Performance Analysis of SOHO in DSSS Composite Neighbour sets:

A function of Eb/No and BER Influenced by Peak Electromagnetic Field

Intensity of an N-element linear array antenna
Horace L. King
BioMed and Wireless Technologies,
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Horace1@ieee.org

Abstract The work presented in this paper analyses the

performance and explores the Soft Hand Over (SOHO)
requirements of a User Equipment (UE) based on Composite
Neighbour Sets power levels driven by Electromagnetic
intensity, bit error rates (BER), Bit Energy (Eb) to total
interference (No) ratio in Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum
Systems (DSSS). It is evident, in the results, that the BER is
influenced by the field intensity whereas in previous work, more
emphasis was put on optimum static parameters and other
trigger values.
Keywords- Composite Neighbour Sets; Power Levels; EM Intensity;
Bit Error Rate; SOHO Requirement; NodeB.

I.

by the UE or by the NodeB of the holding cell and, in some

unique situation, by a NodeB of a neighbouring cell. The UE
and the NodeB of the neighbouring cells monitor each others'
signals and the best target candidates are selected among the
neighbouring cells. In some systems, a target candidate may be
selected among the cells which are not in the neighbour list.
This is done to mitigate the probability of interference due to
the near-far effect. In this paper work is carried out to
formulate the field intensity requirement at the receiving
antennae; the BER probability as a function of Eb/No and the
impact of field intensity for a faultless SOHO are determined
and presented in plots
II.

INTRODUCTION

Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum (DSSS) Systems have

become more ubiquitous due to their Portability and Mobility
providing users with a rich variety of service enhancements
and secure full duplex transmission [1]. However, as the
number of users continues to rise, system performance is
impacted especially in the uplink where orthogonality is very
difficult to achieve for all the user devices and the radio link
performance is unpredictable. In analogue systems, it was
easier to increase signal power to mitigate the dwindling
Signal-to-Noise ratio since systems were simple devices that
did not require spreading and dispreading of data streams. In
digital systems, using complex modulation schemes such as 64
QAM, increasing Signal power means that more transmission
Bandwidth is required for high data rates; the error vector
margin tends to increase in the presence of interference putting
more pressure on the allocated spectrum. Filter design also
becomes more complex and conforming to BER becomes an
issue. When it comes to system hand overs such as SOHO; in
theory this is possible as long as the hardware is well
configured and there is no interference caused by near far
effects. It should be clear that when a user is holding a call, one
or more parameters of the signal in the channel, in the holding
(source) cell is/are monitored and analysed in order to establish
when to effect a handover [2]. The handover may be requested

978-1-4244-6890-4/10$26.00 2010 IEEE

ANALYSIS OF SOHO PROCEDURES

To achieve a SOHO, the following phases must be

completed; measurements on the downlink primary common
pilot channel (P-CPICH) or Received Signal Code Power
(RSCP) and the received signal strength indicator (RSSI) must
be made. These measurements establish the quality of the pilot.
Hence, the energy per chip (ec) after spreading the bit (eb), and
interference (io) spectral density ratio, are related to these
measurements by the following equation.
ec RSCP
=
io
RSSI

(1)

The decision for a SOHO is reached after measurements are

made and unbroken communication is held between the UE
and the NodeB. The SOHO algorithms implemented in UMTS
systems relate to [3]. In addition, there must be an active set
which contains a list of all cells involved in SOHO; and a
monitored set which contains a list of candidate cells that are in
the neighbourhood and may be added to the active set when
power level parameters become better than those of a cell in the
active set; a number of events take place based on these
measurements. Moreover the Radio Access Network Controller
(RNC) decides on the SOHO events to trigger, such as event
1A - radio link addition, event 1B radio link removal, and

893

TENCON 2010

event 1C radio link replacement [2]. These events depend

on the signal quality which in turn depends on Field intensity.

III.

Nd

sin 2 (k cos y)
Af n =

Nd (k cos y)
2

SIGNAL FIELD FORMULATIONS

Whereas section II establishes the SOHO events, this section

determines the field intensity for an N-element linear array
antenna installed at the NodeB with uniform amplitude and
element spacing. The far field geometry of an element array is
shown in Figure 1 below.

