EDGE Trial Report Ed2.1 (VMS)

EDGE TRIAL FINAL REPORT
2 ED
Creation CHANGE NOTE APPRAISAL AUTHORITY
Anawat Diwitaya ORIGINATOR
ED MND
2.1
VMS : EDGE Trial Final Report REFERENCE
Released
EDGE Trial Report Ed2.1.doc
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Introduction..................................................................3
1.1 Scope of Trial.........................................................................3 1.2 Document Structure...............................................................3
2 Trial description............................................................4
2.1 Trial Area..............................................................................4 2.2 Test Tool...............................................................................4 Radio measurement tool:............................................................4 End User QoS measurement tool:.................................................4 Radio QoS statistic tool: .............................................................4 EDGE terminal:...........................................................................4 2.3 Schedule Plan........................................................................5
3 Trial RESULT..................................................................6
3.1 Access the EDGE performance impact due to TRX Type (BCCH, TCH)...........................................................................................6 3.2 EDGE performance, Extra TS=0 with difference number of MAX_PDCH..................................................................................8 3.3 GPRS vs edge Perforamnce (Ping, web, ftp)...........................10 3.3.1 Ping 3.3.2 Web 3.3.3 FTP 10 13 15
4 Gprs & edge qos statistic.............................................17

4.1 TBF Establishment Phase......................................................17 4.2 TBF RELEASE PHASE.............................................................18 4.3 Data Packet Traffic...............................................................19 4.4 Data Transfer throughput.....................................................21
5 Bss dimensioning result...............................................22

5.1 Extra Abis TS.......................................................................22 5.2 GPU AND ATer Mux...............................................................25
ED MND 2.1 VMS : EDGE Trial Final Report REFERENCE Released 1/36
5.3 Gb Interface.........................................................................29
6 Conclusion...................................................................32 APPENDIX A: Edge Throughput (Internal FTP Server)......33 APPENDIX B: EDGE PARAMETER setting..........................34
ED MND
2.1
Released 2/36
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 SCOPE OF TRIAL
This document is created as a guideline for EDGE implementation in the VMS network. The purpose of this trial is to help the customer to define the best EDGE introduction strategy, as well as to assess the improvement brought by EDGE radio access on the commercial network, in term of the throughput of data service.
1.2 DOCUMENT STRUCTURE
Section1 of this document presents the scope of this trial and document structure. Section2 presents trial description: Test cell, Test Tool. Section3 identifies test description and result of each sub-part. - Access the EDGE performance impact due to TRX Type (BCCH, TCH) - Access the EDGE performance, which brought by new feature Autonomous Packet Resource Allocation - Compare the performance between EDGE and GPRS on difference application Ping Web FTP Section4 present GPRS & EDGE Qos statistic. Section5 present EDGE BSS dimensioning result. Annex part presents. - Edge Throughput (Internal FTP Server) - EDGE parameter setting.
ED MND
2.1
Released 3/36
2 TRIAL DESCRIPTION
2.1 TRIAL AREA
Select test cell 10146 (HNI_HMI3_GIAP_BAT_1800_C), which cover VMS OMC. In order to modify/check radio parameter easily. This cell using 1800 frequency band and under BSC GIAP_BAT_3. Site location is show in picture below.
Figure 1 : Trial cell

2.2 TEST TOOL RADIO MEASUREMENT TOOL:
Drive test software NEMO Outdoor version 4.0

END USER QOS MEASUREMENT TOOL:
DEUTRIP version 3.2 for Ping and Web test. Dos command for FTP test.
RADIO QOS STATISTIC TOOL:
AnaQos version 1.99

