15 07 14 Ieeebts DL PDF

IEEE BTS LECTURE
Layered Division Multiplexing: Basic

Concepts,
p , Application
pp
Scenarios and
Performance
Prof. Pablo Angueira, University of the Basque Country

IEEE Broadcast Technology Society Distinguished Lecturer
IEEE Broadcast Technology

gy Society
y
The IEEE Broadcast Technology Society (BTS) is

one of the technical societies & councils yyou can
join as an IEEE member.
The
The technologies to deliver information and
entertainment to audiences worldwide and on the go
BTS now has about 2,000 members and chapters worldwide,
p
technical p
periodicals,, provides
p
support
pp for technical meetings
g
sponsors
Speaker
p
Speaker
p
Speaker
p
Agenda
g
Introduction
Layered Division Multiplexing
System technical highlights
Results
Prototypes
Conclusions
Introduction
Layered Division Multiplexing (LDM), which grew out from the Cloud-Txn (*) concept, is a
research project to enhance the capacity of the new generation broadcasting systems.
systems
(*)CloudTransmission: Y.Wu etal,Cloudtransmission:Anewspectrumreusefriendlydigitalterrestrialbroadcasting
transmissionsystem.Broadcasting,IEEETransactionsOn58(3),pp.329337.2012.
It has been proposed as a Physical Layer technology to the ATSC 3.0 next gen. DTV standard
In short, the main goal is to develop a terrestrial DTV PHY Layer that
is: Simple to build, Flexible and Efficient, With backward
compatible future
f t re extension
e tension
Introduction
Conventional FDM/TDM
Conventional transport vehicle:
single-decker bus.
Layer Division Multiplexing (LDM)

is like a double-decker bus, more
capacity with the same foot print in
UHF RF channel.
channel
Introduction
It also provides flexibility for future growth: multidecker bus, or adaptive-decker bus, with full backward
compatibility (no impact to legacy system data rate)
rate).
Agenda
g
Introduction
Basic Concepts
System Architecture
LDM vs
vs. TDM/FDM

Results
Prototypes
Conclusions
Basic Concept
p
Use of spectrum overlay techniques to
transmit multiple data streams in one RF
channel with different robustness and data
capacity for different services and
reception environments
Injection
Level
Stream A
100% of RF bandwidth and 100% of the time are

used to transmit the multi-layered signals
(hierarchical spectrum re
re-use)
use) for spectrum
efficiency and flexible use of the spectrum
g
cancellation is used to retrieve the robust
Signal
upper layer signal first, cancel it from the received
signal, and then start the decoding of lower layer
signal
Stream B
RF
Channel BW
Basic Concept
p
The upper layer (UL) needs to be ultra-robust: Limited Data Rate
The lower layer (LL) will carry a high data rate:

Required for multiple HD and UHD services to fixed or portable
terminals
Injected from 3 to 6 dB below the upper layer signal
DTV-T2/NGH can be used as the lower layer system
Basic Concept
p
The upper layer (UL) needs to be ultra-robust
The lower layer (LL) will carry a high data rate:

Required for multiple HD and UHD services to fixed or portable
terminals
Injected from 3 to 6 dB below the upper layer signal
DTV-T2/NGH can be used as the lower layer system
More layers could be added later as network extension for new

services
The network is scalable and can be implemented progressively
It is backward compatible for future extension
Basic Concept
p
Upper layer fixed reception:
10m directional antenna
S/N = -1 dB
Upper layer portable reception:
1.5m Omni-directional antenna,
S/N = -0.5 dB
DTV Tx
Upper layer mobile reception:

1.5m Omni-directional antenna,
S/N = +2 dB
Lower layer fixed reception:

10m directional antenna,
S/N = +19 dB
Agenda
g
Introduction
Basic Concepts
System Architecture
LDM vs
vs. TDM/FDM

