2013 26th IEEE Canadian Conference Of Electrical And Computer Engineering (CCECE)

ANTENNA PLACEMENT OPTIMIZATION FOR CELLULAR NETWORKS

Hammad Hafiz, Harjeet Aulakh and Kaamran Raahemifar
Electrical and Computer Engineering Ryerson University Toronto Canada
ABSTRACT
Long Term Evolution (LTE) cellular networks are
currently implemented in many countries at very high
speed. Since manual cell planning is a time consuming
process and subject to errors and inefficiency, there is a
need for automated approaches to optimize coverage,
capacity and quality of cellular networks in less amount of
the time. This paper studies the application of branch and
bound algorithms to solve the Antenna Placement
Problem (APP) in Cellular networks. We are investigating
the optimal placement of trans-receiver antennas in
cellular systems. Our optimization framework imposes no
constraints on the location of the antennas. Based on a
branch and bound search technique, we adopt a
formulation that is suitable for node placement
optimization in various cellular network scenarios. We
have shown that optimal placement of antennas within the
coverage area can significantly improve the efficiency of
wireless networks. We achieved the optimal placement
topologies for different numbers of antennas and illustrate
that the circular deployment is not optimum in all cases.
Finally, we showed the optimal placement solutions
through MATLAB simulations.
Index TermsCellular networks, Antenna placement,
Cluster head, Branch and Bound search, coverage area
and Quality of Service.
1. INTRODUCTION
Cellular network planning is a multi-objective
optimization problem, which involves deciding on the
number of Base Stations, their configuration such as
power, type of antennae, height of the tower, etc., and
locating BSs in the geographical area.
A new generation cellular system looks forward to
increasing its network capacity and coverage, as well as
minimizes the interference and improves the Quality of
Service (QoS). One methodology to minimize the
interference, both in the uplink and the downlink of
cellular networks, is to decrease the overall transmit
power by Base Stations [1]. In addition, by decreasing the
access distance between the transmitter and the receiver,
these antenna systems has a direct impact on the energy
efficiency of the cellular network.

978-1-4799-0033-6/13/$31.00 2013 IEEE

Figure 1: Structure of antenna system in cellular networks [2]

Optimal placement of antennas has been a significant

subject of attention in wireless networks [2], [3].
Optimizing the location of the antennas for obtaining the
minimum bit error rate in linear cells [4], maximizing the
coverage of a cellular network [1] or finding the optimum
radius for antenna deployment of antennas [3] are some
examples of the benefits of antenna placement
optimization in cellular systems. In different words, the
capacity increase (or equally the power saving) of antenna
systems is largely influenced by antenna locations. Many
of the studies on the placement optimization of antennas
[5] impose restrictions on the topology of the network,
such as linear cells or antennas deployed along a circle.
The remaining of this paper is outlined as follows. First in
Section II, we discussed the related work. In Section III,
we formulated the optimization problem and introduce the
branch and bound technique used for solving the
placement optimization problem. In Section IV the
MATLAB simulation with comparisons and graphs are
shown. This paper is concluded in Section V.
2. RELATED WORK
Tzung-Pei Hong and Cheng-Hsi Wu [4] et al. proposed
the weighted clustering algorithm (WCA) for identifying
cluster heads in mobile networks. A mobile ad hoc
network can be modeled as composing of nodes and links,
which is usually represented by a graph G = (V,E) , where
V represents the set of nodes and E represents the set of

links. They assume the transmission radii for all nodes are
the same. The following formula is used to calculate the
combined weight (Wv) of a node v as a cluster head:

