Frequency Planning Strategies

Distributed with permission from Page 1 of 24
TEC Telecommunications Engineering and Consulting Pte Ltd.

All Rights Reserved.

Frequency Planning Methodology

Prepared by:

Nathan Paul
TEC Telecommunications and Consulting, Pte Ltd


Table of Contents

1. Introduction - Purpose of Frequency Planning........................................................... 3

2. Theoretical Background of Frequency Planning ........................................................ 4
2.1. Estimation of C/I..................................................................................................... 5
2.2. Estimation of Cluster Size ...................................................................................... 7
2.3. Traffic Estimation................................................................................................... 8
2.3.1. Cluster Size ......................................................................................................... 8
2.3.2. Traffic Loading and Quality ............................................................................... 8

3. Frequency Planning Strategy Scenarios.................................................................... 10
3.1. Basis of Frequency Planning ................................................................................ 10
3.2. Types of Frequency Planning Options.................................................................. 11
3.2.1. Uniform Frequency Planning............................................................................ 11
3.2.2. Non-Uniform Frequency Planning ................................................................... 12
3.2.3. Random Frequency Planning............................................................................ 12
3.2.4. 1/1 and 1/3 Frequency Planning ....................................................................... 13
3.3. Frequency Planning Methods ............................................................................... 13

4. Proposed Frequency Planning Methodology:........................................................... 15

5. What is required to implement this Methodology: ................................................... 20

6. Appendix I - Burst Collision Probability.................................................................. 21


1. Introduction - Purpose of Frequency Planning

Frequency planning is the process of allocating channels in the most efficient manner
based upon the design of the network. A poor frequency plan will create interference and
poor quality. As a result, the system capacity can be lowered since frequency planning is
the balance between capacity and interference. However, even a very efficient frequency
plan will create interference. The ultimate aim then would be to:

1. Minimize the interference and;
2. Push the interference to less important areas.

The most efficient frequency plan will not be able to overcome the basic design
architecture of the sites. The capacity constraint will be the site design and the level of
efficiency that can be attained in frequency planning. The ultimate dependency of
capacity is on the selection of well-chosen sites. The choice of site location must have as
its primary consideration the effective reuse of frequency. The frequency plan will only
be able to maximize the capacity to a certain limit.

The TEC and Metatron strategy is to develop and implement tools aimed at improving
the frequency planning efficiency. These strategies are to find the most efficient way of
using the spectrum to balance quality and capacity. The frequency plan process to make
efficient use of the spectrum by using an intelligent heuristic algorithm to minimize the
costs in the allocation channels. It does not, however, guarantee that the network quality
and capacity can be improved incrementally and continuously. That is constrained by
the network design. Interference reduction methods and re-engineering strategies need
to be aligned with the spectrum strategies in order to achieve further capacity and quality
gains in the network.


2. Theoretical Background of Frequency Planning

The following section provides some theoretical background to some of the issues in
Frequency planning and the effectiveness of a particular strategy. This background
information is referenced in later sections and, therefore is provided for completeness.
In addition, this information can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of a frequency plan
prior to its implementation as well as when quantitative evaluations are not available (i.e.,
statistics, drive test results.)

Theoretically, cellular systems are evaluated in terms of Frequency Reuse and Cluster
sizes. Many theories have been developed based on uniform grid layouts and the
optimal spectral efficiency that can be obtained. In reality, it is difficult and rare to
obtain a uniform grid layout. Also, in a dense urban environment, the reuse grid does not
always apply; many additional gains can be achieved by use of the clutter. Nevertheless,
these principles will be compared in order to ascertain the effectiveness of the frequency
strategies. This will assist in the choice of the frequency strategy in the absence of
quantitative results.

The goal will be to try to ascertain whether a planned reuse can be tightened. Theoretical
calculations based on cluster size and reuse as well as gains that may be achieved with
frequency hopping and DTX.

The first method would be to calculate the approximate C/I values that could be obtained
using 3-sector reuse scheme. Then calculating the C/I requirements using GSM features
of Frequency hopping and DTX. Based upon this C/I value a reuse cluster size of K can
be calculated. The K cluster size can be compared to the number of frequencies provided
by a partitioning plan as to whether it is adequate or not.

The second method is to calculate the spectrum constraints is to consider traffic loading.
The GSM feature of frequency hopping is dependent upon the actual loading of the cells.
By evaluating the cells traffic with the possible number of interferers in the typical reuse
grid, the minimum number of frequencies that would have to be allocated to a MA-List
for frequency hopping can be determined. This number can then be compared to the
number frequencies allocated in the partitioning plan.