Results
Prototypes
Conclusions
System
y
Architecture
GI
UL payload
Preamble
Max. 250 ms
LL payload
GI
Max. 250 ms
The Upper and Lower layer share some parameters:
UL payload
Preamble
GI
GI
FFT Size
GI length
Preamble
LL payload
System
y
Architecture: Transmitter
System
y
Architecture: Transmitter
System
y
Architecture: Receiver
System
y
Architecture: Receiver
Agenda
g
Introduction
Basic Concepts
System Architecture
LDM vs
vs. TDM/FDM

Results
Prototypes
Conclusions
Capacityy Examples: Case I Mobile + Fixed Reception

LDM (two layers) vs. DVB-T2+NGH (single layer) 8 MHz RF Channel
LDM System
Upper
layer
Mobile 50% Capacity
Data rate
SNR
3.1 Mbps
QPSK 1/4
-1.0 dB
Data rate
SNR
Mobile 33.3% Capacity

Data rate
SNR
Mobile 25% Capacity

Data rate
Low layer w. -4 dB injection

Low-rate
17.5
17
5 Mbps
16QAM 2/3
14.4 dB
Mid-rate
26.3 Mbps
64QAM 2/3
19.0 dB
High-rate
32.9 Mbps
64QAM 5/6
22.3 dB
All SNR power levels are referenced to the total RF in-band

in band power (of all layers)
LDM: 16K FFT, GI= 1/16, P12,2.
TDM: Fixed 32K FFT, GI = 1/32, P24,4; Mobile 8K FFT, GI = 1/8, P6,2.
SNR

LDM System
Upper
layer
Mobile 50% Capacity
Data rate
SNR
Data rate
SNR
3.1 Mbps
QPSK 1/4
-1.0 dB
2.5 Mbps
QPSK 2/5
-0.2 dB

Data rate
SNR
Mobile 25% Capacity

Data rate
Fixed(T2) 50%
Low-rate
17.5
17
5 Mbps
16QAM 2/3
14.4 dB
18.1
18
1 Mbps
256QAM2/3
17.8 dB
Mid-rate
26.3 Mbps
64QAM 2/3
19.0 dB
N/A
High-rate
32.9 Mbps
64QAM 5/6
22.3 dB
N/A

LDM: 16K FFT, GI= 1/16, P12,2.
SNR

LDM System
Upper
layer
Mobile 50% Capacity
Data rate
SNR
3.1 Mbps
QPSK 1/4
-1.0 dB
Data rate
SNR

Data rate
SNR
Mobile 25% Capacity

Data rate
SNR
2.5 Mbps
QPSK 4/5
4.7
dB
Fixed(T2) 75%
Low-rate
17.5
17
5 Mbps
16QAM 2/3
14.4 dB
18.3
18
3 Mbps
64QAM 3/5
12.0 dB
Mid-rate
26.3 Mbps
64QAM 2/3
19.0 dB
27.2 Mbps
256QAM 2/3
17.8 dB
High-rate
32.9 Mbps
64QAM 5/6
22.3 dB
34 Mbps
256QAM 5/6
22.0 dB

LDM: 16K FFT, GI= 1/16, P12,2.

LDM System
Upper
layer
Mobile 50% Capacity
Mobile 25% Capacity
Data rate
SNR
Data rate
SNR
Data rate
SNR
Data rate
SNR
3.1 Mbps
QPSK 1/4
-1.0 dB
2.5 Mbps
QPSK 2/5
-0.2 dB
2.6 Mbps
QPSK 2/3
3.1dB
2.5 Mbps
QPSK 4/5
4.7
dB
Fixed(T2) 50%
Fixed(T2) 66.7%
Fixed(T2) 75%
Low-rate
17.5
17
5 Mbps
16QAM 2/3
14.4 dB
18.1
18
1 Mbps
256QAM2/3
17.8 dB
18.2
18
2 Mbps
64QAM 2/3
13.5 dB
18.3
18
3 Mbps
64QAM 3/5
12.0 dB
Mid-rate
26.3 Mbps
64QAM 2/3
19.0 dB
N/A
27.2 Mbps
256QAM 3/4
20.0 dB
27.2 Mbps
256QAM 2/3
17.8 dB
High-rate
32.9 Mbps
64QAM 5/6
22.3 dB
N/A
N/A
34 Mbps
256QAM 5/6
22.0 dB