Where v is the serial number (ID) of a mobile node, v is

the degree difference of node v, Dv is the sum of the
distances between v and its neighbors, Mv is the mobility
speed of node v, Tv is the cumulative time in which node v
acted as a cluster head, and wi is the weighted coefficient
for the i-th factor. The degree of a node v is the number of
nodes within its transmission radius, not including itself.
The degree difference is thus the difference between the
degree of a node v and a predefined ideal node number M
in a cluster. Wv is used to determine the goodness of a
node as a cluster head. The lower the Wv value is, the
better v acts as a cluster head. Limitation of this approach
is that the base stations were randomly generated to
compute the system lifetime from the application nodes.
Also, additional limitation for selection of cluster heads in
mobile wireless sensor networks.
Efrat [6] et.al has addressed the problem of finding an
optimal base-station location. They split the problem into
two parts: (i) for a given base station location and (ii)
finding an optimal base-station location by using part (i)
over a discrete set of locations. They show that problem
(i) can be expressed as a linear programming problem,
which can be solved in polynomial time. For problem (ii),
they show that restricting the base-station to the locations
of the mobile nodes achieves a constant-factor
approximation for maximizing lifetime and present a (1
) - approximation by discretizing the search space into a
limited number of points. Limitation of this approach is
that it only considers line of sight sensors in the optimal
sensor placement problem.
Buragohain [7] et al deals with the sub-problem of finding
an optimal routing scheme to maximize the lifetime of the
network when the base stations location is fixed. With the
use of assumption that transmission and reception of 1 bit
of data uses 1 unit of energy irrespective of the distance of
transmission/reception, they prove that the problem is NPcomplete. Limitation under their scheme is that the
number of levels of the transmission tree is not restricted
and also it only considers a time synchronization model
for computing aggregates.
Hou [8] et al. has presented the extension of the life of the
network by moving the base-station to different locations.
In their model, the base-station has an unlimited supply of
power. The idea is that since the sensors around the basestation consume more energy than others (because they
work as the relay for other sensors), one can move the
base-station to different locations, to balance the battery

consumption among all sensors. They considered two

versions of the problem: (i) The number of base-station
locations is finite (C-MB), and (ii) The number of basestation locations is infinite (U-MB). They provide a
polynomial-time algorithm for the C-MB problem and a
(1)-approximation algorithm for the U-MB based on
discretizing the space into a set of finite locations.
Limitation of this model is that it does not consider how to
determine the optimum time to move the base station to
new sensors.
3. BRANCH AND BOUND SEARCH TECHNIQUE
Several heuristics have been proposed to choose cluster
heads (CH) in a group of cell phone users. These include
(i) Highest-Degree heuristic (ii) Lowest-ID heuristic and
(iii) Node-Weight heuristic. In our approach we have
assumed several things to deploy B & B technique for
optimal placement of antennas. These things includes: 1:
The squared space area, 2: The mobile terminals (users)
are represented as nodes, 3: Heterogeneous network, 4:
Applications nodes (AP) are also called cluster header
(CH), 5: A node x is considered to be a neighbor of
another node y if x lies within the transmission range of y,
and 6: The neighbors of a CH become members of that
cluster and can no longer be executed in algorithm after
one node has chosen as CH. We have deployed the
mentioned algorithm using B & B technique to obtain the
following constraints e.g. Cost (Installation), energy
(signal quality) and coverage area.

Figure 2: Overview of Clustering Technique

We have deployed the mentioned algorithm using B & B

technique to obtain the following constraints e.g. Cost
(Installation), energy (signal quality) and coverage area.
Wireless
network
consists
of
nodes,
cluster
header/application nodes, and one or several base stations
(BSs). Energy of the wireless network elements can be
described as follows: Nodes < Cluster header < Base
Station. Each cluster of nodes is allocated with at least one
cluster header (CH) (see Fig. 2). Our goal is to place the
cluster header in such a way, in a square space, so that we
have maximum coverage, signal quality, minimum
installation cost and improved QoS (future work). We
have taken different scenarios in which we considered

different parameters to find out the optimized location for

the cluster header to cover the maximum number of
nodes. And if the node lies out of that range then we
analysis it by considering the following two options. 1: Do
we want to serve the node with the same cluster header
with weak signals (less quality of service) or 2: Do we
want to place another antenna to get the services for that
node. Intelligently we may want to get the services from
the same cluster header as placing another antenna for just
one/two nodes may not be cost efficient solution. To
provide a solution to this thing, whereby we dont want to
place another antenna just to serve one/two nodes, we
have also implemented logic to optimally cover this node
with enhanced antenna range. We can realize the trade-off
that if we want to deploy the antennas with less range then
we may have the scenarios in which some nodes lies
outside the range of the antenna but those nodes have to
be served by the same cluster header to have optimal
distribution. But on the other hand, if we deployed
antennas with larger range to cover the all nodes in
specified vicinity then we can eliminate the above
scenarios but we may have to pay in terms of antenna cost
(with larger coverage area). The steps involved in B & B
search technique optimization process are shown in the
figure 3 below.
Here are the steps that we have taken to implement B & B
search technique.
1. Average of X =1/
2. Neighbors N (v) ={v| distance (v,v)Rv}
3. Compute the Euclidean distance for every node.
4. Neighborhood calculation (see matrix below for
generalized basic logic steps) and choosing proper CH.

31

36

After implementing our desired criteria (nodes<R) and

logic we are eliminating row and column. Repeating all
this for remaining nodes until each node is assigned to a
cluster (this way we traversed the whole matrix). At the
end we are left with 1x1 matrix.