EDGE TERMINAL:
Nokia N80 (EDGE Class B , Multislot Class 11 : 4+3)
ED MND
2.1
Released 4/36
2.3
SCHEDULE PLAN
Figure 2 : Trial schedule
ED MND
2.1
Released 5/36
3 3.1
TRIAL RESULT
ACCESS THE EDGE PERFORMANCE IMPACT DUE TO TRX TYPE (BCCH, TCH)
Objective: To decide on which TRX type (BCCH, TCH) will implement EDGE. Base on assumption that BCCH frequency has quality better than TCH frequency. Test Cells : 10146 (HNI_HMI3_GIAP_BAT_1800_C) Parameter setting & Time slot configuration :
Test Procedure: BCCH - Set parameter using BCCH setting. - FTP file ftp://ftp.fao.org/codex/ALINORM01/al01_12e.pdf using nokia N80 (4+3) - Record application throughput. TCH - Set parameter using TCH setting. - FTP file ftp://ftp.fao.org/codex/ALINORM01/al01_12e.pdf using nokia N80 (4+3) - Record application throughput.
ED MND
2.1
Released 6/36
Test Result : Average application through and Max RLC throughput on BCCH slightly higher compare to throughput on TCH. This is due to variation of MeanBEP and CV BEP on TCH but stable on BCCH. The variation of MeanBEP and CV_BEP on TCH is due to synthesized hopping on TCH, which frequency list is same for all BTS. The BCCH frequency is clean so, MeanBEP and CV_BEP on BCCH test is stable.
Figure 3 : EDGE Throughput on BCCH and TCH
Figure 4 : MeanBEP and CV BEP on BCCH (No Hop)
Figure 5 : Mean BEP and CV BEP on TCH (NH/RH)
ED MND
2.1
Released 7/36
3.2
EDGE PERFORMANCE, EXTRA TS=0 WITH DIFFERENCE NUMBER OF MAX_PDCH
Objective: To access maximum MCS / Throughput gain, when tuning parameter for feature Autonomous Packet Resource Allocation. - Extra TS=0, Max PDCH = 04, TRX prefmark = 0 for BCCH and 1 for TCH. - Extra TS=0, Max PDCH = 18, TRX perfmark = 0 for all TRX. Test Cells : 10146 (HNI_HMI3_GIAP_BAT_1800_C) Parameter setting & Time slot configuration :
ED MND
2.1
Released 8/36
Test Procedure: Max PDCH = 4 - Set parameter using Max PDCH =4 setting. - FTP file ftp://ftp.fao.org/codex/ALINORM01/al01_12e.pdf using nokia N80 (4+3) - Record application throughput. Max PDCH = 18 - Set parameter using Max PDCH = 18setting. - FTP file ftp://ftp.fao.org/codex/ALINORM01/al01_12e.pdf using nokia N80 (4+3) - Record application throughput. Test Result : Maximum coding scheme on radio interface for both case are MCS9. This is due to good radio condition (Mean BEP = 31 and CV BEP = 7). But the maximum RLC throughput is difference. In case of MAX_PDCH =18, the maximum RLC throughput is ~52 kbps per PDCH. (End-2-End = MCS-8). By calculate maximum MCS of this setting. Maximum number of Abis TS is = 18 (basic) + 9 (bonus) = 27, so the maximum MCS is MCS-9 (4 * 4.49 = 17.96 Abis TS). By the way, in normal situation basic abis nibble is vary from 4 to 18 depend on CS & PS load in the cells. In case of MAX_PDCH =4, the maximum RLC throughput is ~29 kbps per PDCH. (End-2-End = MCS-6). By calculate maximum MCS of this setting. Maximum number of Abis TS is = 4 (basic) + 9 (bonus) = 13 , So the maximum MCS is MCS-6 (4 *2.36 = 9.44 Abis TS)
Figure 6 : EDGE Throughput with Extra TS =0 with Max PDCH = 4 and 18
ED MND
2.1
Released 9/36
3.3 3.3.1
GPRS VS EDGE PERFORAMNCE (PING, WEB, FTP) Ping
Objective: Assess EDGE improvement compare to GPRS in term of round trip delay and accessibility. Test Cells : 10146 (HNI_HMI3_GIAP_BAT_1800_C) Parameter setting & Time slot configuration :
ED MND
2.1
Released 10/36
Test Procedure: GPRS 32 Bytes Set parameter EN_EGPRS to disable. Test using nokia N80 (4+3) at good radio condition. Configure DEUTRIP version 3.2 Ping modules. Server: 210.245.0.11 (DNS) Data Packet Size (bytes) : 32 Time Out (ms) : 5000 Ping for 101 iteration (ignore 1st iteration)