(5)

z
rN

#N

#4

AF

#3

r3

r2

#2

r1
d

10

#1
Figure 2: Phasor diagram of the N-element array

Figure 1: Far field Geometry of an N-element array

Using equation (5), and for simplicity,

The total field of the array is determined by the vector addition
of the fields radiated by the individual elements as shown in
Figure 2. Here the elements are assumed to have identical
amplitudes and each succeeding element has a progressive
phase relative to the proceeding one [4]. Hence the array factor
Af is a summation of exponentials represented by the vector
sum of N phasors each of unit amplitude and phase shown in
equation (2) where,

Af e j = e j + e j2 + e j3 +...+ e j(N1) + e jN
N

Since A f =

j (n 1)

sin( M )
R ( ) = ( A f n ) 2 =

(7)

and the directivity DR() of the array factor is then evaluated as

a function of the maximum radiation (Rmax) and average
radiation intensity (R0),

(2)

DR( ) =

4Rmax Rmax
=
Prad
R0

(8)

where,

n =1

P
1
R0 = rad =
4
4

(3)

Using [4] conditions, where = -(kd + /N),

N

sin (kd cos +

2

Afn
N
[ (kd cos + )]
2

(6)

The radiation intensity R() is expressed as

, therefore equation (2) simplifies to,

Af (e j 1) = (1+ e jN )

Nd
( k cos y )
2

M =

1
= n2
2

(4)

When there is a progressive phase shift between the elements,

= -yd, where y is a constant, then,

R( ) sin( )d ( )d ( )
0 0

(9)

sin( M ) 2
[
] sin d
M

According to [5], the far zone field of a uniform two

element array of identical amplitudes is equal to the product of
the field of a single element at a selected reference point and
the array factor.

894

The next step is to determine the radial component Wrad of the

radiated power density of the antenna,
Wrad = a rWr = a r A0

sin

r2

(10)

A0 is the peak value of the power density, is the spherical

coordinate and a r is the radial unit vector. Using equation (10),
the total radiated power Prad is determined such that,

Prad =

Wrad nda =

2
2
rad a r r sin dd = A0

(11)

0 0

Since our interest is in the total field of the array, we use the
approach by [6] of the field pattern of a single element where,

cos cos
I 0e jkr 2

E = j

2r
sin

(12)

and by multiplying equation (12) by the array factor

determined in equation (4), the total field ET of the array is
determined,
I e jkr
ET = E A f n = j 0
2r

IV.

cos cos
A
2
fn
sin

Figure 3: Field strength vs distance to elevation plot

(13)

RESULTS

Figure 3 shows the plot of the total field strength of the array in
equation (13) plotted against the distance and the
transmitting/receiving antenna elevation. It is evident that as
the field goes farther away from the antenna, the intensity
decreases, hence the signal power received is low. In this
situation, and in the presence of interference, the probability of
error is seen to be increasing. The increase is shown in Figure 4
with h values of the field intensity in the plots varying from 1,
0.5, 0.35 and 0.28; where h = 1 is most intense field and h =
0.28 is the least intense. Figure 5 plots show that where the
highest Eb/N0 = 20 dB, the probability of error is a lot lower
than all the other cases; an indication that the field strength
must have been higher to result into a stronger signal being
received and hence ensuring that interference was kept below
the signal strength. In this context SOHO would most likely
take place 90 - 95% of the time without a problem. Where the
field intensity is lower, the probability of SOHO being
successful, would depend on other contributing factors such as
comparisons of Eb/N0 with other cells, system BER
requirements and thresholds for time-to-trigger events.
Figure 4: Error Probability to Eb/No as a function of signal Field strength

895

Figure 5: Bit Error Rate vs Eb/N0 plot

V.

CONCLUSION

From the results it can be concluded that for SOHO to be

successful, high signal to interference ratios must be targeted.
This means that both the receiving and transmitting antenna
arrays must be performing optimally. Eb/N0 and the BER
requirements must be adhered to. Trigger events for SOHO,
although not fully explored in this work, must depend on signal
strength, which in turn depends on field intensity and the
performance of the elements in the arrays.
REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

3GPP, TS 25.331, Radio resource control, Version 5.2.0, Release 5.

3GPP, TR 25.922, Radio resource management strategies, Version
3.8.0, Release 6.
I. Forkell et all, Performance Evaluation of Soft Handover in a realistic
UMTS Network, in Proc. IEEE 57th Semiannual Vehicular Technology
Conference, vol. 3, pp. 19791983, April 2003.
K. D. Katsibas, C.A.Balanis, P.A.Tirkas, C.R.Birtcher, Folded Loop
Antenna for Mobile andPersonal Communication Systems, IEEE
Intern.,Veh., Technol., Phoenix, AZ, May 5 7 1997.
J.P.Gianvittorio and Y. Rahmat-Samii, Fractla Element Antennas: A
Novel Antenna Miniaturisation Technique and Applications, IEEE
Antenna Propagation Magazine, Vol. 44, no.1, pp. 20 36, Feb 2002.
M.M. Dawoud and A.P.Anderson, Design of Super Directive Array
with High Radiation Efficiency, IEEE Trans., Antenna, Prop., vol.AP 26, no.6, Jan 1978, pp. 819 823.

896