12

15

18

33

36

32
22

36
24

34

36

29
35

5. Plotting the network distribution

30
[36]
36

6. Plotting cluster header with corresponding served

nodes.
7. Plotting the antenna range
Form a
matrix of
elements

Make Matrix
diagonal zero
and chose a

Sort Node
< R (high
to low)

Count # of
nodes that
satisfies:
Node <R

radius R

Finding the
Euclidean
distance

Sort the rows

and perform
Neighborhood
Calculations

Remove
correspondin
g row and
column of
chosen node

CH =
highest
density

Repeat
process for
all nodes

Figure 3: Steps for B & B Search Technique

4 EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Generally antenna gain is a parameter which measures the
degree of directivity of the antenna's radiation pattern. A
high-gain antenna preferentially radiates in a particular
direction. Normally, the antenna gain, or power gain of an
antenna is defined as:
Gain =

, where U is the radiation intensity.

In our research we have considered two different

scenarios. In the first scenario, we have taken the fact into
the consideration that we have chosen antennas with
optimized range. That being said, antenna with small
range possesses the less gain (less expensive) and
orientation of the antenna is relatively inconsequential.
This scenario also realizes the fact that the nodes sitting in
the vicinity of the cluster header (antenna) may also be
served intelligently by the same CH/antenna. Below is the
Algorithm Flow Chart (Figure 4). Our program
intelligently allocates the nodes to the best available CH.
As it is not an optimal idea to place another antenna just to
serve one/two nodes, these nodes may get the services
from nearby antenna at some cost.
In the second scenario we have presented antennas with
longer range. Although we need the less number of
antennas to cover the same area but we may pay the cost
in terms of gain (more expensive antennas). Examples of
both scenarios are laptop Wi-Fi antenna and dish antenna
on a spacecraft. The algorithm flow chart, see Fig. 3, has
been shown to grasp the basic idea.
4.1 Simulations Results

Figs. 5 to 7 show the results of our program. Beside the

improvement in efficiency we have the same optimized
output with indicated covered area compared to the
preceding logic output. The time analysis of the program
is also presented to show the efficiency of our program.
Start

Finding the
Euclidean
distance and
setup R

In the profile summary Self Time is the time spent in a

function excluding the time spent in its child functions. So
efficiency can easily be visualized. Our program is so
generalized that it even can take care of 1500 nodes
(tested) compared to the 30 nodes which were executed
last year by another group. This is the significant
improvement. In the outputs below N represents the
number of nodes while Criteria represents the method of
selecting the area range by cellular antenna. Optimized
placement criteria means that the antenna is placed in such
a way that it optimally cover the nodes. Although some of
the nodes may not be covered under the same CH range
but they may be served by the same CH with the
compromise on QoS (Quality of Service). On the other
hand range extender means that we are placing antenna
with higher range so that all of the approximate nodes
should be in the range of CH/antenna but with no
compromise on QoS.

Traversing whole
matrix and choosing
proper CH with
specific criteria

Neighborhood
Calculations

No
Optimization
Criteria &
Range Selection

Remove processed
Row and Column

Yes

Figure 5: N=500, Criteria = Optimized Placement Layer1

Data Gathering
for CH and
Antenna Range

Plotting nodes
cluster
distribution with
served CH

Stop
Figure 4: Algorithm flow chart

Figure 6: N=500, Criteria = Optimized Placement Layer2

Figure 9: Number of Nodes versus

v
Time
Figure 7: N=500, Criteria = Range Exteender

4.2 Graphs and Comparisons

Improvemen
nt (%)

Figs. 8 to 10 show the graphical represeentation of the

output. X-axis represents the number of nodes while y
axis represents the unit of time i.e. secondss. So lesser the
time of the execution is higher the effi
ficiency of the
program would be. For the better represeentation of the
graph we are only taking the nodes up to 1000. But we also
did the execution of the program for N=15500. Results of
the program are also tabulated below.
It can easily be visualized by these grraphs that our
program is more generalized and perform
mance efficient
compared to the one executed last year by another group.
Our program has the drastic change in thee efficiency of
the program after N=30.

Our Program (s)

1

0.6882
0.665
0.627
0.609
0.59
0.54
0.591
0.533
0.532
0.52

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

120.00

97.67
7

88.88

100.00

99.20

94.69 98.88

80.00

99.70

99.49 99.76

70.65
53.94

60.00
40.00
20.00
0.00
0

20

40

60

80

100

Figure 10: Number of Nodes versus Time (Efficiency improvement)

First column of the table represents the number of nodes.