EDGE 32 Bytes - Set parameter EN_EGPRS to enable. - Test using nokia N80 (4+3) at good radio condition. - Configure DEUTRIP version 3.2 Ping modules. - Server: 210.245.0.11 (DNS) - Data Packet Size (bytes) : 32 - Time Out (ms) : 5000 - Ping for 101 iteration (ignore 1st iteration) GPRS 512 Bytes - Set parameter EN_EGPRS to disable. - Test using nokia N80 (4+3) at good radio condition. - Configure DEUTRIP version 3.2 Ping modules. - Server: 210.245.0.11 (DNS) - Data Packet Size (bytes) : 512 - Time Out (ms) : 5000 - Ping for 101 iteration (ignore 1st iteration) EDGE 512 Bytes - Set parameter EN_EGPRS to enable. - Test using nokia N80 (4+3) at good radio condition. - Configure DEUTRIP version 3.2 Ping modules. - Server: 210.245.0.11 (DNS) - Data Packet Size (bytes) : 512 - Time Out (ms) : 5000 - Ping for 101 iteration (ignore 1st iteration)
ED MND
2.1
Released 11/36
Test Result : Ping 32 byte : Very little difference between GPRS and EDGE in term of delay. Difference of round trip time between GPRS and EDGE is about 20 ms. Ping success rate for both GPRS and EDGE is 100%.
Figure 7 : Ping 32 byte GPRS vs. EDGE Ping 512 byte : EDGE have lower average round trip delay compare to GPRS about 300 ms. EDGE improve round trip delay around 25%compare to GPRS. Due to the fact that ping with big file size GPRS will use higher number of RLC block (CS2 1 RLC block = 30 bytes) compare to EDGE (MCS8: 1 RLC block = 68 bytes).
Figure 8 : Ping 512 byte GPRS vs. EDGE
ED MND
2.1
Released 12/36
3.3.2
Web
Objective: Assess EDGE improvement compare to GPRS in term of page view time for web application. Test Cells : 10146 (HNI_HMI3_GIAP_BAT_1800_C) Parameter setting & Time slot configuration :
Test Procedure: GPRS Set parameter EN_EGPRS to disable. Test using nokia N80 (4+3) at good radio condition. Configure DEUTRIP version 3.2 Web module. Address : www.mobifone.com.vn/web/vn/ Load for 5 iteration.
EDGE Set parameter EN_EGPRS to enable. Test using nokia N80 (4+3) at good radio condition. Configure DEUTRIP version 3.2 Web module. Address : www.mobifone.com.vn/web/vn/ Load for 5 iteration.
ED MND
2.1
Released 13/36
Test Result : Average EDGE page preview time is shorter than GPRS by 40 second. EDGE using only 60% of the time compare to GPRS to view the same web page (www.mobifone.com.vn/web/vn/). Web page preview success for both GPRS and EDGE is 100%.
Figure 9 : Web GPRS vs. EDGE
ED MND
2.1
Released 14/36
3.3.3
FTP
Objective: Assess EDGE improvement compare to GPRS in term of data throughput for FTP application. Test Cells : 10146 (HNI_HMI3_GIAP_BAT_1800_C) Parameter setting & Time slot configuration :
Test Procedure: GPRS Set parameter EN_EGPRS to disable. FTP file ftp://ftp.fao.org/codex/ALINORM01/al01_12e.pdf using nokia N80 (4+3) Load for 5 iteration.
EDGE Set parameter EN_EGPRS to enable. FTP file ftp://ftp.fao.org/codex/ALINORM01/al01_12e.pdf using nokia N80 (4+3) Load for 5 iteration.
ED MND
2.1
Released 15/36
Test Result : EDGE average application throughput is higher than GPRS ~18.8 Kbps/PDCH. Gain of EDGE throughput compare to GPRS is 200%. Average EDGE application throughput is around 28 Kbps per PDCH, which is lower than the theoretical value at 59 Kbps per PDCH. The main reason is due to bad effect of internet server. Appendix A show the result of FTP throughput test with internal FTP server.
Figure 10 : FTP GPRS vs. EDGE
ED MND
2.1
Released 16/36
4 4.1
GPRS & EDGE QOS STATISTIC

TBF ESTABLISHMENT PHASE
EDGE Activation
10000000.0 9000000.0 8000000.0 7000000.0 6000000.0 5000000.0 4000000.0 3000000.0 2000000.0 1000000.0 0.0
xx /x x 12 /1 2 12 /1 4 12 /1 6 12 /1 8 12 /2 0 12 /2 2 12 /2 4 12 /2 6 12 /3 0 01 /0 1 01 /0 3 01 /0 5 01 /0 7 01 /0 9 01 /1 1 01 /1 3 01 /1 5 01 /1 7 01 /1 9
Alc_GPRS_UL_TBF_estab
100.0% 95.0% 90.0% 85.0% 80.0% 75.0% 70.0% 65.0% 60.0% 55.0% 50.0%
BSS fail Gb fail Radio fail Congestion Request % Allocated % Success
Figure 11 : UL TBF establishment

EDGE Activation
5000000.0 4500000.0 4000000.0 3500000.0 3000000.0 2500000.0 2000000.0 1500000.0 1000000.0 500000.0 0.0
xx /x x 12 /1 2 12 /1 4 12 /1 6 12 /1 8 12 /2 0 12 /2 2 12 /2 4 12 /2 6 12 /3 0 01 /0 1 01 /0 3 01 /0 5 01 /0 7 01 /0 9 01 /1 1 01 /1 3 01 /1 5 01 /1 7 01 /1 9
Alc_GPRS_DL_TBF_estab
100.0% 95.0% 90.0% 85.0% 80.0% 75.0% 70.0% 65.0% 60.0% 55.0% 50.0%
BSS fail Gb fail Radio fail Congestion Request % Allocated % Success
Figure 12 : DL TBF establishment Both UL and DL TBF establishment success rate remain stable after EDGE activation on 17 Dec 07. UL TBF establishment success rate stable at 92% and DL TBF establishment success rate stable at 96%.
ED MND
2.1
Released 17/36
4.2
TBF RELEASE PHASE

E D G E A c t i v a t i o n
Alc_GPRS_UL_data_transfer
600000.0 500000.0 400000.0 300000.0 200000.0 100000.0 0.0
xx /x x 12 /1 2 12 /1 4 12 /1 6 12 /1 8 12 /2 0 12 /2 2 12 /2 4 12 /2 6 12 /3 0 01 /0 1 01 /0 3 01 /0 5 01 /0 7 01 /0 9 01 /1 1 01 /1 3 01 /1 5 01 /1 7 01 /1 9
Modify GprsMultislotClassDefValue from 8 to 1 100.0%

95.0% 90.0% 85.0% 80.0% 75.0% 70.0% 65.0% 60.0% 55.0% 50.0%
Blocking drop Stagnat drop BSS drop Gb drop Realloc Drop Radio Drop Real radio drop % Norm Release % Acc Release
Figure 13 : UL data transfer

EDGE Activation
500000.0 450000.0 400000.0 350000.0 300000.0 250000.0 200000.0 150000.0 100000.0 50000.0 0.0
Alc_GPRS_DL_data_transfer
Modify GprsMultislotClassDefValue from 8 to 1 100.0%

95.0% 90.0% 85.0% 80.0% 75.0% 70.0% 65.0% 60.0% 55.0% 50.0%
Blocking drop Stagnat drop BSS drop Gb drop Realloc Drop Radio Drop Real radio drop % Norm Release % Acc Release
Both UL and DL TBF Normal release rate remain stable after EDGE activation on 17 Dec 07. UL TBF normal release rate stable at 95%. DL TBF normal release rate stable at 92%. Reallocate Drop decrease on both UL and DL since 13 Jan 08. This is due to number of UL and DL TBF reallocation are decrease after modify BSC parameter AGprsGprsMultislotClassDefValue from 8 to 1.
ED MND
xx /x x 12 /1 2 12 /1 4 12 /1 6 12 /1 8 12 /2 0 12 /2 2 12 /2 4 12 /2 6 12 /3 0 01 /0 1 01 /0 3 01 /0 5 01 /0 7 01 /0 9 01 /1 1 01 /1 3 01 /1 5 01 /1 7 01 /1 9
Figure 14 : DL data transfer
2.1
Released 18/36
4.3
DATA PACKET TRAFFIC

EDGE Activation
30000000.0 25000000.0 20000000.0 15000000.0 10000000.0 5000000.0 0.0
xx /x x 12 /1 2 12 /1 4 12 /1 6 12 /1 8 12 /2 0 12 /2 2 12 /2 4 12 /2 6 12 /3 0 01 /0 1 01 /0 3 01 /0 5 01 /0 7 01 /0 9 01 /1 1 01 /1 3 01 /1 5 01 /1 7 01 /1 9
Alc_GPRS_UL_useful_traffic
100.0% 90.0% 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0%
CS4 usef CS3 usef CS2 usef CS1 usef %io CSx usef
Figure 15 : UL GPRS Traffic

EDGE Activation
90000000.0 80000000.0 70000000.0 60000000.0 50000000.0 40000000.0 30000000.0 20000000.0 10000000.0 0.0
xx /x x 12 /1 2 12 /1 4 12 /1 6 12 /1 8 12 /2 0 12 /2 2 12 /2 4 12 /2 6 12 /3 0 01 /0 1 01 /0 3 01 /0 5 01 /0 7 01 /0 9 01 /1 1 01 /1 3 01 /1 5 01 /1 7 01 /1 9
Alc_GPRS_DL_useful_traffic
100.0% 90.0% 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0%
CS4 usef CS3 usef CS2 usef CS1 usef %io CSx usef
Figure 16 : DL GPRS Traffic