2.1. Estimation of C/I

The C/I protection value can be calculated from the Cluster size (assuming the D/R
relationship) by the following formulas:

2
2
2478 . 1
) 3 ( 6
) 3 (
K
K
ional Omnidirect
I
C
= =

law. power loss n propagatio their and s interferer of tiers ring for Factor
Size Cluster

5814 . 2
) 4 ( ) 3 ( 2
) 3 (
2
2
=
=
=
+
=

K
K
K
l Directiona
I
C

The results for 3-Sector directional antennas is calculated as follows:

Cluster Size and C/I
(3-Sector Cell)
K C/I dB
2.4 11.7
3 13.7
4 16.2
7 21.0
12 25.7


The GSM Recommendation 05.05 gives the following minimum interference protection
ratios:

Relation Frequency Spacing (kHz) Minimum C/I dB
Co-Channel 0 9
1
st
Adjacent Channel 200 -9
2
nd
3
rd

However, these protection ratios do not take into account shadow fading and additional
margins are required. The Cell Edge location probabilities from the Jakes curves are
used to determine the additional margin. The GSM recommendation 03.30 recommends
an additional 5 dB as the lognormal shadow margin for 90% Area Probability and 75%
Cell Edge Probability. The following C/I margin and Overall Co-channel C/I
requirement is given below for the Probability of Interference Free Reception:

Cell Edge
Probability
Cell Area
Probability
C/I Margin
= 7 dB
(Urban-GSM 3.30)
Co-Channel
C/I
Requirement
0.50 0.73 0 9
0.75 0.90 5 14
0.90 0.96 9 18
0.95 0.99 12 21

If the cell edge probability is 75%, the C/I requirement of 14dB. If DTX is applied then
an additional 2 dB can be gained for an overall C/I of 12. (This does not take into
account a neighbor hysterisis normally used as an interference margin.)


2.2. Estimation of Cluster Size

Working in reverse, the Cluster size can be calculated by estimating what C/I value can
be achieved. The minimum C/I for the BCCH carrier is 17 dB (considering it is not
hopping). For the TCH carriers with frequency hopping and DTX (2dB reduction) a C/I
12dB would be required.

The Cluster Sizes calculated for various C/I values is as follows:

C/I and Cluster Size
(3-Sector Cell)
C/I K
3 0.9
6 1.2
9 1.8
10 2.0
11 2.2
12 2.5
13 2.8
14 3.1
15 3.5
16 3.9
17 4.4


2.3. Traffic Estimation

A proposed frequency partition can be evaluated in 2 ways related to traffic: Cluster Size
and the Quality impact of the traffic loading.

2.3.1. Cluster Size

Spectral efficiency is related to cluster size. The larger the cluster size the lower the
spectral efficiency. By reducing the cluster size, the spectral efficiency is increased.
However, if the cluster size is reduced below the minimum C/I requirements, then the
capacity limit of the current design has been reached. The reuse of spectrum of the
carried traffic has been calculated as follows:

[ ( Carried Traffic * Spectrum per Time Slot ) ] / Total Bandwidth Mhz

[ ( Carried Traffic * 25 Khz ) / 1 Mhz ] / Total Bandwidth Mhz

2.3.2. Traffic Loading and Quality

The traffic loading has serious impact on the effectiveness of frequency hopping and as
result the quality of the network. The number of interferers that a typical cell is affected
by further compounds the traffic loading. Below is the typical number of interferers
that can be expected in a3-sector design:

Number of interfering cells with 3-sector directional antennas
Reuse Cluster Ring (Tier) around site
K 1 2 3 4 5
3 3 of 6 5 of 12 7 of 18 9 of 24 11 of 30
4 2 of 6 5 of 12 6 of 18 9 of 24 10 of 30
7 2 of 6 4 of 12 6 of 18 8 of 24 10 of 30
9 2 of 6 5 of 12 6 of 18 9 of 24 11 of 30
12 2 of 6 5 of 12 7 of 18 9 of 24 11 of 30


Normally, the 1
st
and 2
nd
tiers have the most impact on C/I, which would correspond to 3
and 5 interferers at a reuse of K=3. The appendix shows some analysis charts showing
the impact of traffic loading on frequency hopping. The charts show probabilistically
the number of frequencies required for frequency hopping to maintain the minimum
quality level. The results are summarized here:

3 Interferers
Minimum Required Assignments (MA-LIST)
TRX Fhop Only Fhop + DTX
3 6 4
4 6 4

5 Interferers
Minimum Required Assignments (MA-LIST)
TRX Fhop Only Fhop + DTX
3 10 6
4 10 6

The above channel requirements are the minimum number and it is assuming the
traffic load is at or below 2% GOS.


