower received

Pro

babi

lity

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Slot Format

Syncfield

ARQfield

Packet

50 s 50 s

Preamble Header ARQinformation CRC Frame 1 Frame 2 ... Frame N

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

ARQ Format

• ARQ is performed on all of the frames inside the payload. Each bit in the ARQ payload corresponds to the corresponding frame.

25 sec turn around time

Sync. field Payload (up to 128 bits) CRC 25 sec turn around time

100 s ARQ Frame Length

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

TDD Scheme

• Slave responds with ARQ packet only in case of a unidirectional link

•Master does not send an ARQ packet in case of a unidirectional link

Master -> Slave Slave -> Master

Sync.field

Payload …

100 s

ARQ

Turn-around

25 s50 s 50 s

Sync.field

Payload …

100 s

ARQ

Turn-around

50 s 50 s 25 s

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Throughput

• Assume we use 16 QAM with rate 1/2 coding• Assume we have 100 segments in each packet• Therefore each packet takes 200+100*100=10.2 ms• Each segment has a payload of 2088 bits• Assume we perform PLS every 50 of these packets

• Therefore throughput is 2088*50*100/(10.2*50+7.5) = 20.17 Mbps

• A similar calculation shows that we meet the high end throughput of 40 Mbps using uncoded 16 QAM.Throughput = 4240*50*100/(10.2*50+7.5) = 40.97 Mbps

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Mode 3• Begin transmission in mode 1 and identify good 22 MHz bands. • Negotiate to enter mode 3.

• After spending a time T2 in mode 3 come back to mode 1 for time T1.

• Identify good 22 MHz bands.• Again negotiate to enter mode 3, this time possibly on a different 22

MHz band.• Regulatory issues similar to 802.11

• Time allocation T1 and T2 negotiated between the Master and Slave in the beginning depending upon data rate requirements of the Slave.

• Master maintains synchronization of all other Mode 1 devices in the piconet

• Sniff, Beacon, Paging, for other mode 1 devices.

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Mode 3 (Example)

Master

Slave 1 Slave 2

Slave 3

Mode 1 Mode 3

Mode 1

Mode 1 Mode 3 Mode 1 Mode 3 Mode 1 Mode 3

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Exponential 802.15.3 Channelmagnitude

time10Ts9Ts8Ts7Ts6Ts5Ts4Ts3Ts2TsTs0

RMSs

RMSs

TT

TkTk

kki

e

e

jNNh

/20

/20

2

2212

21

1

),0(),0(

TRMS = 10, 25 ns

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Probe, Listen and Select (PLS)

• Intelligently avoids microwave ovens, 802.11b, etc.

• Frequency diversity

Microwave802.11(b) interference

2402 MHz 2480 MHz

PLS selects this bandfor mode 3

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Turbo Codes• Serial concatenated convolutional code (SCCC):

– No error floor

– Choose low complexity code. Complexity less than 802.11 (b) convolutional code. Offers better performance compared to 802.11 (b) convolutional code.

– Implemented and tested the Turbo codes.

– 4 state outer and 2 state inner code

D D D

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Simulations (AWGN)

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Delay Spread Tolerance

• A MMSE-DFE is employed to combat multipath spread– 6 taps ( half-symbol spaced ) feedforward and up to 3 taps

feedback filters are used

– Taps are calculated from channel estimate performed during sync word

– Taps can be adapted using LMS • Combats interference

Feedforward Filter -

Feedback Filter

Output from square root raised cosine filter

To turbo decoder

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Delay Spread Results

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Dual Mode Radio, RF Cost Estimation• 802.15.1 and 802.15.3 share

– Antenna

– Antenna filter

– Tx/Rx Switch

– LNA

– Transmit modulator

– Power amplifier

• Additional blocks needed– RF/baseband conversion mixers for 802.15.3

– Low pass filters

– AGC amplifier (+/- 20 dB)

• The total RF chip area is less than 20 mm2 in RFBiCMOS

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Digital Technology • Digital technology allows integration and hence cost,

power reduction– Adding new features onto an existing chip leads to a small

increase in cost.

Baseband

Silicon area increase

Cost increase

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Baseband Blocks

• Baseband blocks– 2, 8 bit A/D’s at 22 MHz each.

– 2, 6 bits D/A’s at a speed of 44 MHz.

– A 16 tap half symbol spaced square root raised cosine filter.

– A 6 tap half symbol spaced feed forward and up to 3 tap symbol spaced feed back equalizer.

– The Turbo decoder size is a total of 50 K gates and 13 Kbytes of RAM.

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Baseband (Continued)

• Gate count and silicon area in 0.13 technology.

• 0.13 technology– Highly integrated solution takes advantage of Moore’s Law that

the cost of digital solutions decreases by a factor of 2 every 18 months. Moore’s Law does not apply to analog solutions, which decrease in cost much more slowly.

Baseband block Gate count Chip area (0.13 )A/D size N/A 1.2 mm2

D/A size N/A 0.32 mm2

Digital filter 22.4K 0.14 mm2

Equalizer 14K 0.09 mm2

Turbo Decoder 50K 0.32 mm2

Decoder RAM 13Kbytes 0.23 mm2

MAC 150K 0.94 mm2

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Power Consumption (Receive)

Function Power consumption forreceive (mW)

RF (receive) 65 mWA/D 10 mW

Digital filters 5 mWEqualizer 2 mW

Turbo decoder 16 mWTotal PHY power consumption 98 mW

MAC power consumption(estimated)

50 mW

Total PHY + MAC powerconsumption

148 mW

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Power Consumption (Transmit)

Function Power consumption fortransmit (mW)

PA 25 mWRF transmit (excluding PA) 65 mW

D/A 6 mWDigital filters 4 mW

Total PHY power consumption 100 mWMAC power consumption

(estimated)50 mW

Total PHY + MAC powerconsumption

150 mW

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Cost Comparison

• Estimated cost increase for (802.15.3 + 802.15.1) solution over 802.15.1 only solution:– RF cost increase is 25 %

– Baseband cost increase is 60 %

• Overall cost of (802.15.3 + 802.15.1) < 1.5Xcost of 802.15.1.

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Time to Market

• Shares most blocks with other wireless systems– Reuse 802.15.1 and 802.11(b) RF solutions

– Turbo decoder employed in 3G WCDMA systems

– Equalizer similar in design to 802.11(b), but simpler due to much smaller delay spreads.

– Other blocks including A/D converters, D/A converters are readily available.

• Hence can leverage off of other closely related existing wireless systems.

• Hence short time to market.

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

Conclusions

• Our solution – Satisfies minimum throughput of 20 Mbps

– Can go up to 40 Mbps for high bandwidth applications

– Maintains same link margin as Bluetooth 1.0 hence has 99 % coverage in a 10 m radius

• Same indoor operation range for Bluetooth 1.0 and 802.15.3.

• User will not have communication signal fade in and out.

– Allows high level of integration allowing cost to fall exponentially following Moore’s Law.

– Low cost solution (< 1.5 X Bluetooth 1.0)

– Low power consumption of less than 150 mW on transmit and receive

– Rapid time to market by leveraging off of existing wireless systems

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

General Solution Criteria Comparison Values

CRITERIA Comparison Values- Same +

Unit ManufacturingCost ($)

> 2 x equivalent Bluetooth 1 1.5-2 x equivalent Bluetooth1

< 1.5 x equivalent Bluetooth1

Interference andSusceptibility

Out of the proposed band:Worse performance thansame criteria

In band: -: Interferenceprotection is less than 25 dB

Out of the proposed band:based on Bluetooth 1.0b

In band: Interferenceprotection is less than 30 dB

Out of the proposed band:Better performance thansame criteria

In band: Interferenceprotection is greater than 35dB

IntermodulationResistance

< -45 dBm -35 dBm to - 45 dBm > -35 dBm

Jamming Resistance Any 3 sources jam Any 2 sources jam. No more than 1 sourceMultiple Access No Scenarios work Handles Scenario 2 One or more of the other 2

scenarios workCoexistence Individual Sources: 0%

Total: < 3Individual Sources: 50%Total: 3

Individual Sources: 100%Total: > 3 (Total=7)

Interoperability False True N/AManufactureability Expert opinion, models Experiments Pre-existence examples,

demoTime to Market Available after 1Q2002 Available in 1Q2002 Available earlier than

1Q2002Regulatory Impact False True N/AMaturity of Solution Expert opinion, models Experiments Pre-existence examples,

demo

Scalability Scalability in 1 or less than ofthe 5 areas listed

Scalability in 2 areas of the 5listed

Scalability in 3 or more ofthe 5 areas listed

November 2000


doc.: IEEE 802.15-<199r2>

Submission

PHY Criteria Comparison Values

CRITERIA Comparison Values- Same +

Size and FormFactor

Larger Compact Flash Type 1card

Smaller

MinimumMAC/PHYThroughput

< 20 Mbps (without MACoverhead)

20 Mbps + MACoverhead

> 20 Mbps + MACoverhead

High EndMAC/PHY

Throughput (Mbps)

N/A 40 Mbps + MACoverhead

40 Mbps + MACoverhead

Frequency Band N/A (not supported byPAR)

Unlicensed N/A (not supported byPAR)

Number ofSimultaneouslyOperating Full-

Throughput PANs

< 4 4 >4

Signal AcquisitionMethod

N/A N/A N/A

Range < 10 meters > 10 meters N/ASensitivity N/A N/A N/A

Delay SpreadTolerance

< 25 ns > 25 ns

PowerConsumption

> 1.5 watts Between .5 watt and 1.5watts

< .5 watt

Doc.: IEEE 802.15- Submission November 2000 Anand Dabak, Texas InstrumentsSlide 1 Project: IEEE...

Documents

Transcript of Doc.: IEEE 802.15- Submission November 2000 Anand Dabak, Texas InstrumentsSlide 1 Project: IEEE...