CEPT ERC REPORT 65-1999 Adjacent Band Compatibility between UMTS and Other Services in the 2 GHz Band (Menton May 1999 Revised in Helsinki November 1999)《2GHz频段中UMTS和其他业务之间相邻频段的兼容性.pdf

《CEPT ERC REPORT 65-1999 Adjacent Band Compatibility between UMTS and Other Services in the 2 GHz Band (Menton May 1999 Revised in Helsinki November 1999)《2GHz频段中UMTS和其他业务之间相邻频段的兼容性.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《CEPT ERC REPORT 65-1999 Adjacent Band Compatibility between UMTS and Other Services in the 2 GHz Band (Menton May 1999 Revised in Helsinki November 1999)《2GHz频段中UMTS和其他业务之间相邻频段的兼容性.pdf（60页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、- STDDCEPT ERC REPORT bS-ENGL 1777 D 232bV14 00Lb955 751 i ERC REPORT 65 European Radiocommunications Committee (ERC) within the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations (CEPT) ADJACENT BAND COMPATIBILITY BETWEEN UMTS AND OTHER SERVICES IN THE 2 GHz BAND Menton, May 1999

2、revised in Helsinki, November 1999 Copyright 2000 the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations (CEPT) STD-CEPT ERC REPORT b5-ENGL 1999 = 232b919 00Lb957 529 ERC REPORT 65 INDEX TABLE ADJACENT BAND COMPATIBILITY BETWEEN UMTS AND OTHER SERVICES IN THE 2 GHz BAND 1 INTRODUCT

3、ION . 1 2 COMPATIBILITY STUDY METHODS 1 2.1 SCENARIOS FOR CONSIDERATION . 1 2.2 2.3 PROPAGATION MODELS 3 2.4 MINIMUM COUPLING LOSS . 3 2.5 IMPACT OF INTERFERENCE . 3 2.6 MONTE CARLO ASSUMIONS 3 2.7 INTERFERENCE MECHANISMS . 4 COMPATIBILITY STUDY RESULTS 4 3.1 DECT 4 3.1.1 Mutual lnte rference Cases

4、. 4 3.1.2 3.1.3 Interference to UMTS 6 3.1.4 Interference to DECT 7 3.1.5 Discussion on the less important scenarios . 7 3.1.6 Means to improve compatibility 7 DECT FWA and above roof-top macro BS 7 3.1.7 Conclusions . 7 3.2.1 Interference to MSS satellites 8 FDD Mode of terrestrial UMTS at 1980 MHz

5、 8 MINIMUM COUPLING LOSS (MCL) AND MONTE CARLO (MC) APPROACHES . 3 3 Summary table with Minimum Separation Distances for the most important cases 5 3.1.6.1 3.1.6.2 DECT indoor BS system and UMTS TDD outdoor BS system . 7 3.2 MOBILE SATELLITE SERVICE 8 3.2.1.1 3.2.1.2 3.2.1.3 3.2.1.4 3.2.1.5 TDD Mode

6、 of terrestrial UMTS at 1980 MHz and 2010 MHz, used to provide limited area indoor coverage . 10 TDD Mode of terrestrial UMTS at 1980 MHz and 2010 MHz, used to provide outdoor coverage 11 Interpretation of results . 12 Comments on the results 12 Interference from MSS satellites to terrestrial UMTS .

7、 13 MSS Earth station interference 14 UMTS BS into MSS MES at 2170 MHz 14 MSS MES into UMTS BS at 1980MHz and 2010 MHz 15 Discussion and conclusions . 16 3.3 SPACE SERVICES . 17 3.3.1 At 2025 MHz 17 3.3.2 At 2110 MHz 19 3.3.3 Conclusions . 20 3.4 FIXED SERVICE . 20 4 CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION . 22

8、5 GLOSSARY . 24 6 REFERENCES 25 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.2.3.1 3.2.3.2 3.2.3.3 ANNEX A . SYSTEM PARAMETERS 26 ANNEX B . METHODOLOGY AND PARAMETERS FOR ASSESSING INTERFERENCE TO THE MSS SPACE SEGMENT 39 ANNEX C -ASSUMPTIONS FOR MONTE-CARLO SIMULATIONS . 42 ANNEX D: FIXED SERVICE COMPATIBILITY STUDIES . 43 ANNEX