3. Frequency Planning Strategy Scenarios

This section describes the considerations required in developing a frequency planning
strategy. It includes:

Basis of frequency planning
Discussion of the types of frequency planning options:
o Uniform
o Non-Uniform
o 1/3
o 1/1
Methods of Frequency Planning

3.1. Basis of Frequency Planning

Frequency planning began due to the scarcity of spectrum and eventual congestion of the
early radio systems, where there was a fixed frequency for each site. As a result, the
concept of frequency reuse was created, and is the essence of cellular systems to gain
capacity.

The limit of the frequency reuse is interference, and as a result the limit of the system
capacity is interference. The radio planning theories assume a uniform hexagonal grid
site layout. It is also used to create contiguous coverage areas and is fundamental for
calculating C/I ratios theoretically. The reuse of frequencies depends upon the pathloss
between 2 reusing sites to lower the interferers signal strength to achieve the required
C/I ratio. This started the concept of cellular grids and reuse factors. The C/I ratio
depends upon the D/R ratio (Distance Between co-channel sites/ Cell Radius).

Theoretically, using the grid reuse pattern, you could accommodate unlimited subscriber
density usage by creating smaller and smaller cell sites. The interference between 2
reusing sites, based on the relationship D/R, is not an absolute distance, but the ratio of
the distance. Therefore, as the cell radius gets smaller and smaller, you can still maintain
C/I as long as the ratio is maintained.

The hexagonal grid is divided into clusters of cells called the reuse factor. Considering
the geometry layout of the hexagonal grid and calculation of distance between reusing
sites, the following reuse factors are possible: 1, 3, 4, 7, and 12. The choice of the reuse
factor is a function of the minimum C/I ratio required to maintain a connection.


In reality, the uniform grid is impractical because rarely are the sites built upon a regular
grid. What is more fundamental is that each site is selected with the primary
consideration of frequency reuse, whether it falls on the grid or not. Also, in urban areas
the interference does not necessarily depend upon the D/R ratio, for the following
reasons:

1. The propagation loss is higher and irregular due to the clutter.
2. Due to non-uniform traffic loading where some cells carry a heavier traffic load
than other cells. There is a relationship between traffic loading and interference.

Therefore, the spectral efficiency of the frequency plan depends upon the radio
environment of each network and on the interference reduction techniques introduced.

3.2. Types of Frequency Planning Options

3.2.1. Uniform Frequency Planning

Uniform Frequency Planning uses the Reuse Grid in which you would have a reuse factor
of 1, 3, 4, 7, and 12. The spectrum is divided up into clusters of sites with a certain
number of channels per cell called a channel group. The frequencies are then assigned
evenly to each cell in the cluster. Generally, the assignments are performed manually
since the complication is limited.

This type of frequency planning is impractical for most networks. It requires a fairly
homogenous environment to control the interference and the ideal placements of cell
sites. It depends upon the D/R ratio to attain the required C/I. Most environments are
far from homogenous. Using a uniform cluster frequency plan in this environment will
cause channel groups to be used as guard bands between other groups and the spectrum
will be wasted.


3.2.2. Non-Uniform Frequency Planning

Non-Uniform Frequency Planning is used in most networks that have reached capacity
limitations of the design. This approach does allow the network capacity to continue
expanding while maintaining quality. The available spectrum is split into pools of
channels. Each channel pool is used for a specific purpose, such as:

Control Channels
Traffic Channels
Macro Layer Channels
Micro Layer Channels
Indoor Layer Channels

The allocation of channels is then assigned according to the traffic loading requirements
of each cell. The cleanest possible channel available from each pool is then assigned.
As a result, there is no uniformity in the reuse of the channels. This approach attempts to
match the real world radio environment and thereby increase the spectral efficiency. The
spectrum inefficiency, however, is the separation of the spectrum into layers. This layer
separation should only be done when:

There will be a substantial gain in capacity from a tighter reuse in the lower layer,
and;
There will be a need to increase the quality of service.