EDGE Activation
14000000.0 12000000.0 10000000.0 8000000.0 6000000.0 4000000.0 2000000.0 0.0
xx /x x 12 /1 2 12 /1 4 12 /1 6 12 /1 8 12 /2 0 12 /2 2 12 /2 4 12 /2 6 12 /3 0 01 /0 1 01 /0 3 01 /0 5 01 /0 7 01 /0 9 01 /1 1 01 /1 3 01 /1 5 01 /1 7 01 /1 9
Alc_EGPRS_UL_useful_traffic
100.0% 90.0% 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0%
MCS4 usef MCS3 usef MCS2 usef MCS1 usef %io MCSx usef %io MCS4 usef
Figure 17 : UL EDGE Traffic

EDGE Activation
45000000.0 40000000.0 35000000.0 30000000.0 25000000.0 20000000.0 15000000.0 10000000.0 5000000.0 0.0
xx /x x 12 /1 2 12 /1 4 12 /1 6 12 /1 8 12 /2 0 12 /2 2 12 /2 4 12 /2 6 12 /3 0 01 /0 1 01 /0 3 01 /0 5 01 /0 7 01 /0 9 01 /1 1 01 /1 3 01 /1 5 01 /1 7 01 /1 9
Alc_EGPRS_DL_useful_traffic
100.0% 90.0% 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% MCS9 usef MCS8 usef MCS7 usef MCS6 usef MCS5 usef MCS4 usef MCS3 usef MCS2 usef MCS1 usef %io MCSxusef %io 8PSKusef
Figure 18 : DL EDGE Traffic
ED MND
2.1
Released 19/36
Alc_GPRS_EGPRS_UL_traffic
800000000.0 700000000.0 600000000.0 500000000.0 400000000.0 300000000.0 200000000.0 100000000.0 0.0
xx /x x 12 /1 2 12 /1 4 12 /1 6 12 /1 8 12 /2 0 12 /2 2 12 /2 4 12 /2 6 12 /3 0 01 /0 1 01 /0 3 01 /0 5 01 /0 7 01 /0 9 01 /1 1 01 /1 3 01 /1 5 01 /1 7 01 /1 9
EDGE Activation
MCSx lost byt CSx lost byt MCSx retr byt CSx retr byt MCSx usef byt CSx usef byt
Figure 19 : UL GPRS & EDGE Traffic

EDGE Activation
4000000000.0 3500000000.0 3000000000.0 2500000000.0 2000000000.0 1500000000.0 1000000000.0 500000000.0 0.0
xx /x x 12 /1 2 12 /1 6 12 /1 8 12 /2 0 12 /2 2 01 /0 3 01 /0 5 01 /0 7 12 /1 4 12 /2 4 12 /2 6 12 /3 0 01 /0 1 01 /0 9 01 /1 1 01 /1 3 01 /1 5 01 /1 7 01 /1 9
Alc_GPRS_EGPRS_DL_traffic
MCSx lost byt CSx lost byt MCSx retr byt CSx retr byt MCSx usef byt CSx usef byt
Figure 20 : DL GPRS & EDGE Traffic UL and DL MCS (EDGE) traffic start increase since 18 Dec 07 after EDGE activation on 17 Dec 07. For UL direction % CS traffic decrease from 99.5% to 50% and % UL MCS traffic increase from 0.5% to 50%. For DL direction % DL CS traffic decrease from 99.5% to 45% and % DL MCS traffic increase from 0.5% to 55%.
ED MND
2.1
Released 20/36
4.4
DATA TRANSFER THROUGHPUT

Alc_GPRS_UL_throughput
12.0 10.0 8.0 6.0 4.0 2.0 0.0
xx /x x 12 /1 2 12 /1 4 12 /1 8 12 /2 4 01 /0 1 01 /0 5 01 /0 7 01 /0 9 01 /1 1 01 /1 3 01 /1 5 01 /1 7 01 /1 9 12 /1 6 12 /2 0 12 /2 2 12 /2 6 12 /3 0 01 /0 3
Kbit/s per TBF Kbit/s per PDCH Kbit/s per cell
Alc_GPRS_DL_throughput
16.0 14.0 12.0 10.0 8.0 6.0 4.0 2.0 0.0
xx /x x 12 /1 2 12 /1 4 12 /1 6 12 /1 8 12 /2 2 12 /2 6 12 /3 0 01 /0 3 01 /0 7 01 /0 9 01 /1 1 01 /1 3 01 /1 5 01 /1 7 01 /1 9 12 /2 0 12 /2 4 01 /0 1 01 /0 5
kbit/s per TBF kbit/s per PDCH kbit/s per cell
Figure 21 : UL/DL GPRS Throughput

Alc_EGPRS_UL_throughput
10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0
xx /x x 12 /1 2 12 /1 4 12 /1 8 12 /2 4 01 /0 1 01 /0 5 01 /0 7 01 /0 9 01 /1 1 01 /1 3 01 /1 5 01 /1 7 01 /1 9 12 /1 6 12 /2 0 12 /2 2 12 /2 6 12 /3 0 01 /0 3
Kbit/s per TBF Kbit/s per PDCH
Alc_EGPRS_DL_throughput
45.0 40.0 35.0 30.0 25.0 20.0 15.0 10.0 5.0 0.0
xx /x x 12 /1 2 12 /1 4 12 /1 8 12 /2 4 01 /0 1 01 /0 5 01 /0 7 01 /0 9 01 /1 1 01 /1 3 01 /1 5 01 /1 7 01 /1 9 12 /1 6 12 /2 0 12 /2 2 12 /2 6 12 /3 0 01 /0 3
Kbit/s per TBF Kbit/s per PDCH
Figure 22 : UL/DL EDGE Throughput Both UL GPRS and EDGE throughput per TBF is around 8 kbps. This is due to less data transfer on UL direction. DL GPRS throughput per TBF is around 9 kbps. But DL EDGE throughput per TBF is around 27 kbps. EDGE throughput per tbf is about 3 times higher than GPRS throughput.
ED MND
2.1
Released 21/36
5 5.1
BSS DIMENSIONING RESULT