Second, third and fourth column sho
ows the execution time
in seconds. And at the end; fiftth column, show the
improved efficiency of our prograam. As we can easily
visualize that as the number of nodes increases our
program is more efficient. And this efficiency reaching
towards 100% when we take moree nodes i.e. over 100
nodes compared to the preceding log
gic where the program
halts after N=100. (-ve sign show
ws that we gain the
efficiency).
ON
5. CONCLUSIO

0
0

20

40

60

80

100

Figure 8: Number of Nodes versus Tiime

4.3 Comparisons
Our program produced the same optimizedd output as the
preceding logic does, with the improvemennt in efficiency.
In table 1 we have presented the comparisoon showing the
efficiency of our program compared to thee one executed
last year by another group considering the same scenarios.

A branch and bound search algorith

hm has been proposed
in this paper to solve the antenna placement problem. The
Versatility of our algorithm compaared to the preceding
logic is that the performance of th
he algorithm does not
depend on the number of nodes/clu
uster header or on the
initial matrix, and radius of the anttenna. Our program is
much more generic and perform
mance efficient. Our
program can handle about 1000 nod
des in 12s, a significant
improvement. Our program handles 100 nodes in 0.6s. We
have taken two different scenarios i.e. optimal placement
hem do not affect the
and range extender, and both of th

efficiency of our program, an advantage of our approach.

Looking at the graphs we conclude that as the number of
nodes is increasing the efficiency increases accordingly.
Table 1 also shows that we have achieved the 99%
efficiency at N=70. This keeps growing until we hit the
100 nodes for 100% efficiency.
N

10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
500
1000
1500

Our
Program
(s)

Preceding
logic (s)

Improvement (s)

Improvement
(%)

0.52
0.59
0.532
0.627
0.54
0.533
0.609
0.682
0.591
0.665
3.171
13.643
28.661

1.129
2.01
4.784
11.819
23.173
47.794
76.227
134.462
196.267
282.352
Halted
Halted
Halted

0.609
1.42
4.252
11.192
22.633
47.261
75.618
133.78
195.67
281.68
-

-53.94
-70.647
-88.880
-94.695
-97.670
-98.885
-99.201
-99.493
-99.699
-99.764
-100
-100
-100

Table 1: Program execution performance table

In each iteration the branch and bound search algorithm

choose the randomly generated initial values and the
number of covered users must be analyzed from the
results of a single run of the algorithm. Then we analyzed
the performance for each set of nodes to evaluate the
performance of our program. The randomly selected node
matrix makes branch and bound algorithms a powerful
tool in solving the antenna placement problem. The
algorithm performance was evaluated assuming a flat
square area. Further work can include development of
algorithms so that terrain features can also be considered.
6. REFERENCES
[1] Job Munyaneza, Anish Kurien and Ben Van Wyk,
Optimization of Antenna Placement in 3G Networks
using Genetic Algorithms,
IEEE 3rd International
Conference on Broadband Communications, Information
Technology & Biomedical Applications, 2008
[2] Sina Firouzabadi and Andrea Goldsmith Optimal
Placement of Distributed Antennas in Cellular Systems,
IEEE 12th International Workshop on Signal Processing
Advances in Wireless Communications, 2011
[3] Eunsung Park, Sang-Rim Lee, and Inkyu Lee
Antenna Placement Optimization for Distributed
Antenna Systems, IEEE Transactions on Wireless
Communications, Vol. 11, No. 7, July 2012

[4] Tzung-Pei Hong and Cheng-Hsi Wu An Improved

Weighted Clustering Algorithm for determination of
application nodes in heterogeneous Sensor Networks
Department of computer science and information
engineering national university of Kaohsiung. Volume 2,
Number 2, April 2011, 2011 ISSN 2073-4212.
[5] M. Chatterjee, S. K. Das, and D. Turgut, WCA: a
weighted clustering algorithm for mobile ad hoc
networks, Cluster Computing, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 193204, 2002.
[6] A. Efrat, S. Har-Peled, and J. Mitchell. Approximation
algorithms for two optimal location problems in sensor
networks. In Proc. 2nd International Conference on
Broadband Networks, pp. 714723, 2005.
[7] C. Buragohain, D. Agrawal, and S. Suri. Power aware
routing for sensor databases. In Proc. 24th Annual
Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and
Communications Societies, vol. 3, pp. 17471757, 2005.
[8] Y. Shi, Y. Hou, and A. Efrat. Algorithm design for
base station placement problems in sensor networks.
In Proc. 3rd International Conference on Quality of
Service in Heterogeneous Wired/Wireless Networks,
page 13, ACM, 2006.