HSPA Capacity Analysis: PRESENTATION TO Econet Zimbabwe

HSPA Capacity analysis
TO SUSTAIN MBB SUCCESS
PRESENTATION TO Econet Zimbabwe

Agenda
Introduction HSPA Capacity analysis
Performance of your HSPA system
Limiting factors RNC
Limiting factors HSPA (device types, iub capacity, power, codes,

ce, UL Load, users,)
Load Measurement principle
How to expand your network in order to grow HSPA TRAFFIC
Conclusions & Way Forward

Commercial in confidence | 2011-06-09 | Page 2
Device Types in the network
DL
› 55.59%: 10-15 codes terminals (Cat. 7–
10)
› 2.48% with 64 QAM
UL
› 45.43% of the HSPA-terminals are EUL

capable

Terminal capabilities and
system performance
› Lack of capabilities in terminals reduces overall capacity of
an HSPA network
› Penetration of 64QAM terminals is low.
› EUL capability in terminal is key for Mobile Broadband

– Higher peak rates
– Faster ramp-ups time
– Capacity Improvement
Category 8
with EUL & Rx Div
+100% gain
Category 6 Category 8 compared with cat. 6
+37% gain
Uplink Traffic Volume
All Cell Carriers
Data Volume Distribution UL EUL

R99 PS384k
1% 3%
0% R99 PS128k
R99 PS64k
R99 PS16k
R99 PS8k
PS Common
37%
49%
5%
5%
EUL distribution is balanced when considering the

number of EUL capable handsets compared to R99
capable handsets
Uplink Performance
All Cell Carriers
EUL cell throughput UL higher then for R99 data

EUL terminals stay shorter time on air interface
downlink Traffic Volume
All Cell Carriers
Data Volume Distribution DL

HSDPA
1% R99 PS384k
R99 PS128k
1%
R99 PS64k
7%
0% R99 PS16k
0% R99 PS8k
PS Common
2%
89%
DSDPA traffic is dominating the DL traffic distribution

downlink Performance
HSDPA Cell Throughput
HSDPA User Throughput
2 000 HSDPA traffic volume 20
Throughput [kbps] or data volume [Mbyte/hour]
1 800 # HS Users with data in Buffer 18
1 600 16
1 400 14
1 200 12
1 000 10
800 8
600 6
400 4
200 2
0 0
Cells
HSDPA Throughput higher than R99

HSDPA terminals stay shorter time on air interface
HS Code Load
Code usage
16
14 HS Code Usage
DCH Code Usage
12
Number of codes used
10
0
Cells
There is currently no Code Congestion

Power usage
P_HS
Power Usage P_R99
P_Common
Pnom
12
10
8
Power (W)
0
Cell Carriers
Pnom = power at reference point = 10w

No Power limitations currently

Iub capacity, traffic and Congestion
18 000 3%
Current Capacity in service
Max Cell Throughput
16 000
Iub Limitation HS thp (%)
2%
14 000
Iub limiting HSDPA (% of time)

12 000
Throughput [kbps]
2%
10 000
8 000
1%
6 000
4 000
1%
2 000
0 0%
Sites
IUB is currently not a limiting factor

EUL Users
EUL Users per cell vs. License
maxNumEulUsers
17
Average EUL users
16
15
14
Too many users in Eul scheduler
13
12
Number of EUL Users
11
10
Too many users in Eul scheduler cause spill over traffic to R99
R99 Data traffic causes higher uplink load
HSDPA Users
Number of HSDPA Users vs. License
maxNum HsdpaUsers
18
Average HSDPA Users
16
14
Number of HSDPA Users
12
10
› Some sites have user Adm set to 10 but licensed for 16

users this could cause users not to be scheduled when
there is still licensed capacity available
HS Scheduler resource check
Resource situation in % of all TTIs
All SCCH Codes Used

All PDSCH Codes Used
All Pow er Used
TTIs w ith Resources available All SCCH All PDSCH
Codes Used, Codes Used,
7.0% 0.0%
All Power
Used, 0.0%
If Code Multiplexing is not

TTIs with activated, all scch codes are not
Resources used when traffic is present.
available, 93% Most sites currently limited to 1 SCCH
Most of the time users can be scheduled