EXTRA ABIS TS
Target: To estimate the number of Extra Abis Timeslots needed at BTS level. Counters:
Measured Object: BTS Gathering periods: 7-day Busy Hour data, recommended Input : Require extra&bonus abis traffic = Measure extra&bonus abis traffic / (1Min (%TBF abis cong, 30%)) Measure extra&bonus abis traffic = P466/3600 % TBF abis cong = Max( %DL TBF abis cong, %UL TBF abis cong) %DL TBF abis cong = 100*P105i / (P91a + P91b + P91c + P91d + P91e + P91f) %UL TBF abis cong = 100*P105j / (P62a + P62b + P62c - P438c) pABIS = 99% Nb of bonus Abis nibbles = Total number of BCCH and SDCCH in the BTS. Output : Number of required extra & bonus Abis nibbles = Erlang C (Required extra&bonus abis traffic, pABIS) Number of required extra Abis nibbles = Number of required extra&bonus Abis nibbles Nb of bonus Abis nibbles Number of required extra Abis TS = Number of required extra & bonus Abis nibbles / 4* Remark: 1 Abis TS contains 4 Abis nibble
ED MND
2.1
Released 22/36
Result : From above method & Minimum MSC-9 is requiring for each BTS, Using counter data during 24-27 Dec 07. Dimensioning result for extra abis TS are list below.
Figure 23 : BSS Dimensioning , Extra Abis TS For more detail, Number of Extra abis TS require for each BTS is in attach object.
Require Extra Abis TS
ED MND
2.1
Released 23/36
ED MND
2.1
Released 24/36
5.2
GPU AND ATER MUX
AterMUX-PS dimensioning is based on 2 different kinds of traffic i.e. signaling & user traffic. After applying corresponding methods, each of traffic may need a different number of AterMUX-PS links, and then the final number of required AterMUX-PS link will be the maximum number. GSL dimensioning method based on bandwidth (Signaling) Target: To estimate the number of AterMUX-PS links needed per GPU/GP, according to signaling traffic. Counters:
Measured Object: LAPD Gathering periods: 7-day Busy Hour data, recommended Methodology: Measure GSL Traffic = Max (p41,p42) / 28800* *Note: 1 Erlang = [Gb TS speed (64Kbits/s) * 3600] / 8 =28800 K bytes. GSL Capacity = 0.42 Erlangs GSL load = Measure GSL Traffic / GSL Capacity GSL load on a given GPU/GP should not exceed 80% , At least two GSLs are recommended to be defined per GPU/GP due to security reason. GCH/AterMUX-PS Dimensioning Target: To estimate the number of AterMUX-PS links needed per GPU/GP, according to user traffic. Number of AterMUX-PS links per BSC = Number of required GCH per BSC / 112 GCH Number of AterMUX-PS links per GPU/GP (based on user traffic) = Number of AterMUX-PS links per BSC / Number of required GPU/GP per BSC Finally, Number of AterMUX-PS links per GPU/GP (on signaling + user traffic) = Max (Number of required GSL per GPU/GP, Number of AterMUX-PS links per GPU/GP based on user traffic, 2)
ED MND
2.1
Released 25/36
GPU/GP Dimensioning and AterMux PS dimensioning (user traffic) Target: To estimate the number of GPU/GP needed per BSC. Gathered Counters:
Measured Object: BSC Gathering periods: 7-day Busy Hour data, recommended Methodology: As the main input for the estimation of the number of GPU/GP boards is represented by the estimated number of needed GCHs (at BSC or GPU/GP level), before being able to apply the GPU/GP dimensioning process, another process for the assessment of the AterMux PS interface on the basis of the target user traffic must be executed.
ED MND
2.1
Released 26/36
Input: Required GCH traffic = Measured GCH traffic / 1 Min (%GCH congestion, 30%) Measured GCH traffic = P100c / 3600 %GCH congestion = Max {Ater congestion, GPU limitation} = Max { %Ater_cong, %DSP_Cong, %DSP_load, %CPU_overload} Where : %GCH_Ater_cong = P383a * 100 / 3600 %GCH_DSP_cong = P384 *100 / 3600 %DSP_load = Max(P201, P202) *100 / 3600 %CPU_overload = P402 *100 / 3600 Output: Number of required GCH = Erlang C (Required GCH traffic, pGPU/GP) pGPU/GP = 99.9% Number of required GPU/GP = (Number of required GCH / GPU_GCH_Capacity) + GPU_for_MS_context_handling + GPU_for_Power_Limitation GPU_GCH_Capacity the maximum number of GCHs that the GPU can handle - 480 GCH (for legacy MFS) - 1560 GCH (for Mx MFS) GPU_for_Ms_context_handling = 0 for software release after B9MR1ed6QD2. GPU_for_Power_Limitation - 0 for normal situation. - 1 if P402/3600 >0,1% and (max(P105e/P105f) > 1% OR GPU reboots observed during the CPU loaded hours)
ED MND
2.1
Released 27/36
Result: From above method , Using counter data during 24-27 Dec 07. Dimensioning result for number of GPU and Ater MUX PS are list below.
Figure 24 : BSS Dimensioning , GPU and Ater Mux PS.
ED MND
2.1
Released 28/36
5.3
GB INTERFACE
Target: To estimate the number of Gb TS for each Gb link. Gathered Counters:
Measured Object: Gb Gathering periods: 7-day Busy Hour data, recommended Input: Require Gb traffic = Measure Gb traffic + 15%Margin Measure Gb traffic = Max(P45, P46) / 28800* *Note : 1 Erlang = [Gb TS speed (64Kbits/s) * 3600] / 8 =28800 K bytes. pGb = 99.9% Output: Number of required Gb TS per link = Erlang C (Required_Gb_traffic, pGb) Notes: - - Minimum 2 Gb links are required for one GPU/GP due to security reason - - Maximum 31 Gb TS (TS no. 1 to 31) can be configured per one Gb link. TS0 - cannot be used as it is reserved for specific usages e.g. frame synchronization. - - In general, around 4 to 8 Gb TS are configured per one Gb link.
ED MND
2.1
Released 29/36
Result: From above method , Using counter data during 24-27 Dec 07. Dimensioning result for Gb timeslot for each GB link is list below.
Figure 25 : BSS Dimensioning , Gb timeslot MFS 501

ED MND 2.1 VMS : EDGE Trial Final Report REFERENCE Released 30/36
Figure 26 : BSS Dimensioning , Gb timeslot MFS 502
ED MND
2.1
Released 31/36
6 CONCLUSION
EDGE performance on BCCH/TCH : EDGE throughput on BCCH is higher than on TCH. The main reason is due to BCCH frequency is more clean compare to TCH (NH/RH). EDGE performance, Extra TS=0 with difference number of MAX_PDCH : With out extra timeslot. EDGE throughput can be increase by setting optimize value of MAX_PDCH. This is the gain of B9 feature Autonomous Packet Resource Allocation. GPRS vs. EDGE Performance : - Ping : EDGE access time is faster than GPRS depend on packet size. - Web : EDGE use 60% of the time to preview web page compare to GPRS. - FTP : EDGE throughput is 200% faster compare to GPRS GPRS & EDGE Qos statistic : Main Indicator remains stable after EDGE activation. UL/DL TBF establishment success and normal release are stable. After EDGE activation EDGE traffic increase to 55% and GPRS traffic decrease to 45%. BSS Dimensioning : Result of BSS dimensioning is in chapter 5. Most impacted part is number of extra abis TS. This is due to requirement of VMS to allow MSC-9 for each BTS.
ED MND
2.1
Released 32/36
APPENDIX A: EDGE THROUGHPUT (INTERNAL FTP SERVER)