LDM: 16K FFT, GI= 1/16, P12,2.
Capacity Examples: Case II Indoor + Fixed Reception

LDM System
Upper
layer
Mobile 50% Capacity
Mobile 25% Capacity
Data rate
SNR
Data rate
SNR
Data rate
SNR
Data rate
SNR
5.46 Mbps
QPSK 6/15
2.7 dB
5.46 Mbps
QPSK 2/5
4.7 dB
5.46 Mbps
16QAM 2/3
8.9 dB
5.55 Mbps
64 QAM 3/5
12.0
dB
Fixed(T2) 50%
Fixed(T2) 66.7%
Fixed(T2) 75%
Low-rate
17.5
17
5 Mbps
16QAM 2/3
14.4 dB
18.1
18
1 Mbps
256QAM2/3
17.8 dB
18.2
18
2 Mbps
64QAM 2/3
13.5 dB
18.3
18
3 Mbps
64QAM 3/5
12.0 dB
Mid-rate
26.3 Mbps
64QAM 2/3
19.0 dB
N/A
27.2 Mbps
256QAM 3/4
20.0 dB
27.2 Mbps
256QAM 2/3
17.8 dB
High-rate
32.9 Mbps
64QAM 5/6
22.3 dB
N/A
N/A
34 Mbps
256QAM 5/6
22.0 dB

LDM: 16K FFT, GI= 1/16, P12,2.
Capacity Examples: Case II Indoor + Fixed Reception

LDM System
Upper
layer
Mobile 50% Capacity
Mobile 25% Capacity
Data rate
SNR
Data rate
SNR
Data rate
SNR
Data rate
SNR
5.46 Mbps
QPSK 6/15
2.7 dB
5.46 Mbps
QPSK 2/5
4.7 dB
5.46 Mbps
16QAM 2/3
8.9 dB
5.55 Mbps
64 QAM 3/5
12.0
dB
Fixed(T2) 50%
Fixed(T2) 66.7%
Fixed(T2) 75%
Low-rate
17.5
17
5 Mbps
16QAM 2/3
14.4 dB
18.1
18
1 Mbps
256QAM2/3
17.8 dB
18.2
18
2 Mbps
64QAM 2/3
13.5 dB
18.3
18
3 Mbps
64QAM 3/5
12.0 dB
Mid-rate
26.3 Mbps
64QAM 2/3
19.0 dB
N/A
27.2 Mbps
256QAM 3/4
20.0 dB
27.2 Mbps
256QAM 2/3
17.8 dB
High-rate
32.9 Mbps
64QAM 5/6
22.3 dB
N/A
N/A
34 Mbps
256QAM 5/6
22.0 dB

LDM: 16K FFT, GI= 1/16, P12,2.
LDM vs TDM/FDM: Gain

LDM vs TDM: MOBILE SERVICE GAIN (AWGN)
50%
33.3%
25%
3.1 Mbps
0.8 dB
4.1 dB
5.7 dB
5 46 Mbps
5.46
Mb
2 0 dB
2.0
6 2 dB
6.2
9 3 dB
9.3
LDM vs TDM: HIGH-CAPACITY GAIN (AWGN)
50%
67 7%
67.7%
75%
17.5 Mbps
3.4 dB
- 0.9 dB
-2.4 dB
26 3 Mbps
26.3
N/A
1 dB
-1
1.2
2 dB
24.6 Mbps
N/A
N/A
-0.3 dB
LDM gain between 4-8 dB
LDM vs TDM/FDM: Capacity

p
y Gain
Power
High S/N environment
Mobile and fixed services work well for both systems
Single layer system wastes channel capacity
LDM improves spectrum efficiency
Only part of time (TDM) or RF channel (FDM) used
100% time, 100% RF channel
LDM vs TDM/FDM: Capacity

p
y Gain
Power
Low S/N environment
Only mobile services will be correctly received
Single layer system wastes channel capacity
LDM improves spectrum efficiency
Only part of time (TDM) or RF channel (FDM) used
100% time, 100% RF channel
Agenda
g
Introduction
Basic Concepts
System Architecture
LDM vs
vs. TDM/FDM

Results
Prototypes
Conclusions
Impact
p
of Injection
j
on Thresholds
Injection
Level
Stream A
The overall transmitted power (ERP)

remains constant
The injection level provides an
additional tool for broadcasters to
configure the coverage area.
Lower injection levels provide more
emphasis on the fixed services
Stream B
RF
Channel BW
Higher injection levels provide more

emphasis on the mobile/portable
/
services
There is a tradeoff between injection level and required SNR
threshold for decoding both the Upper and Lower Layers
Impact
p
of Injection
j
on Thresholds
Upper layer
only
SNR = -3.4dB
3 4dB
3.1 Mbps
R = QPSK
SNR = -3.4dB
3 4dB
3.1 Mbps
R = QPSK
SNR = -3.4dB
3.1 Mbps
R = QPSK
Injection level
UL Min. SNR
-3
3 dB
-4 dB
-5 dB
3 dB
-3
-4 dB
-5 dB
3 dB
-3
-4 dB
-5 dB
-0.5
0.5 dB
-1.0 dB
-1.5 dB
-0.5
0 5 dB
-1.0 dB
-1.5 dB
-0.5
0 5 dB
-1.0 dB
-1.5 dB
Lower layer
only
SNR=6.2
SNR=6
2 dB
11.2 Mbps
R = 1/2 16QAM
SNR=13.4dB
SNR
13 4dB
26.3 Mbps
R = 2/3 64QAM
SNR=18.1dB
35.1 Mbps
R= 2/3 256QAM
LL Min. SNR
11.0 dB
11.7 dB
12.4 dB
18 2 dB
18.2
18.9 dB
19.6 dB
22 9 dB
22.9
23.6 dB
24.3 dB
Key
y Enabling
g Technologies
g
A strong error correction code and error mitigation system for the Upper layer
that can achieve a negative SNR value, closer to the Shannon limit, and save
power.
A rate compatible LDPC code optimized for low coding rate;
Closer to the Shannon limit at low coding rate;
It can be truncated to higher rate code for power saving and low latency
decoding.
A good
d signal
i
l cancelation
l ti
scheme
h
th t can minimize
that
i i i th
the cancellation
ll ti
errors which makes a high data rate lower layer viable.
Low-complex channel estimation and equalization algorithms.
Agenda
g
Introduction
New LDPC C
N
Coding
di Al
Algorithms
ih
Signal Cancellation and Channel Estimation
Doppler
pp Influence
Non-Uniform Constellations
Latency & Complexity
Results
Prototypes
Conclusions
A rate compatible
p
LDPC code
LDPC Parity Check Matrix (PCM)

Structure
S
uc u e fully
u y co
compatible
pa b e with DVB
Code PCM
The code is optimized in the range
of R < 0.5
It is very close to the Shannon limit
(< 1 dB)
Cancellation in a two layered

y
system
y
U
Upper
L
Layer Signal
Si
l S(U) + Lower
L
Layer
L
Signal
Si
l S(L)
Injection
Level
Pilot Signals
Total Signal Power

Upper L
U
Layer
Signal S(U)
Lower Layer
Signal S(L)

y
system
y
Multipath Distortion[S(U) + S(L)] + Noise
Injection
Level
Pilot Signals
Noise
Total Signal Power
Upper Layer
Signal S(U)
Lower Layer
Signal S(L)

y
system
y
S(U) + S(L) + (Channel Estimation Error) + Noise
Injection
Level
Pilot Signals
Coloured
Noise
Total Signal Power

Upper Layer
Signal S(U)
Lower Layer
Signal S(L)
Channel
Estimation
Error

y
system
y
S(U) + S(L) + (Channel Estimation Error) + Noise
Channel Estimation Error is the Signal Cancellation Error
Pilot Signals
Coloured
Noise
Lower Layer
y
Signal S(L)
Channel
Estimation
Error
The lower layer signal has significantly boosted pilots

pilots. Good for equalization
equalization.
Channel estimation error should be much lower than the noise.
Cancellation Error
Same explanation with some easy math
There is only a main noise source that can lead to a cancellation error
Cancellation Errors = Channel estimation error
Channel Estimation Performance Analysis

Pilot-Aided Channel Estimation and Decision-Directed Channel
E ti ti in
Estimation
i 0 dB Si
Single-Echo
l E h channels
h
l with
ith different
diff
t echo
h delays.
d l
Focus on:
Signal cancellation performance vs. echo delay;

Pilot Aided 3rd order interpolation (PA-Cinterp);
Pilot Aided DFT interpolation (PA-DFTF);
Decision Directed DFT Filtering (DD-DFTF).
Montalban, J.; Bo Rong; Yiyan Wu; Liang Zhang; Angueira, P.; Velez, M., "Cloud Transmission frequency domain cancellation," Broadband Multimedia
Systems and Broadcasting (BMSB), 2013 IEEE International Symposium on , vol., no., pp.1,4, 5-7 June 2013
Montalban, J.; Angulo, I.; Vlez, M.; Angueira, P.; Regueiro, C.; Yiyan Wu; Liang Zhang; Li., W. Error Propagation in the Cancellation Stage for a MultiLayer Signal Reception,
Reception " Broadband Multimedia Systems and Broadcasting (BMSB),
(BMSB) 2013 IEEE International Symposium on , vol.,
vol no
no., pp
pp.1,4,
1 4 25-27
June 2014
Signal Cancellation
1.
Signal cancellation error is the same as the channel estimation error.
2
2.
Existing channel estimation and equalization algorithms work well.

well Not
need to invent new fancy algorithms.
3.
Channel estimation error also related to noise level. Channel estimation error
should be lower than the noise level to minimize the impact to the receiver
performance
4
4.
Pilot Added algorithms work well for high SNR cases.

cases Decision Directed
algorithms work better for low SNR cases; Two layer system is equivalent to
boosting pilots by several dB (injection level) for lower channel estimation, which
provides
id good
d channel
h
l estimation
ti ti results.
lt
5.
Larger size FFT OFDM modulation will improve estimation performance,

since for the same p
percentage
g of p
pilots,, large
g FFT modulation reduces the p
pilot
spacing (in Hz).
Agenda
g
Introduction
New LDPC C
N
Coding
di Al
Algorithms
ih
Signal Cancellation and Channel Estimation
Doppler
pp Influence
Non-Uniform Constellations
Latency & Complexity
Results
Prototypes
Conclusions
Doppler Noise for different FFT sizes

Signal Contributions
Double the FFT size, the Doppler

noise increase by 6 dB.
-5
For 16K FFT, the Doppler noise is

about -10 dB.
Power (dBm)
-10
16K FFT
-15
8K FFT
-20
If the UL layer SNR is -3 dB, the 10 dB Doppler noise is 13 dB

below the noise threshold and will
have very limited impact.
4K FFT
-25
2K FFT
-30
-35
50
100
150
Symbol Number
150 Hz Doppler shift
200
25
Example: LDM UL 16K for Mobile

LDM UL ( =-5 dB), TI=200ms, 16K, TU-6, ATSC-3. Ideal CSI
20
UL: QPSK 7/15; =-5dB

UL QPSK 6/15
UL:
6/15; =-5
5 dB
18
UL: QPSK 5/15; =-5 dB
16
SN
NR
min
14
12
LDM UL 16K can go

up to 260 km/h for the
CR=5/15 ((4.5 Mbps)
p )
with a 3 dB margin
10
50
100
150
V (km/h)
200
250
300
Example: LDM UL 32K for Mobile

20
LDM UL, LL-5dB, TI-100ms, 32k, QPSK, TU, ATSC-3 LDPC, DFT-ChEst
LDM-UL, r-4/15
TDM, r-8/15
TDM, r-10/15
TDM, r-12/15
18
Signal to Noise Ratio [dB]
16
14
12
10
8
6
95 km/h
4
2
20
40
60
80
100
Vehicle speed [km/h]
120
3 dB
Threshold
140
135km/h160
Latency and complexity of LDM receivers

Common
Sync & Timing
Tuner
Clock Recovery
IF & Down
Converter
OFDM Demo
& Equalization
A-D Converter
Time De-Intl
AGC
Stream A Decoder
Data buffer
Delay
Stream A
Bit to Cell
Mapping
Upper Layer BICM

Lower Layer BICM
Data + FEC
Common Modules
Stream B Decoder
Stream B
Complexity of LDM receivers

Common
Sync & Timing
Tuner
IF & Down
Converter
Clock Recovery
OFDM Demo
& Equalization
A-D Converter
Time De-Intl
AGC
A large part of the circuits can be shared (tuner, sync, IF, ADC,
AGC, OFDM demodulator, equalizer, time deinterleaver etc.)
Clearly no complexity increase in common parts.
Complexity
p
y of LDM receivers
For a LDM receiver that decodes the high-data rate lower layer
First step is to correctly decode the upper layer
Re-modulate the decoded data and then cancel it from the received signal
Complexity mainly depend on the LDPC decoder

LDPC decoding performance of the UL must be considered
Stream A Decoder
Data buffer
Delay
Stream A
Bit to Cell
Mapping
Upper Layer BICM

Lower Layer BICM
Data + FEC
Common Modules
Stream B Decoder
Stream B
LDPC Decoding
g Performance of Upper
pp layer
y
QPSK 4/15 & 64-QAM 10/15 (IL = -5 dB). AWGN, Rice, Rayleigh and TU-6 fading channels
50
QPSK
QPSK
QPSK
QPSK
45
40
4/15
4/15
4/15
4/15
AWGN
Rice
Rayleigh
TU-6 (Doppler = 33.3 Hz)
Iteration
n
BER
35
UL: Q
QPSK+4/15,,
LL: 64NUC+10/15,
IL: -5dB
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
-5
5
10
SNR [dB]
15
LDPC iterations vs SNR
20
25
Given LL
target SNR of
15 dB
dB,
iterations < 5
LDPC Decoding
g Performance of Upper
pp layer
y
LDPC decoder complexity:

Upper layer LDPC decoder: 5 (normal case) or 10 (worst case) iterations
LDPC computation complexity increase < 20% (10/50, worst case)
LDM will likely

y use up to 16QAM ((4 bits)) for UL and 1k-QAM ((10 bits)) for LL,
so the total LDPC complexity increase is 20% x 4/10 = 8% referenced to the
LL only case (LL must be able to decode the highest modulation single PLP
case).
case)
Memory increase estimation assuming UL and LL use 64k LDPC codes
Since UL decoding (10 iteration),

iteration) remapping,
remapping cancellation
cancellation, and LL decoding
(50 iteration) should be finished simultaneously maximum 64k cells are
required . 32k cells for current decoding + 32k cells for storing next data
If TDI = 219(512K) cells 12.5% memory increase (worst case)
Agenda
g
Introduction
System
y
technical highlights
g g
Results
Simulations
L bT
Lab
Tests
Field Tests
Prototypes
Conclusions
Simulation Configuration
g
Single Layer
CONSTELATION
Code Rate
Spectral Efficiency
(Mbps/Hz)
Bit Rate (Mbps)
3/15
4/15
5/15
3/15
4/15
5/15
0.38
0,53
0.66
0 79
0.79
1.05
1.32
1.83
2.45
3.07
3 67
3.67
4.91
6.15
QPSK
16-QAM
LDM
Upper Layer
Lower Layer
Const.
Code Rate
Spectral Efficiency
(Mbps/Hz)
Bit Rate (Mbps)
QPSK
QPSK
16-QAM
64-QAM
256-QAM
3/15
4/15
3/4
2/3
2/3
0,38
0,51
3.17
4.22
5.28
1.83
2.45
16.63
22.18
27.72
Computer
p
Simulations: Single
g Layer
y
Stationary Channels (Ideal Channel Estimation)
AWGN
-2.9
-1.7
0.7
2.3
4/15
5/15
/
4/15
5/15
QPSK
16-QAM
RICE
-2.7
-1.5
0.9
2.6
Rayleigh
-2
-0.5
2.1
3.8
0 dB Echo
-2.3
-0.9
1.7
3.5
Mobile Channels (Ideal Channel Estimation)

QPSK
16-QAM
/
4/15
5/15
4/15
5/15
5 Hz
-0.9
0.4
2.8
44
4.4
50 Hz
-0.8
0.1
3.2
48
4.8
75 Hz
-1.0
0.4
3.5
51
5.1
Single
g Layer
y ((Channel Estimation Loss))
Stationary Channels
Mobile Channels
LDM ((Injection
j
Range
g = -4 dB))
Stationary Channels (Ideal Channel Estimation)
UL
LL
LL
LL
QPSK
16QAM
64QAM
256QAM
4/15
3/4
2/3
2/3
AWGN
-0.4
15.4
18.9
23.2
RICE
-0.1
15.9
19.2
23.5
Rayleigh
1.3
18.8
21.5
25.7
Mobile Channels (Ideal Channel Estimation)

QPSK
4/15
fd=5 Hz
2.0
fd =50 Hz
2.3
fd =75 Hz
2.4
0 dB Echo
0.8
18.7
21.3
25.8
LDM (Channel Estimation Loss)

Stationary Channels
Mobile Channels
Agenda
g
Introduction
Results
Simulations
Lab Tests
Field Tests
Prototypes
Conclusions
Lab Set Up
p
UPV/EHU
SW
DEMOD
Based on a DVB-T2 Software Defined Radio

(SDR) platform;
Upper Layer tested under different channel :
AWGN, Rice, Rayleigh, etc.
UNIVERSITY OF THE BASQUE COUNTRY

LDM RECEIVER
Single
g Layer
y ((HW Impact)
p )
Stationary Channels
Mobile Channels
LDM ((HW Impact)

p )
Stationary Channels
Mobile Channels
LDM Field Test

BILBAO
SPAIN
Transmitting Site
Frequency
Transmitter ERP
Antenna Type
Tx Antenna Height
Altitude (a.g.l.)
Radiation Pattern
Polarization
Channel Bandwidth
Banderas Bilbao
Banderas,
Bilbao, Spain
690 MHz
35.68 dBW
4 Element UHF panel
48 meters
216 meters
Directive (140-210)
Vertical
6 MHz
Simulation,, Lab and Field Test Results

0
Uppe r Laye r: 8K, GI=1/32, CR=1/4, QPSK, R=2.3 Mbps
Low e r Laye r: 8K, GI=1/32, CR=2/3, 256-QAM, R=30.1 Mbps
10
10
-1
1
-1
1
10
10
-2
-2
10
10
-3
BER
BER
10
-4
10
-5
-6
-6
10
-7
-2
Lower Layer:
y
256QAM, R=2/3,
30.1 Mbps
8k FFT
10
10
-8
-4
10
-5
10
10
Upper Layer: QPSK

R=1/4, 2.3 Mbps.
-3
10
10
AWGN: Simulated
AWGN: Laboratory
Field Test
-7
10
AWGN: Simulated
AWGN: Laboratory
Field Test
-1.5
-1
SNR (dB)
-8
-0.5
10
22
24
26
SNR (dB)
28
30
Agenda
g
Introduction
Results
Simulations
Lab Tests
Field Tests
Prototypes
Conclusions
UNIVERSITY OF THE BASQUE COUNTRY

LDM RECEIVER
ETRI: Electronics and Telecommunications

Research Istitute Korea
ETRI Korea has designed and built a first full hardware LDM prototype
Shown in next Dec ATSC AH 32 Face to Face meetings and in Las Vegas
NabShow
Agenda
g
Introduction
Results
Simulations
Lab Tests
Field Tests
Prototypes
Conclusions
Conclusions
LDM is a multiplexing scheme, that can mix different services
with different reception conditions in one RF channel.
The main advantage is the use of the 100 % of the spectrum
d i th
during
the whole
h l transmission
t
i i time.
ti
It achieves 5 to 6 dB SNR gain when compared to TDM/FDM
systems for robust mobile/indoor reception.
Q&A
Pablo Angueira
pablo.angueira@ehu.eus
htt //
http://www.ehu.es/tsr_radio
h
/t
di

15 07 14 Ieeebts DL PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

15 07 14 Ieeebts DL PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

IEEE BTS LECTURE

Layered Division Multiplexing: Basic

Prof. Pablo Angueira, University of the Basque Country

IEEE Broadcast Technology

The IEEE Broadcast Technology Society (BTS) is

Layer Division Multiplexing (LDM)

System technical highlights

100% of RF bandwidth and 100% of the time are

The upper layer (UL) needs to be ultra-robust: Limited Data Rate

The lower layer (LL) will carry a high data rate:

The upper layer (UL) needs to be ultra-robust

The lower layer (LL) will carry a high data rate:

More layers could be added later as network extension for new

Upper layer mobile reception:

Lower layer fixed reception:

System technical highlights

The Upper and Lower layer share some parameters:

System technical highlights

Capacityy Examples: Case I Mobile + Fixed Reception

Mobile 50% Capacity

Mobile 33.3% Capacity

Mobile 25% Capacity

Low layer w. -4 dB injection

All SNR power levels are referenced to the total RF in-band

Capacityy Examples: Case I Mobile + Fixed Reception

Mobile 50% Capacity

Low layer w. -4 dB injection

Mobile 33.3% Capacity

Mobile 25% Capacity

All SNR power levels are referenced to the total RF in-band

Capacityy Examples: Case I Mobile + Fixed Reception

Mobile 50% Capacity

Low layer w. -4 dB injection

Mobile 33.3% Capacity

Mobile 25% Capacity

All SNR power levels are referenced to the total RF in-band

Capacityy Examples: Case I Mobile + Fixed Reception

Mobile 50% Capacity

Mobile 33.3% Capacity

Mobile 25% Capacity

Low layer w. -4 dB injection

All SNR power levels are referenced to the total RF in-band

Capacity Examples: Case II Indoor + Fixed Reception

Mobile 50% Capacity

Mobile 33.3% Capacity

Mobile 25% Capacity

Low layer w. -4 dB injection

All SNR power levels are referenced to the total RF in-band

Capacity Examples: Case II Indoor + Fixed Reception

Mobile 50% Capacity

Mobile 33.3% Capacity

Mobile 25% Capacity

Low layer w. -4 dB injection

All SNR power levels are referenced to the total RF in-band

LDM vs TDM/FDM: Gain

LDM vs TDM: HIGH-CAPACITY GAIN (AWGN)

LDM gain between 4-8 dB

LDM vs TDM/FDM: Capacity

High S/N environment

Mobile and fixed services work well for both systems

Single layer system wastes channel capacity

LDM improves spectrum efficiency