Suggest Setting SCCH codes to 2

Number of Users per TTI
Comparison with other networks
100%
90%
80%
Unloaded network
70%
60%
70%
50%
60% 40%
Econet Zimbabwe 30%
50% 20%
10%
40% 0%
0 users/TTI 1 users/TTI 2 users/TTI 3 users/TTI 4 users/TTI
30%
Network B
20% 70%
60%
10%
50% Loaded network
0% 40%
0 users/TTI 1 users/TTI 2 users/TTI 3 users/TTI 4 users/TTI 30%
20%
10%
0%
0 1 2 3 4
Overall low number of users scheduled

Users in scheduler
UL Load VS # Users(total)
120%
100%
80%
UL Load
60%
40%
20%
0%
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0
Number of Users (CS+PS)
Too many users in the scheduler cause low HS accessibility

Full Scheduler increase R99 data traffic
UL RSSI and Load
90% UL Load 7.0
Noise Rise [dB]
80%
6.0
70%
5.0
Relative UL Load
60%
Noise Rise
4.0
50%
40%
3.0
30%
2.0
20%
1.0
10%
0% 0.0
Cell Carriers
Currently Uplink Load is at an acceptable level. As

the Number of EUL users increases so will the load
CE Utilization UL
400
Installed CE HW UL
Licensed CE UL
95 Perc. UL CE consumption%
300
# CE
200
100
0
NodeBs
9 Node Bs with more than 80% HW utilization

CE Utilization DL
CE status DCH DL
500 CE HW (excluding reserved for HS)

Licenced CE DL
DL CE Consumption
400
300
# CE
200
100
HSDPA traffic does not consume any CE defined for R99

No Congestion on DL Channel Elements
Executive Summary
HSPA Capacity issues
Too high pathloss / interference X Need for CQI Optimisation
Code management OK Currently Low code Utilization
Scheduler (X) Code Multiplexing / SCCH Codes
Too much R99 RABs OK A few number of cells
High UL load OK More EUL Users can be Scheduled
Lack of power OK Currently only a few Cells With High

Power Utilization
Lack of Channel Elements OK Good Capacity UL and DL
Lack of IUB capacity OK Good IUB Capacity
Too low terminal capabilities X Low high-end terminal penetration

Agenda


HSPA Load Measurements
› Provide a way to estimate load level of cell using
pmCounters
› Provide a simple way to communicate about the load level

of a cell – “Relative Load” concept introduced
› Focus on estimating load level of cell for forecasting

purposes. Not finding overloaded cells.

Resource Load vs. Utilization
› Resource utilization measured by pmCounters
› Resources covered:
Site level resource utilization
– DL channelization codes 40%
– DL power 80%
– Uplink Load 30%
– Channel Elements 90%
But what if one single user is using all the power when the measurement is taken?

Understanding Radio Network Load
› The Load should be measured against a target performance
Relative load
=> The Load is so high

150%
that the user throughput
becomes unacceptable
100%
50%
0%
Relative Load can become > 100%

Example
Code load
Cell 36337 HS Code Usage
100% 100%
•Used codes: 68% of code tree DCH Code Usage
•4.8 Users with 485kbps User Thp
RelativeCodeTreeLoad
90% •Target=500kbps => no room for new users 90%
with this target rate
80% 80%
70% 70%
Cell 26623
60% •Used codes: 61% of code tree 60%
Usage/Load
•Only 1.2 Users with 2.4Mbps User Thp

50% •=> Room for more users = low relative load 50%
40% 40%
30% 30%
20% 20%
10% 10%
0% 0%
Cells

Agenda


How to expand to grow Traffic By 100%
› The following measures are considered:
› Need for RF tuning (low CQI, UL Load)
› Cells with not enough Power

All Cells in RNCs
› Cells with not enough Codes
› Cells need increased Scheduler
› NodeBs that need Channel Element

expansion (UL)
› NodeBs that need Iub transport expansion

Traffic Growth Impacts
The following needs to be done to handle 100% traffic growth.
Traffic Growth Impacts
No Action
Low CQI
19% Low CQI
27%
Lack of Pow er
EUL Users
11% Lack of Codes
High UL Load
HS Users HS Users
4% EUL Users
No Action
Lack of Pow er
Lack of Codes High UL Load 37%
0% 2%
46 (of 313) Sectors need additional Channel Elements