Both reasons need to go hand in hand. Any spectrum removed from the reuse is a
directly calculable loss in revenues and needs to be offset by a tighter reuse in the lower
layer.

3.2.3. Random Frequency Planning

Random frequency planning is similar to Non-Uniform planning except that there is 1
pool of channels for all purposes (both BCCH and TCH). The allocation of channels is
then assigned according to the traffic loading requirements of each cell. The cleanest
possible channel out of the entire spectrum available is then assigned. This approach
matches as closely as possible the real world radio environment. The outcome of this
approach is that the network becomes an as built configuration. Any capacity
expansion is extremely constrained. It usually results in a congested network while
waiting for quantum jumps in capacity build outs.


3.2.4. 1/1 and 1/3 Frequency Planning

1/1 and 1/3 frequency planning relies upon GSM synthesizer hopping capabilities (See
Guidelines section). The spectrum is divided into 2 reuse schemes.

4/12 reuse for the BCCH carriers
A minimum of 12 ARFCN is required in an ideal uniform 4/12 pattern.

Reuse for Non-BCCH carriers

o 1/3
The rest of the carriers are divided into 3 for each sector at the site. At
least twice the number of TRXs installed is required to be assigned for
each cell. If the typical configuration is 4+4+4, then at least 8*3=24
ARFCN are required.

o 1/1 reuse for non-BCCH carriers
The same frequency list is used for all cells. Co and Adjacent channel
interference is avoided at the same site by using the same HSN number
and different MAIO numbers. The adjacent channel interference is
avoided by assigning frequency lists that are 2*# of Synchronized TRX
(or total trx at the site). Between sites, the interference is averaged by
using different HSN numbers.

Both 1/1 and 1/3 frequency plans require a homogenous network. In other word, an
ideal uniform 4/12 network, where the D/R relationship is strictly maintained. If this is
the case then frequency planning is extremely simplified. If this is not the case, then the
number of interferers on a particular cell will increase and the increased burst collisions
will degrade the quality.

3.3. Frequency Planning Methods

There are basically 2 methods for generating the channel allocations:

Automatic Frequency Planning (AFP). AFP has the advantage of being faster,
less error prone, and can run many iterations to find the optimal solution. The
disadvantage of AFP is that too often it is expected overcome and hide basic
design issues. It is used as a band-aid covering over the real problems.


Manual Frequency Planning. The manual method can take 2-3 months and is
very error prone since it takes a tenacious planner to perform more than 1
iteration. The advantage of the manual method is that it provides an output that
no AFP yet produces identification of what are the problem areas in the reuse
to be re-engineered and optimized. Many of these problems are reengineered and
optimized prior to the completion of the frequency plan.

There are many methods for producing the data required for the channel allocations:

Interference Matrix is based on propagation models where the interference is
calculated on a cell-to-cell relationship. The output is the percentage of the
coverage area where the design C/I is met and percentage of area that the C/I is
not meet. The disadvantage of this method is that there are many errors in the
process due to in accuracies in the database, a high standard deviation in the
model and does not reflect reality. It is also difficult to finely tune the
propagation model for each cell. Until live network data from mobiles (GPS and
Location Based triangulation) are integrated into the models, the results can be
unrealistic.

Reuse Matrix builds up the cell-to-cell reuse relationship. The matrix can be built
in multiple ways:
o Cell-to-Cell interference area percentage.
o Fixed channel frequency separation numbers 0,1,2, would be assigned to
cell to cell relationships on which a co, adj or neither frequency could be
used or not.
o Decimalized channel separation numbers where costs can be associated
with the reuse.
o Drive test analysis where C/I is performed on actual measured data.
o Live Network Data
IOI Interference on Idle channels
C/I calculations based on mobile measurements.


4. Proposed Frequency Planning Methodology:

Frequency Planning is required to support every phase of the site implementation and
optimization process, including:

Planning

In a tight reuse network the highest priority of the planning process is to minimize
the interference and not chasing the traffic. The planning needs to be
incorporated into the frequency planning process at the very beginning stage.
Traditional planning practices start with reuse as the primary consideration.
However, with the proliferation of micro and pico cells, this consideration is
becoming lost.

New Site Implementation

The process of implementing a new site should comfortably allow a new
frequency plan to be created/modified without disturbing the network
performance. In many cases, this is left to an optimization function after it is on
air. The frequency planning process needs to include the interference aspects of
the new site prior to going on line.