9、 E - DECTAJMTS COMPATIBILITY ANALYSIS . 54 STD-CEPT ERC REPORT b5-ENGL 1999 E 232bll1ll 00Lb958 4b0 ERC REPORT 65 Page 1 1 INTRODUCTION Decision ERC/DEC/(97)07 designated the frequency bands 1900-1980 MHz, 2010-2025 MHz and 21 10-2170 MHz to terrestrial UMTS applications. It decided to accommodate U

10、MTS satellite component applications within the bands 1980-2010 MHz and 2170-2200 MHz. The frequency bands identified in ERC/DEC/(97)07 have Co-primary allocations for fixed service. Co-channel (but not adjacent channel) compatibility studies between the fixed service in the band 2025-21 10 MHz and

11、the terrestrial component of UMTS have been studied in ERC Report 64. In this study HAPS is not included. The band 1880-1900MHz is currently used by DECT (ERC/DEC/(94)03). The bands 2025-2110MHz (and 2200- 2290 MHz) are currently allocated to several space services, the fixed service and the mobile

12、service (see Figure i). 1850 1WO 1850 mw msa 21 O0 21m 2200 iam IWO lesa mw a60 21 O0 mm Poo FREQUENCY (MHz) Figure 1 - European frequency plan for the 2 GHz band This report gives the relevant parameters needed in interference studies for the systems identified in figure 1, at the date of publicati

13、on. N.B. the parameters assumed in this report are those of UMTS; no other terrestrial IMT2 radio interface has been considered in this report in terms of adjacent band interference. The interference problems are investigated by both deterministic and statistical approaches, for the different scenar

14、ios. This report gives initial recommendations on the necessary guard bands between UMTS and other services to use when introducing UMTS. Since these recommendations are based on parameters correct at the date of publication, it should be noted that any changes in parameters, for example, in the ter

15、restrial UMTS emission masks, would require the recommendation of this report to be re-considered. Because the UMTS carrier spacing can vary from 4.4 MHz up to more than 5 MHz, depending on the intra-system configuration, the results will be given in terms of “required carrier frequency separation”.

16、 This enables the derivation of the “extreme acceptable position of the UMTS carrier centre frequency”. 2 COMPATIBILITY STUDY METHODS The parameters for terrestrial UMTS, MSS, DECT and space services are provided in Annex A. The parameters for fixed service are provided in Annex D. 2.1 Scenarios for

17、 consideration Based on the number of systems under consideration, a number of scenarios have to be considered Table 1 lists these scenarios, which have been considered and makes reference to the relevant paragraphs in this report. STD-CEPT ERC REPORT 65-ENGL 1999 = 232b414 003b959 3T7 q v) v) X iz

18、o O .+ E 3 B tz X lu ? 2 X L L C b u 8 STD-CEPT ERC REPORT bS-ENGL 1997 232b414 001b9b0 017 = ERC REPORT 65 Page 3 2.2 Within CEFT, two approaches have been used so far to assess interference between two systems. Minimum Coupling Loss (MCL) and Monte Carlo (MC) approaches The first one, the Minimum

19、Coupling Loss (MCL), is now well-known, and gives for a given system the relationship between the separation distance and the guard band for a given set of transmitter and receiver parameters. The second and more recent one, Monte Carlo (MC) simulation, 3, is becoming more usual and gives a probabil

20、ity of interference for the given set of parameters and a deployment and power control model. It is understood that only one of the approaches described above is not sufficient alone to describe in detail the interference problem, and to conclude on the problem of guard bands. The following points a

21、re relevant to the comparison of deterministic and statistical approaches : 0 The MCL method is useful for an initial assessment of frequency sharing, and is suitable for fairly “static” interference situations (e.g. fixed links vs mobile base stations). It can however be pessimistic in some cases.

22、o The Monte-Carlo probabilistic method will generally give more realistic results. It is however complex to implement and will only give accurate results if the probability distributions of all the input parameters are well known. 0 Because of the lack of agreed parameters for IMT-2000KIMTS in ETSI

23、ETSs / TBRs and knowledge of deployment scenarios at the moment, the calculations must be done with approximate parameters for the transmitters and receivers. If the Monte-Carlo simulations are made with those approximate parameters, it is difficult to interpret the interference probability determin

24、ed by the simulation to verify that the results are accurate. 2.3 Propagation models When the distances considered in the MCL approach are small the free space propagation model can be used. For Monte Carlo simulations, the propagation model described in 3 is used. It should be noted that Recommenda

25、tion ITU-R M.1225 (REVAL) and UMTS 30.03 11 give a set of propagation models that were used in the selection of the transmission technologies. These models differ slightly from the one in 3, but the results are expected to be similar. 2.4 Minimum Coupling Loss The coupling loss between two interferi

26、ng systems depends on the scenarios under study. The separation distance between the interferer and the victim is not the same if they are mobile or base stations. The MCL between an interfering transmitter (Tx) and a victim receiver (Rx) is defined as MCL = Tx Power (adref. BW) + Tx Out-of-band att

27、enuation (dB) + Tx antenna gain (ai) + Rx antenna gain (dBi) - Rx interference threshold (adref. BW) 2.5 Impact of interference In UMTS the interference results in loss of capacity and/or of coverage, and the MCL may not be the best method to investigate this loss. The acceptable interference probab

28、ility used in Monte-Carlo studies will depend on the scenario under consideration. For example, in the case of interference between DECT and UMTS, the maximum acceptable interference probability is considered to be 2%. Furthermore, the impact of interference on the loss of capacity needs to be the s

29、ubject of further study. 2.6 Monte Carlo assumptions The assumptions used in the Monte Carlo simulations are detailed in Annex C, and are based on work in ITU-R 5. Additional information is also included alongside the reported compatibility studies. STDDCEPT ERC REPORT bS-ENGL 1999 H 232bqLY 00Lb7bl

30、 T55 ERC REPORT 65 Page 4 UMTS DECT Above roof-top WLL RFP Above roof-top WLL CTA Below roof-top CTM RFP Indoor RFP Outdoor PP Indoor PP 2.7 Interference mechanisms This report has considered the effect of out-of-band emissions from one system falling into the receiver of another, and where the nece

31、ssary technical information is available, the effects of receiver blocking have also been considered. Where the necessary receiver performance data is not available, blocking has not been considered and receivers will need to be designed taking into account the adjacent band systems and the guard ba

32、nds available. Above roof-top Below roof-top Indoor micro BTS Outdoor MS Indoor MS macro BTS micro BTS 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 20 1 6 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 25 30 26 27 28 29 3 COMPATIBILITY STUDY RESULTS 3.1 DECT The interference between DECT and UMTS has been evaluated for the UMTS TDD mo

33、de only, because it is expected that the band immediately above 1900 MHz will not be paired and therefore will be available for the TDD mode only. 3.1.1 Mutual Interference Cases In the following sections, RFP means “Radio Fixed Part”, equivalent to a DECT base station; CTA means “cordless terminal

34、adaptor”, i.e. fixed subscriber unit; PP means “Portable Part”. Since both DECT and UMTS are TDD technologies, all the above mutual interference cases exist, although many are not very likely to occur, and only some are critical. In order to estimate the probabilities for harmful interference, it is

35、 important to know how common different types of systems are, and to know their geographical distribution. STDOCEPT ERC REPORT b5-ENGL 1999 232b4LLi 001b9b2 991 ERC REPORT 65 Page 5 Above roof-top WLL RFPs and Above roof-top WLL CTAs installations are for the time being mainly found in Eastern Europ

36、e, Asia, Latin America and Africa. Below roo-top CTM RFPs and Outdoor PPs for public use in large numbers are only found in Italy, where streets, shopping centres and public buildings are covered in 31 cities. Total number of subscribers is about 130.000. Outdoor RFF3 (and PPs) also exist as outdoor