117 (of 313) Sectors need additional Power

Agenda

Future potential CARRIER STRATEGY
SMART PHONE DOMINANT NETWORK
Network with older smart phone

dominating EUL/HS EUL/HS
– Upgrade R99 carrier to R99/HS R99 R99/HS
– Use HSDPA IFLS

Legacy voice/data
mixed with HS/EUL
Network with new generation

smart phone (e.g. iPhone4) EUL/HS EUL/HS
– EUL/HS support on all carriers R99/HS EUL/HS
– This will ensure efficient

operation of HSDPA IFLS
High carrier efficiency

Hspa evolution for smartphones
Key smartphone features
IDLE CONNECTED
HSPA
“High”
3GPP Fast
Dormancy (W11B) CPC
Power
FACH High speed FACH (W11B)

“Low”
Battery efficiency
for high speed FACH
(W11B)
High speed
uplink FACH (W12B)
Idle URA
“Standby” Direct upswitch from URA (W12B)
Data rates / lower latency / resources
Improved latencies, power efficiency and capacity

Conclusion - The way forward
› Low traffic load in these RNCs
– Small Investment for growth in the traffic
› RF-Optimization
– CQI(xACP?)
› Drive renewal of terminals

– New HSPA terminals are more efficient (rel. 8 features)
› Remove HLR Limitations

HSPA Capacity Analysis: PRESENTATION TO Econet Zimbabwe

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

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

HSPA Capacity Analysis: PRESENTATION TO Econet Zimbabwe

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

HSPA Capacity analysis

TO SUSTAIN MBB SUCCESS

PRESENTATION TO Econet Zimbabwe

Introduction HSPA Capacity analysis

Performance of your HSPA system

Limiting factors RNC

Limiting factors HSPA (device types, iub capacity, power, codes,

Load Measurement principle

How to expand your network in order to grow HSPA TRAFFIC

Conclusions & Way Forward

› 45.43% of the HSPA-terminals are EUL

Commercial in confidence | 2011-06-09 | Page 3

› Penetration of 64QAM terminals is low.

› EUL capability in terminal is key for Mobile Broadband

Data Volume Distribution UL EUL

EUL distribution is balanced when considering the

EUL cell throughput UL higher then for R99 data

Data Volume Distribution DL

DSDPA traffic is dominating the DL traffic distribution

Commercial in confidence | 2011-06-09 | Page 7

1 800 # HS Users with data in Buffer 18

HSDPA Throughput higher than R99

There is currently no Code Congestion

Pnom = power at reference point = 10w

Commercial in confidence | 2011-06-09 | Page 10

Iub limiting HSDPA (% of time)

IUB is currently not a limiting factor

› Some sites have user Adm set to 10 but licensed for 16

All SCCH Codes Used

If Code Multiplexing is not

Most of the time users can be scheduled

Commercial in confidence | 2011-06-09 | Page 14

Econet Zimbabwe 30%

Overall low number of users scheduled

Too many users in the scheduler cause low HS accessibility

Currently Uplink Load is at an acceptable level. As

9 Node Bs with more than 80% HW utilization

Commercial in confidence | 2011-06-09 | Page 18

500 CE HW (excluding reserved for HS)

HSDPA traffic does not consume any CE defined for R99

Too high pathloss / interference X Need for CQI Optimisation

Code management OK Currently Low code Utilization

Scheduler (X) Code Multiplexing / SCCH Codes

Too much R99 RABs OK A few number of cells

High UL load OK More EUL Users can be Scheduled

Lack of power OK Currently only a few Cells With High

Lack of IUB capacity OK Good IUB Capacity

Too low terminal capabilities X Low high-end terminal penetration

Commercial in confidence | 2011-06-09 | Page 20

Introduction HSPA Capacity analysis

Performance of your HSPA system

Limiting factors RNC

Limiting factors HSPA (device types, iub capacity, power, codes,

Load Measurement principle

How to expand your network in order to grow HSPA TRAFFIC

Conclusions & Way Forward

› Provide a simple way to communicate about the load level

› Focus on estimating load level of cell for forecasting

Commercial in confidence | 2011-06-09 | Page 22

– Uplink Load 30%

– Channel Elements 90%

Commercial in confidence | 2011-06-09 | Page 23