UMTS Co-location Issues

Agenda
Introduction Interference Analysis Methodology Interference Analysis Results UMTS operators co-existence Interference Prevention
Antenna protection Filter(s)

PHS interference issues

Conclusion
1 1

Introduction
UMTS comes after other radio systems
CDMA (800, 900, 1900), GSM900, GSM1800, GSM1900

High data rate & multi-service UMTS networks require a

high density of sites

It becomes more and more difficult to find new sites:

UMTS market pressure
Available radio sites are very limited Quick rollout & cost reduction

Environment protection Radio site sharing is one of the efficient solution

2 2

Agenda
Introduction Interference Analysis Methodology Interference Analysis Results UMTS operators co-existence Interference Prevention
Antenna protection Filter(s)

PHS interference issues

Conclusion
3 3

Interference Analysis Methodology

Spurious emissions and intermodulations study Blocking study

Required isolation between GSM / UMTS antenna connector and UMTS antenna connector

Antennas performances

BTS performances
4 4

Agenda
Introduction Interference Analysis Methodology Interference Analysis Results UMTS operators co-existence Interference Prevention
Antenna protection Filter(s)

PHS interference issues

Conclusion
5 5

Required isolations based on standard recommendations

6 6

Standard recommendations
Required isolations
UMTS UMTS UMTS GSM 900 GSM 1800 transmitter transmitter transmitter transmitter transmitter to to to to UMTS to UMTS GSM 900 GSM 1800 UMTS receiver receiver receiver receiver receiver

Blocking

40 dB

58 dB

48 dB

58 dB

63 dB

Spurious emissions Intermodu lations products

: required

29 dB

83 dB (32 dB with New Req)

29 dB

83 dB (32 dB with New Req)

32 dB

isolations are pessimistic since no feeder losses have been taken into account
7 7

Required isolations based on products performances

8 8

Physical calculations considering UMTS competitor BTS and Nortel UMTS iBTS
Required isolations
iBTS UMTS transmitter to iBTS UMTS receiver iBTS UMTS UMTS competitor transmitter to transmitter to UMTS competitor iBTS UMTS receiver receiver

Blocking

0 dB

63 dB

0 dB

Spurious emissions Intermodu lations products

: required

15 dB

15 dB

32 dB

isolations are pessimistic since no feeder losses have been taken into account
9 9

Physical calculations considering GSM competitor BTS and Nortel UMTS iBTS
Required isolations
iBTS UMTS Tx to GSM Rx 40 dB
(GSM 900)

GSM Tx to iBTS UMTS Rx

Blocking

48 dB
(GSM 1800)

28 dB

Spurious frequencies

14 dB

83 dB (32 dB if compliant with new GSM req.)

: required

isolations are pessimistic since no feeder losses have been taken into account
10 10

Conclusion
Nortel iBTS UMTS:
iBTS UMTS has better performances than the UMTS standard recommendation

Competitor BTS:
If only compliant with standard recommendations, interference problems will occur

Important to do studies considering the real performances of the products in order to reduce the required isolations to avoid interference between systems
11 11

Agenda
Introduction Interference Analysis Methodology Interference Analysis Results UMTS operators co-existence Interference Prevention
Antenna protection Filter(s)

PHS interference issues

Conclusion
12 12

UMTS operators co-existence

UL Interference Mechanism
Adjacent channel interference
a single mobile can have severe impact on a large number of other mobiles "cell breathing" phenomenon
In Tx-UMTS Channel, MS side

Possible dead zones

UMTS FDD UL band

1920 MHZ

1980 MHZ

Capacity loss

Associated in Rx-UMTS Channel, BS side

13 13

UMTS operators co- existence

DL Interference Mechanism
Adjacent channel interference:
Smaller impact: Design of the BS Fewer users affected
Possible dead zones
In Tx-UMTS Channel, BS side

UMTS FDD DL band

Capacity loss

2110 MHZ

2170 MHZ

Associated in Rx-UMTS Channel, UE side

14 14

UMTS operators co- existence

ACP

ACLR Ability of a transmitter to confine its transmissions to its own channel ACS Ability of a receiver to exclude the interference present on an adjacent channel

ACP Sums up the degree of interaction between adjacent channels. Combination of both transmitter and receiver performance

15 15

UMTS operators co-existence

Solutions
Good ACP / ACIR

Adjacent Channel Protection / Adjacent Channel Interference Ratio

Good ACLR Adjacent Channel Leakage Ratio

Good ACS Equipment limitations . SOLUTIONS Spectrum efficiency Adjacent Channel Selectivity

Carrier spacing

Co-location
16 16

UMTS operators co- existence

ACLR & ACS

Some values of ACP from Normalisation & Nortel ACP

Agreement between participant on the following values
of ACLR (25.101, 25.104) for FDD mode:
ACLR1 (5 MHz) 33 dB 45 dB ACLR2 (10 MHz) 43 dB 50 dB

MS BS

Nortel ACLR & ACS = 58 dB

The UE has less ACP due to its small size.

17 17

UMTS operators co-existence

Carrier spacing
spacing between central frequency is 5 MHz

Carrier spacing

For UMTS, allocated bandwidth for one carrier is 5 MHz and

With this spacing between two adjacent competitor channels (and assuming the standard required ACP), the capacity loss is around 5%

Idea: decrease the distance between two carriers belonging to the

same operator in order to move away from competitors carrier to get more protection
4.6 MHz spacing (intra operator) => ACP decrease of around 10 dB 5.4 MHz spacing (inter operator) => ACP increase of 2 dB

Spacing of 4.8 MHz (instead of 5 MHz) between two carriers

belonging to the same operator is a good choice:
No impact on capacity (intra operator) Reducing the capacity loss (inter operator)

Carrier spacing performance is linked to the design of filter

18 18

UMTS operators co-existence

Co-location
Co-location means less UL adjacent channel interference due to UE
and less DL adjacent channel interference due to BS:
Co-location

But, inter BS interferences can occur:

System A

System B

BS filterings can reduce these interferences

19 19

UMTS operators co-existence

Conclusion
UMTS operators coexistence consequences:
Capacity loss Dead zones

Solutions:
High ACP Carrier spacing: At least 5 MHz between two inter-operator FDD FDD carriers At least 4.8 MHz between two intra-operator FDD FDD carriers FDD FDD base stations co-location
20 20

Agenda
Introduction Interference Analysis Methodology Interference Analysis Results UMTS operators co-existence Interference Prevention
Antenna protection Filter(s)

PHS interference issues

Conclusion
21 21

Co-siting radio solutions

Wideband Noise Spurious emissions Blocking

Intermodulations

Co-siting solutions

BTS radio performances

Filters BTS antenna

Antenna decoupling Antenna isolation Antenna rejection

22 22

Interference Prevention
Main solutions
Antenna protection External filter(s)
External filter at Tx BTS side for reducing Tx out-band spurious and wideband noise transmission External filter at Rx BTS side for protecting out-band of Rx band and improving the Rx blocking performance
System B BTS System A BTS

Antenna decoupling

23 23

Interference Prevention
Main Solutions
With antenna decoupling, required additional decoupling (dB) is Require isolation (dB) Rx cable loss (dB) Tx cable loss - Antenna decoupling (dB) If additional decoupling 0 OK !

If additional decoupling > 0

Decoupling RxLev TxPA PA
Cable Loss Combiner

Filter(s) are needed !

Cable Loss

RxLev TxPA
24 24

Combiner

PA

System A

System B

Interference Prevention
Antenna protection Antenna separation decoupling :
attenuation between two antennas when separated (between the two connectors) for a given frequency band depends on antenna performances and site configuration

Antenna rejection :
attenuation of a signal fed into an antenna working in another band

Antenna isolation :
Attenuation of a signal between the transmitting antenna connector and the reception antenna connector
25 25

Antenna decoupling
Two separated antennas Vertical separation between antennas
1 mast per sector 1 UMTS antenna 1 antenna of other system Isolation is reached:
by vertical separation between antennas
other BTS

Antenna decoupling

UMTS iBTS
26 26

Antenna decoupling
Two separated antennas Horizontal separation between antennas
2 masts per sector 1 UMTS antenna 1 antenna of other system Isolation is reached:
by horizontal separation between antennas
other BTS

Antenna decoupling

UMTS iBTS
27 27

Antenna decoupling
Two separated antennas

Other system

UMTS

example
1 X-polar antenna of other system
2 ports
Feeder Cables

1 UMTS X-polar antenna

2 ports

4 feeders per sector

Other BTS

BTS UMTS

28 28

Antenna decoupling
Antenna decoupling measurement between GSM 900/1800 Xpolar directives antennas and UMTS X-polar directive antenna

Antenna 1

Antenna 2

Network analyser

Input S

Signal generator
29 29

Antenna decoupling
with horizontal separation 0.5 to 4m d
S' in dB Average S' in UMTS band =0 deg 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 -60 -70 -80 -90 0 1 2
GSM-900 antenna GSM-1800 antenna Dual (GSM-900) Dual (GSM-1800)

Horizontal distance in m
Average S' in UMTS band =60 deg 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 -60 -70 -80 -90 -100 0 1 2 Horizontal distance in m 3
GSM-900 antenna GSM-1800 antenna Dual (GSM-900) Dual (GSM-1800)

UMTS X-polar antenna

GSM X-polar antenna

S' in dB

30 30

Antenna decoupling
Antenna decoupling versus horizontal separation between antennas
Antenna GSM 900
d = 0.5 m = 65 dB d = 3 m = 76 dB

d dB

Antenna GSM 1800

d = 0.5 m = 57 dB d = 3 m = 68 dB

Antenna GSM dual band 900 / 1800

UMTS X-polar antenna GSM X-polar antenna
d = 0.5 m = 62 dB (Tx 900) / 55 dB (Tx 1800) d = 3 m = 75 dB (Tx 900) / 67 dB (Tx 1800)
31 31

Antenna decoupling
Antenna decoupling with vertical separation
Average S' in UMTS band Same azimut
0.00 GSM-900 antenna -10.00 -20.00 -30.00 GSM-1800 antenna DUAL (GSM-900) DUAL (GSM-1800)

GSM X-polar antenna

S' in dB

-40.00 -50.00

-60.00
-70.00 -80.00 -90.00 -100.00 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

UMTS X-polar antenna

Vertical distance in m 32 32

Antenna decoupling
Antenna decoupling versus
GSM X-polar antenna

vertical separation between

antennas
Antenna GSM 900
D = 0.5 m = 72 dB D = 3 m = 81 dB

D dB

Antenna GSM 1800

D = 0.5 m = 54 dB D = 3 m = 65 dB

UMTS X-polar antenna

Antenna GSM dual band 900 / 1800

D = 0.5 m = 65 dB (Tx 900) / 60 dB (Tx 1800) D = 3 m = 70 dB (Tx 900) / 66 dB (Tx 1800)
33 33

Antenna decoupling
Antenna decoupling with Horizontal/vertical separation
Average S' in UMTS band

d=1.5m Same azimut

GSM X-polar antenna

S' in dB

0
GSM-900 antenna

-10 -20 -30 -40 -50 -60 -70 -80

GSM-1800 antenna Dual (GSM-900) Dual (GSM-1800)

UMTS X-polar antenna

-90
-100

0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

Horizontal distance in m

34 34

Antenna decoupling
Antenna decoupling versus vertical and horizontal separations between antennas
Antenna GSM 900
d = 0.5 m = 70 dB d = 3 m = 85 dB

GSM X-polar antenna

D = 1.5 m

Antenna GSM 1800

UMTS X-polar antenna

d = 0.5 m = 60 dB d = 3 m = 71 dB d = 0.5 m = 70 dB (Tx 900) / 60 dB (Tx 1800)

Antenna GSM dual band 900 / 1800

d = 3 m = 75 dB (Tx 900) / 72 dB (Tx 1800)

35 35

Antenna decoupling versus azimuth divergence between antennas

Horizontal separation
with azimuth divergence

Vertical separation with

azimuth divergence

GSM Antenna
GSM Antenna UMTS Antenna

d = 0.5 m = 90
d

d = 0.5 m = 30

UMTS Antenna

60 dB (1800) 70 dB (900)
36 36

55 to 60 dB (1800) 65 to 70 dB (900)

Antenna decoupling between two UMTS antennas versus horizontal or vertical separation
Vertical separation:
UMTS X-polar antenna

Horizontal separation:
d dB

d = 0.5 m

D dB

75 dB
d=3m
UMTS X-polar antenna UMTS X-polar antenna

UMTS X-polar antenna

d = 0.5 m

55 dB
70 dB
37 37

85 dB
d=3m

Interference Prevention

If antenna protection does not bring enough

isolation, filters can be added
two separated antennas, physical separation and possible filters one single antenna: dual band antenna, filters diplexer / triplexer whatever the type of antenna

38 38

Co-location solutions example

Example: two separated antennas Vertical separation
1 mast per sector 1 UMTS antenna 1 GSM antenna Isolation is reached:
by vertical separation between antenna with filter at GSM side if antenna decoupling is not sufficient
GSM Nortel BTS

Antenna decoupling

UMTS iBTS
39 39

Co-location solutions example

Example: Two separated antennas Horizontal (and/or vertical) separation(s) between antennas
2 masts per sector 1 UMTS antenna & GSM antenna Isolation is reached:
by vertical and horizontal separations between antennas with filter at GSM side if antenna decoupling is not sufficient
GSM Nortel BTS

Antenna decoupling

UMTS iBTS
40 40

Co-location solutions example

Example: One single dual band antenna
1 mast per sector
1 GSM / UMTS dual band antenna Isolation depends on antenna
isolation between GSM and UMTS bands
dual band antenna characterised by about 30 dB of isolation between the different bands filter at GSM side may be necessary

30 dB (typical value) between GSM band and UMTS band

GSM Nortel BTS

UMTS iBTS

41 41

Co-location solutions example

Example : Use of diplexer or triplexer
1 mast per sector
Isolation is reached with diplexer or
triplexer, which corresponds to actually two or three filters:
filter(s) at GSM side
filter at UMTS side
GSM Nortel BTS

Whatever the type of antennas

Wideband antenna dual band antenna / Triband antenna Monoband antenna
UMTS iBTS
42 42

Diplexer

Antennas options
2 vertical antennas for each band
4 antennas per sector Space diversity

2 vertical dual band antennas

2 antennas per sector Heavier antenna Space diversity

1 dual band cross polar antenna

1 antenna per sector Cross polar diversity

Dual Band antennas can be used only if equipped with independent electrical tilt systems.

1 cross polar antenna for each band

2 antennas per sector Cross polar diversity

Measurements and simulations show that Xpolar diversity (0.7 correlation

factor) give a very good Eb/N0 gain. 1 antenna / sector is more suitable for Urban environments. 1.5 dB insertion loss
43 43

Feeders options

Independent feeders / independent antennas

X-polar UMTS antenna

Shared feeders / Independent antennas

Shared feeders / Shared antenna

X-polar Dual Band antenna

Duplexer

Duplexer

Duplexer

Duplexer

Duplexer

Duplexer

Duplexer

Duplexer

DCS 1800 BTS

UMTS iBTS

DCS 1800 BTS

UMTS iBTS

DCS 1800 BTS

UMTS iBTS

No reuse of 2G aerials New Feeders for UMTS New antenna for UMTS Site capacity ??

Reuse of 2G feeders New antenna for UMTS Need additional feeder if 2G without diversity

Reuse of 2G feeder Reuse of 2G antenna if Xpolar. Or 1 single new antenna for both systems

44 44

Shared feeders using external Duplexer

Physical implementation (without diversity)

External duplexer

The external duplexer can be associated with TTLNA (Tower Top Low Noise Amplifier) for UMTS only or for both UMTS and DCS 1800 Typical insertion loss for both internal and external duplexer : 0.5 dB. No impact on Link Budget
GSM 1800 path UMTS path Frequency 1710 to 1880 MHz 1920 to 2170 MHz Insertion loss (dB) 0.5 0.5 Return loss antenna port (dB) 18 18 Attenuation in GSM 50 50 Attenuation in UMTS 50 IMD 3rd order (dBc) -160 -160 Max Tx Power (W) 200 200

Optional Cabinet area for Lower duplexer

shared feeder

Duplexers provide necessary filtering (isolation) between UMTS and GSM

45 45

Use of TTLNA (Tower Top Low Noise Amplifier)

The TTLNA is used to increase the coverage of the cell by compensating
the feeder loss.

It can be incorporated with the external duplexer, and provided only for
the UMTS path or for both paths.
X-polar Dual Band antenna X-polar UMTS antenna

TTLNA
TTLNA TTLNA

TTLNA

Duplexer

Duplexer

Duplexer

Duplexer

DCS 1800 BTS

UMTS iBTS

DCS 1800 BTS

UMTS iBTS

The impact on the Link Budget is a 3 dB increase of the reverse path loss. This corresponds to the compensation of the feeder loss.

46 46

Agenda
Introduction Interference Analysis Methodology Interference Analysis Results UMTS operators co-existence Interference Prevention
Antenna protection Filter(s)

PHS interference issues

Conclusion
47 47

Co-location between PHS and UMTS Base Stations

Wideband noise
The frequency separation between the PHS band ([1905~1915MHz]) and the UMTS Uplink band ([1920~1980MHz]) is very small PHS maximum power corresponds to wideband noise of -22 dBm for a 5 Mhz band Required isolation is 96 dB

Spurious emission
PHS out of band spurious emission required to be less than 2.5 W correspond to a -26 dBm threshold in 5 Mhz UMTS band PHS in band spurious emission required to be less than 250 nW correspond to a -36 dBm threshold in 5 Mhz UMTS band Required out of band isolation is 92 dB, required in band isolation is 16 dB

Blocking
PHS base station maximum transmit power is 2 W correspond to 33 dBm Required isolation is 48 dB

Solution

50 dB out of band filtering at PHS base station output and physical separation of antennas isolations are pessimistic since no feeder losses have been taken into account
48 48

: required

PHS Base Stations Interfering with UMTS Mobiles

Wideband noise
The frequency separation between the PHS band ([1905~1915MHz]) and the UMTS Downlink band ([2110~2170MHz]) is large enough

Spurious emission
For out of band spurious, maximum tolerated interference level at the mobile side in the UMTS band is 116.5 dBm For in band spurious, the minimum requirement gives a maximum power for the adjacent channel interfering signal on receive at the UMTS mobile of 52 dBm

Required out of band isolation is 90.5 dB, required in band isolation is 16 dB

Blocking
The required blocking level for Downlink band in UMTS is 15 dBm

Required isolation is 25 dB

Solution

PHS signal has high pathloss, usually providing enough isolation Additional isolation is required only in the worst case scenario when PHS base station is very close to an UMTS mobile but far from the PHS mobile isolations are pessimistic since no feeder losses have been taken into account
49 49

: required

PHS Mobile Interfering with UMTS Infrastructure

Wideband noise and Spurious emission

PHS specifications for base station and terminal are the same except maximum transmit power Wideband noise and spurious emission discussion above remains the same Worst case isolation required is 96 dB

Blocking
The required blocking level for Downlink band in UMTS is 10 dBm

Required isolation is 25 dB

Solution

PHS signal has high pathloss, usually providing enough isolation Additional isolation is required only in the worst case scenario when PHS terminal is very close to an UMTS base station. Presumably the probability is low.

: required

isolations are pessimistic since no feeder losses have been taken into account
50 50

PHS Mobile Interfering with UMTS Mobile

Wideband noise and Spurious emission

PHS specifications for base station and terminal are the same except maximum transmit power Wideband noise and spurious emission discussion above remains the same Worst case isolation required is 90.5 dB

Blocking
Required isolation is 25 dB

Solution

PHS signal has high pathloss, usually providing enough isolation

Additional isolation is required only in the worst case scenario when PHS terminal is very close to an UMTS terminal. Presumably the probability is low.

51 51

Conclusions
UMTS is an interference limited system
The interference must be minimized in the network design phase in order to optimize coverage and Capacity

Radio sites co-location brings interference Co-location solutions exist

BTS performance (Tx/Rx filters) Antenna decoupling with space separation (H/V) Antenna isolation with multi-band antenna

External filters at BTS sides (Tx BP filter and Rx BP filter)

52 52