Site Change Requirements (i.e. tilts, height, PA)

The use of AFP tools has lead to the hiding of basic design issues. The
expectation today is that the AFP tool can produce a frequency plan no matter
how poor the design. The result is that the design constraints become hidden
behind the channel allocation algorithms. (See Manual Frequency Planning
above.) The frequency planning methodology needs to highlight the problems in
the design, so that they can be reengineered.

The outcome of a frequency plan should be two items:

The best allocation of channels possible to minimize interference thereby
increasing capacity.
The limitations in the design that prevent a better allocation. These limitations,
once identified, can be optimized and reengineered.


Therefore, the purpose of this methodology is multi-faceted:

1. Tighten the reuse where it can be tightened based on the current design.
2. Unite the processes of frequency planning, cell planning and optimization into a
single, measurable goal.
3. Create a performance indicator that can be measurable for each planning stage:
the number of interferers per cell.
4. Create a unified goal that makes the processes build a network that maximizes
reuse, minimizes interference and expands capacity.

This methodology uses the non-uniform frequency planning as well as the frequency
hopping capabilities (variable length MA list) as the best way to utilize the spectrum
discussed previously. The channel allocation tool should be fed with cost and penalty
values from several intermediate steps. This would require the compilation of an
intermediate database as shown in the following diagram:


The following steps would be involved in creating and maintaining this database and
shown in the below diagram:

1. Create an Intermediate Database.

Generate an interference matrix using:
1. Propagation prediction tool

The propagation prediction tools model is required to be tuned
in order to produce a reasonable interference matrix. There are
two levels of model tuning to consider:
Tuning the model for New Site Scenario Planning. Here a
Drive Test is performed and the model is modified for the
different propagation categories, such as, Urban, Suburban
and Rural. However, this is INSUFFICIENT for
Interference Prediction.
Tuning the model for Interference Prediction. There are 2
methods to implement: First, drive test every site in detail
to capture all the radio neighbor relationships. The
prediction for each site is then modified to be closer to
reality. And second, triangulate the path loss from Mobile
Measurement reports to determine the areas and density of
usage.
2. Mobile measurements captured on the ABIS or thru a call tracing
function at the OMC

Planning Tool
Interference
Matrix
Drive Tests
Reuse
Matrix
OMC
Performance
Statistics
ABIS or CTR
Mobile
Measurements
OMC
Historical
Traffic Analysis
Local
Engineering
Knowledge
Frequency
Planning
Database
Historical
Frequency
Plans
OMC
Interference on
Idle Channel


Generate Reuse matrix from:
1. Interference matrix.
2. Phone and Scanning receiver drive test results.
3. Historical frequency plan implementations where tight reuses
have already been known to work.
4. Engineers local market knowledge.

Create costs and penalties based on the reuse matrix and:
1. Burst level probabilities using GSM features for interference
reduction.
2. Correlate the probabilities to actual performance based on Idle
Channel Interference and ABIS data: Power Control, RXQUAL
3. Performance statistics correlated to historical frequency plans.

Weight the costs and penalties based on historical traffic trends and projected
traffic forecasts.

Store the generated values for each step and the final overall weighted values.

2. Determine the required number of carriers and length of MA List
Determine the number of interferers per cell site. This is accomplished from
the interference and reuse matrix and will be used to determine:

o How well a site has been designed and optimized.
o What reuse constraints exist so they can be re-engineered.

Determine the length of the MA list based on the number of interferers using
the Burst Planning probability tool.
Determine the length of the MA list based on traffic above 2% GOS.

3. Channel Allocation algorithm Generates the Frequency Plan


C/I & C/A
Interference
Matrix
Reuse Matrix
Channel
Separations
OMC
Performance
Statistics &
IOI
ABIS or CTR
Mobile
Measurements
OMC
Historical
Traffic
Analysis
Local
Engineering
Knowledge
Frequency
Planning
Database
Propagation
Model
Tool
Drive Tests
Cell Config &
Neighbor
Lists
Penalties &
Costs

Assignment
Weightings

ABIS or CTR
Power Control
& RXQual
Burst
Planning
Historical
Frequency
Plans
Channel
Assignment
Algorithm
Burst
Planning

Historical
Frequency
Plans


5. What is required to implement this Methodology:

The following packages would be required in order to implement this particular
methodology:

Implementation of the Frequency Planning Database

The frequency planning database would need to be interfaced with the
existing tools and data used at the operator:

Propagation Prediction tool
OMC Performance statistics
Mobile Measurement Reports
Metatrons DimensionZ drive test analysis tool

Mobile Measurement Reports

The mobile measurement can usually captured on the ABIS or
through a cell trace. In some vendor implementations this
information is not available on the ABIS or they may not have a
call trace function. In this case, the Metatron Echo monitoring
and reporting module can be implemented. This module can be
used to tap into the digital cross connect or other taps and capture,
store and forward the mobile measurement reports.