Objective: Assess EDGE performance in term of throughput using internal FTP server. Test Cells : 10146 (HNI_HMI3_GIAP_BAT_1800_C) Parameter setting & Time slot configuration :
Test Procedure: - Set parameter using above value. - FTP file ftp://10.151.11.28/02.exe using nokia N80 (4+3) - Load for 5 iteration. Test Result : With internal FTP server , EDGE RLC throughput is stable and very close to theoretical throughput at MCS-9. Low throughout on the previous test is mainly due to internet effect & possible FTP server software/configuration.
Figure 27: EDGE RLC and Application Throughput (Internal FTP)
ED MND
2.1
Released 33/36
APPENDIX B: EDGE PARAMETER SETTING
Figure 28: EDGE Parameters setting
ED MND
2.1
Released 34/36

EDGE Trial Report Ed2.1 (VMS)

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

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

EDGE Trial Report Ed2.1 (VMS)

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

EDGE TRIAL FINAL REPORT

Creation CHANGE NOTE APPRAISAL AUTHORITY

Anawat Diwitaya ORIGINATOR

VMS : EDGE Trial Final Report REFERENCE

EDGE Trial Report Ed2.1.doc

4 Gprs & edge qos statistic.............................................17

5 Bss dimensioning result...............................................22

EDGE Trial Report Ed2.1.doc

VMS : EDGE Trial Final Report REFERENCE

EDGE Trial Report Ed2.1.doc

VMS : EDGE Trial Final Report REFERENCE

EDGE Trial Report Ed2.1.doc

Figure 1 : Trial cell

Drive test software NEMO Outdoor version 4.0

AnaQos version 1.99

Nokia N80 (EDGE Class B , Multislot Class 11 : 4+3)

VMS : EDGE Trial Final Report REFERENCE

EDGE Trial Report Ed2.1.doc

Figure 2 : Trial schedule

VMS : EDGE Trial Final Report REFERENCE

EDGE Trial Report Ed2.1.doc

VMS : EDGE Trial Final Report REFERENCE

EDGE Trial Report Ed2.1.doc

Figure 3 : EDGE Throughput on BCCH and TCH

Figure 4 : MeanBEP and CV BEP on BCCH (No Hop)

Figure 5 : Mean BEP and CV BEP on TCH (NH/RH)

VMS : EDGE Trial Final Report REFERENCE

EDGE Trial Report Ed2.1.doc

EDGE PERFORMANCE, EXTRA TS=0 WITH DIFFERENCE NUMBER OF MAX_PDCH

VMS : EDGE Trial Final Report REFERENCE

EDGE Trial Report Ed2.1.doc

Figure 6 : EDGE Throughput with Extra TS =0 with Max PDCH = 4 and 18

VMS : EDGE Trial Final Report REFERENCE

EDGE Trial Report Ed2.1.doc

GPRS VS EDGE PERFORAMNCE (PING, WEB, FTP) Ping

VMS : EDGE Trial Final Report REFERENCE

EDGE Trial Report Ed2.1.doc

VMS : EDGE Trial Final Report REFERENCE

EDGE Trial Report Ed2.1.doc

Figure 8 : Ping 512 byte GPRS vs. EDGE

VMS : EDGE Trial Final Report REFERENCE

EDGE Trial Report Ed2.1.doc

VMS : EDGE Trial Final Report REFERENCE

EDGE Trial Report Ed2.1.doc

Figure 9 : Web GPRS vs. EDGE

VMS : EDGE Trial Final Report REFERENCE

EDGE Trial Report Ed2.1.doc

VMS : EDGE Trial Final Report REFERENCE

EDGE Trial Report Ed2.1.doc

Figure 10 : FTP GPRS vs. EDGE

VMS : EDGE Trial Final Report REFERENCE

EDGE Trial Report Ed2.1.doc

GPRS & EDGE QOS STATISTIC

BSS fail Gb fail Radio fail Congestion Request % Allocated % Success

Figure 11 : UL TBF establishment

BSS fail Gb fail Radio fail Congestion Request % Allocated % Success

VMS : EDGE Trial Final Report REFERENCE

EDGE Trial Report Ed2.1.doc

TBF RELEASE PHASE

Modify GprsMultislotClassDefValue from 8 to 1 100.0%

Figure 13 : UL data transfer

Modify GprsMultislotClassDefValue from 8 to 1 100.0%

Figure 14 : DL data transfer

VMS : EDGE Trial Final Report REFERENCE