37、 coverage extensions (parking places etc.) of office systems. The largest is the Volvo Torslanda plant with 2 sqkm area complete indoor/outdoor coverage for about 5000 subscribers. Indoor RFPs with Indoor PPs (office and residential applications) are the most common DECT installations. They represen

38、t the vast majority of the shipments of DECT equipment. These systems are spread world wide, but the most of them are in Western Europe. MTS TDD Systems are not deployed. The standard is not finalised. Which will be the most common application is not known, but the following system types are provide

39、d for: Above roof-top macro BTS. Where DECT Wu is installed, cases 1 and 6 are critical. Below roof-top micro BTS. Cases 12 and 22 are important for Italy. Indoor micro BTS with Indoor MS. Is not very critical. Indoor UMTS and Indoor DECT systems will very seldom be installed in the same location, s

40、ince they give the same service. It could happen in a few large shopping centres and large exhibition halls. In these few cases the coexistence will be solved by installing the systems with a proper large margin on the wanted signal level (smaller cells). Indoor sites are not expensive. Outdoor MSs.

41、 Cases i4 and 24 are important for Italy. (Same parameters as for 20 and 30, but different propagation model). Indoor MSs. Where the MS belongs to an outdoor UMTS system (micro or macro BTS), and this MS visits an indoor location where an indoor DECT system is installed, it is obvious that cases 20

42、and 30 will be important frequent cases. 3.1.2 Summary table with Minimum Separation Disances for the most important cases. In table 3 below are shown the Minimum Separation Distances for the critical scenarios 1,6,20 and 30. The dominating interference mechanism to UMTS is blocking due to limited U

43、MTS receiver interference rejection of the power of the (closest) DECT carriers. The dominating interference mechanism to DECT from UMTS MS is Out-Of-Band emissions. Interference to DECT from UMTS BTS is a combination of Out-Of-Band emissions from UMTS and interference through DECT blocking. In orde

44、r to make this study as realistic as possible, average values for typical DECT equipment have been used, as explained in Annex A. UMTS equipment is not available, but for UMTS Out-Of-Band emissions and blocking, values about 5 dB better than the specification have been used. _ STD-CEPT ERC REPORT bS

45、-ENGL 1779 I232bLiL4 00Lb9b3 828 D I 10dB I 5.6 m 1 ERC REPORT 65 Page 6 42 m 150 m level of signal indoor 21 dBm 24 dBm Victim DECT RFP and PP MS connected to 55.5 dBm Macro BTS (due to blocking) 36 dBm RFP and CTA (due to out-of-band) 1902.5 MHz (due to blocking) emissions) O dB 47 m 18 m 10 dB 27

46、 m 10 m UMTS Macro BTS and DECT WLL 1912.5 MHz system. Cases 1 and 6. Victim DECT VictimMTS 1 1odB I 15 m I 3m OdB I 13 m 1680 m 130 m I 470 m 3.1.3 Interference to UMTS One critical scenario is interference between DECT WLL and UMTS Macro BTS, Cases 1 and 6. If Co-ordination distances down to 100 t

47、o 200 m are required, macro TDD BTSs on carrier 1902.5 MHz is not recommended to be used in areas where DECT WLL systems are installed. TDD macro BTS on carrier 1907.5 MHz use is feasible if local interference power up to 10 dB above the UMTS BTS noise floor is accepted, which means that the UMTS li

48、nk budget may locally be reduced by 10 dB. For carrier 1912.5 MHz the situation is better. Mitigation techniques can be considered on a national basis where Administrations intend to licence DECT WLL and UMTS macro-cell applications in close vicinity (see example in section 3.1.6). Another critical

49、scenario for UMTS, is interference from DECT indoor office and residential systems to an UMTS MS, where the MS belongs to an outdoor UMTS system (micro or macro BTS), and this MS visits an indoor location where the indoor DECT system is installed, cases 20 and 30. It is obvious that cases 20 and 30 will be the most frequent of all cases. Indoor systems are the main market for DECT and UMTS MSs used indoors and outdoors, belonging to some outdoor BTS (micro/macro) system, are a likely use of the TDD band. Separation distances down to 3-5 m occur fo