Metatrons DimensionZ GSM Phone and Scanning Receiver modules


6. Appendix I - Burst Collision Probability

The Burst Collision probability tool was created to determine the minimum number of
frequencies required in a MA-list, if the number of interferers were known. The intention
is not to replace any fractional load dimensioning guidelines, but rather to provide a
means to design and optimize the network for the most efficient reuse of the spectrum.
Based on the discussion previously, an ideal 4/12 design would encounter 2 co-channel
interferers. A 3/9 design would encounter 3 co-channel interferers. Since a Non-
Uniform Multiple Reuse frequency plan will be implemented, the best way to improve on
the results is to engineer the number interferers to the minimum of 2. (Ideally, a micro
cell should only have 1 interferer.)

Most networks are not uniform, and the actual number of interferers will be higher. The
task of RF Planning and Optimization will be to reduce these interferers thru
optimization. If the number of interferers is 3, then the minimum number of frequencies
required to prevent a frame erasure rate of 5% is 6.

The probabilities are calculated in the following manner:

HSN probability
If 2 cells are using the same frequency list, but 2 different HSN numbers, then the
individual bursts will collide no more than 1/N times. N is the number of
frequencies in the hopping list.

2% GOS probability
The 2% GOS probability is the occupancy of a timeslot based on the traffic load.
It is calculated by dividing the rounding up 2% GOS Erlang Offered / Physical
Channels. The actual utilization based of 2% GOS is lower than this value, but
the above calculation is more conservative. This is due to the fact that the
measured Erlang traffic is an average value, whereas in reality traffic comes in
bursts. So the actual occupancy can be higher than the average. Care therefore
must be taken on cells where the traffic is rough (VMR >1) and call congestion
persists.

The 2% GOS level needs to be the maximum allowed. If the GOS degrades, then
the quality will degrade drastically. Some very poorly designed networks survive
because they never allow the GOS to degrade, and a nearby cell easily rescues the
call. The Burst planning tool can be also be modified to determine the number of
frequencies required using the GOS as a parameter.


DTX probability
Discontinuous Transmission reduces the number of occupied Time Slots by
transmitting only when there is speech. Since a speech conversation is half
talking, half listening, it is estimated that the transmission can be reduced by 50%.
The tool assumes a 40% value to be conservative.

These probabilities are multiplied together to determine the collision rate with 1
interferer. The parameter to the spreadsheet is to input the actual number of interferers
and multiply this by the 1-interferer probability.

The intention is not to reintroduce a long MA list and a 1/3-reuse pattern, but rather to
identify design problems and have a method to temporarily overcome poor quality. What
is intended is that there will be variable length MA list, based upon the problems in each
area and cell. The MA list should be kept as short as possible for most cells where the
reuse allows. The problem sites would then have an extended list.

Analysis of a single (TN,MA) connection
If > 3 Bursts are not decoded, the Frame is Erased. (A FER of 5% is the Maximum Toleration )
Goal is 2 Bursts per Frame
Number of Interferers: 5
Worst Case Bursts Lost Per Frame NO Frequency Hopping
TRX 1 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
1 8 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Worst Case Bursts Lost Per Frame Frequency Hopping Only
TRX 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
1 8 8 7 5 4 4 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2 8 8 8 7 6 5 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
3 8 8 8 8 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
4 8 8 8 8 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1
5 8 8 8 8 7 6 5 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1
6 8 8 8 8 7 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1
Worst Case Bursts Lost Per Frame Frequency Hopping & DTX
TRX 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
1 8 6 4 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2 8 8 6 4 4 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
3 8 8 6 5 4 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
4 8 8 6 5 4 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
5 8 8 7 5 4 4 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
6 8 8 7 5 4 4 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Number of ARFCN in Hopping Group
Number of ARFCN in Hopping Group


Frequency Planning Strategies

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

Frequency Planning Strategies

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Distributed with permission from Page 1 of 24

TEC Telecommunications Engineering and Consulting Pte Ltd.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen