Millimeter-wave overlay HetNet for 5G - MiWEBA · Millimeter-wave overlay HetNet for 5G ―System...
1
Millimeter-wave overlay HetNet for 5G ―System level simulation for spectrum assessment― Millimeter-wave overlay HetNet for 5G Spectrum allocation status in US, EU and JP System level simulation Mobile traffic grows exponentially every year and cur- rent cellular network cannot deal with this traffic explo- sion. In order to overcome this problem, many research- ers try to achieve more than 1000x higher system rate by using ultra wideband millimeter wave technologies. BBU pool EPC C-RAN Macro BS SmallCell BS (LTE) C/U splitting C-plane U-plane Next generation CPRI interface Ultra high speed mmW smallcell BS Millimeter-wave HetNet architecture ・C-plane/U-plane splitting ・Next generation CPRI interface ・C-RAN (Cloud RAN) driven network ・Ultra high speed mmW smallcell basestation Which band in mm-wave frequency is suitable for 5G? Frequency [GHz] Bandwidth [GHz] Allocaon status JP US EU 27.94-29.45 1.5 FIXED-SATELLITE FIXED-SATELLITE AERONAUTICAL RADIONAVIGATION 31.8-33.4 1.6 Unused RADIONAVIGATION SPACE RESEARCH INTER-SATELLITE RADIONAVIGATION EARTH EXPLORATION-SATELLITE (acve) SPACE RESEARCH (acve) 40.5-43.5 3 FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE FIXED, RADIONAVIGATION 45.5-47.0 1.5 Unused MOBILE FIXED 47.2-50.2 3 Unused FIXED FIXED 55.78-57.0 20.22 FIXED MOBILE EARTH EXPLORATION- SATELLITE (passive) MARITIME RADIONAVIGATION 57.0-66.0 Unlicensed Unlicensed (-64) Unlicensed 66.0-71.0 Unused FIXED FIXED 71.0-76.0 FIXED, MOBILE FIXED FIXED 81.0-86.0 5 FIXED MOBILE FIXED EARTH EXPLORATION-SATELLITE FIXED RADIO NAVIGATION From the point of view of this allocation status, ①31.8-33.4, ②45.5-47.0, ③47.2-50.2, ④55.78-76.0, ⑤81.0-86.0 are useful bands. Pathloss model for mm-wave bands Pathloss model is generated by using frequen- cy domain interpolation ( ) 0,28GHz 10 28GHz / log 2 . 29 0 . 72 d d PL + = NYU 28GHz: ( ) 0,60GHz 10 60GHz / log 6 . 23 02 . 82 d d PL + = MiWEBA 60GHz: ( ) 0,73GHz 10 73GHz / log 9 . 26 7 . 82 d d PL + = NYU 73GHz: Original model ( ) b f a PL + = 10 log () () ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) () () ( ) ( ) ( ) () () ( ) d b d a J d b d a f f PL d f PL d b d a J d b d a I i i i , min arg ˆ , ˆ , , , , 1 2 o = − = ∑ = subject to () d a ≧ 20 Least square method 10 0 10 1 10 2 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 Distance [m] Pathloss [dB] 28GHz (Original) 28GHz (Interpolation) 60GHz (Original) 60GHz (Interpolation) 73GHz (Original) 73GHz (Interpolation) 10 0 10 1 10 2 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 Distance [m] Pathloss [dB] 32.6GHz 46.2GHz 48.7GHz 65.9GHz 83.5GHz ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ Original Candidate bands Good approx. 10dB x2 Parameter Value Number of macro BSs 7 (evaluate: 1, interference: 6) Number of smallcell BSs 0-80 / macrocell BS antenna height (macro / small) 25 m / 4 m Number of UEs 5000 Number of BS antennas (macro / small) 4 / 1 Number of UE antennas 2 Macro ISD 500 m Antenna beam pattern 3GPP / 11ad Antenna gain (macro / small) 17 dBi / 25dBi@60GHz Tx power (macro / small) 46 dBm / 10 dBm/channel 62 kbps/user / 62 Mbps/user Average traffic demand (current / 10 years later) By using our developed system level simulator, we assessed each candidates from two aspects 1. System rate gain vs Number of smallcell BSs 2. System rate gain vs Average traffic demand Symulation parameters 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 Number of smallcells System rate gain 32.6GHz (BW: 1.6GHz) 46.2GHz (BW: 1.5GHz) 48.7GHz (BW: 3GHz) 65.9GHz (BW: 20.22GHz) 83.5GHz (BW: 5GHz) 3.5GHz (BW: 100MHz) 60GHz (BW: 2.16GHz) ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ 10 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Average traffic value [/current value] System rate gain 32.6GHz (BW: 1.6GHz) 46.2GHz (BW: 1.5GHz) 48.7GHz (BW: 3GHz) 65.9GHz (BW: 20.22GHz) 83.5GHz (BW: 5GHz) ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ System rate gain vs Number of smallcell System rate gain vs Average traffic demand Although coverage becomes narrower as carrier frequency increases, the difference of total bandwidth is dominant in the result of comparison with number of smallcells. Addition- ally, the difference of the system rate gain is very big in high traffic case. Therefore 66GHz band (④) which has 20GHz bandwidth should be selected for the future 5G cellular net- work. Kei Sakaguchi, Tokyo Institute of Technology ① ② ③ ④ ⑤
Transcript of Millimeter-wave overlay HetNet for 5G - MiWEBA · Millimeter-wave overlay HetNet for 5G ―System...
Millimeter-wave overlay HetNet for 5G―System level simulation for spectrum assessment―
Millimeter-wave overlay HetNet for 5G
Spectrum allocation status in US, EU and JP
System level simulation
Mobile traffic grows exponentially every year and cur-rent cellular network cannot deal with this traffic explo-sion. In order to overcome this problem, many research-ers try to achieve more than 1000x higher system rate by using ultra wideband millimeter wave technologies.
BBU pool
EPCC-RAN
Macro BS
SmallCell BS(LTE)
C/U splittingC-plane U-plane
Next generationCPRI interface
Ultra high speedmmW smallcell BS
Millimeter-wave HetNet architecture・ C-plane/U-plane splitting・ Next generation CPRI interface・ C-RAN (Cloud RAN) driven network・ Ultra high speed mmW smallcell basestation
Which band in mm-wave frequency is suitable for 5G?
Frequency[GHz]
Bandwidth[GHz]
Allocation status
JP US EU
27.94-29.45 1.5 FIXED-SATELLITE FIXED-SATELLITE AERONAUTICAL RADIONAVIGATION
31.8-33.4 1.6 UnusedRADIONAVIGATIONSPACE RESEARCHINTER-SATELLITE
RADIONAVIGATIONEARTH EXPLORATION-SATELLITE (active)
SPACE RESEARCH (active)
40.5-43.5 3 FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE FIXED, RADIONAVIGATION
45.5-47.0 1.5 Unused MOBILE FIXED
47.2-50.2 3 Unused FIXED FIXED
55.78-57.0
20.22
FIXEDMOBILE
EARTH EXPLORATION-
SATELLITE (passive)MARITIME RADIONAVIGATION
57.0-66.0 Unlicensed Unlicensed (-64) Unlicensed
66.0-71.0 Unused FIXED FIXED
71.0-76.0 FIXED, MOBILE FIXED FIXED
81.0-86.0 5 FIXEDMOBILE FIXED
EARTH EXPLORATION-SATELLITEFIXED
RADIO NAVIGATION
From the point of view of this allocation status, ①31.8-33.4, ②45.5-47.0, ③47.2-50.2, ④55.78-76.0, ⑤81.0-86.0 are useful bands.
Pathloss model for mm-wave bandsPathloss model is generated by using frequen-cy domain interpolation
( )0,28GHz1028GHz /log2.290.72 ddPL +=NYU 28GHz:( )0,60GHz1060GHz /log6.2302.82 ddPL +=MiWEBA 60GHz:( )0,73GHz1073GHz /log9.267.82 ddPL +=NYU 73GHz:
Original model
( ) bfaPL += 10log
( ) ( )( ) ( ) ( )( )
( ) ( )( )( ) ( )
( ) ( )( )dbdaJdbda
ffPLdfPLdbdaJ
dbda
I
iii
,minargˆ,ˆ
,,,
,
1
2o
=
−= ∑=
subject to ( )da ≧ 20
Least square method
100 101 10270
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
Distance [m]
Path
loss
[dB
]
28GHz (Original)28GHz (Interpolation)60GHz (Original)60GHz (Interpolation)73GHz (Original)73GHz (Interpolation)
100 101 10270
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
Distance [m]
Path
loss
[dB
]
32.6GHz46.2GHz48.7GHz65.9GHz83.5GHz
①②③④⑤
Original Candidate bands
Good approx.10dB
x2
Parameter Value
Number of macro BSs 7 (evaluate: 1, interference: 6)
Number of smallcell BSs 0-80 / macrocell
BS antenna height (macro / small) 25 m / 4 m
Number of UEs 5000
Number of BS antennas (macro / small) 4 / 1
Number of UE antennas 2
Macro ISD 500 m
Antenna beam pattern 3GPP / 11ad
Antenna gain (macro / small) 17 dBi / 25dBi@60GHz
Tx power (macro / small) 46 dBm / 10 dBm/channel
62 kbps/user / 62 Mbps/userAverage traffic demand(current / 10 years later)
By using our developed system level simulator, we assessed each candidates from two aspects1. System rate gain vs Number of smallcell BSs2. System rate gain vs Average traffic demand
Symulation parameters
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 800
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Number of smallcells
Syst
em ra
te g
ain
32.6GHz (BW: 1.6GHz)46.2GHz (BW: 1.5GHz)48.7GHz (BW: 3GHz)65.9GHz (BW: 20.22GHz)83.5GHz (BW: 5GHz)3.5GHz (BW: 100MHz)60GHz (BW: 2.16GHz)
①②③④⑤
101 102 103 1040
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
Average traffic value [/current value]
Syst
em ra
te g
ain
32.6GHz (BW: 1.6GHz)46.2GHz (BW: 1.5GHz)48.7GHz (BW: 3GHz)65.9GHz (BW: 20.22GHz)83.5GHz (BW: 5GHz)
①②③④⑤
System rate gain vs Number of smallcell System rate gain vs Average traffic demand
Although coverage becomes narrower as carrier frequency increases, the difference of total bandwidth is dominant in the result of comparison with number of smallcells. Addition-ally, the difference of the system rate gain is very big in high traffic case. Therefore 66GHz band (④) which has 20GHz bandwidth should be selected for the future 5G cellular net-work.
Kei Sakaguchi, Tokyo Institute of Technology
①
②③
④
⑤
