LTE_Dimensioning_Essentials for GET ENGG

Lte DIM

1. For internal use only
1 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE Dimensioning Essentials
Coverage, Capacity & Baseband

2. For internal use only
2 © Nokia Siemens Networks
Index of key messages on LTE performance
•Existing WCDMA/HSPA 2.1 GHz grids can be reused for LTE deployment at 2.1 GHz
•Existing WCDMA/HSPA 2.1 GHz grids can be reused for LTE deployment at 2.6 GHz
•Existing GSM 1.8 GHz can be reused for LTE deployment at 2.1 GHz
•LTE Voice provides same coverage as GSM Voice but offers much higher spectrum efficiency (#simultaneous users) (tbd)
•LTE Voice provides same coverage as HSPA Voice
•LTE TDD loses ~2..3dB compared to FDD due to sharing resources in time
•Beamforming does not bring significant coverage gain however results in capacity boost (tbd)
•LTE deployment at Digital Dividend band provides extreme coverage and makes difference for PRACH planning
•Typical LTE Link Budget depending on the feature set is about 160..165dB maximum allowable path loss usually limited by
uplink coverage
•Baseband is not likely to be a limiting factor in LTE dimensioning
•Control channels are not likely to limit LTE coverage
•Spectral Efficiency depends on many factors & assumptions
•LTE DL Spectral Efficiency is ~1.8 bps/Hz (3..4 times reference HSPA Release 6)
•LTE UL Spectral Efficiency is ~0.7 bps/Hz (2..3 times reference HSPA Release 6)
•LTE 6-sector site solution reduces the number of coverage sites by ~35%
•LTE 6-sector site solution brings ~80% site throughput gain compared to 3-sector
•LTE dimensioning & planning tools provide consistent path from simple link budget and capacity estimation to topology-aware
network evaluation
•How to make LTE Link Budget more aggressive within reasonable range of changes?
•How to make LTE Capacity more aggressive within reasonable range of changes? (tbd)

3. For internal use only
3 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE vs HSPA
•Enhanced Pedestrian A 5Hz (EPA05)
•Equipment parameters:
–Tx Power: eNB 40W / UE 24 dBm
–Antenna Gain:eNB 18 dBi / UE 0 dBi
–Feeder Loss: DL 0.5 dB / UL 0.5 dB (feederless)
–Noise Figure: eNB 2.0 dB / UE 7 dB
•Other features:
–eNB: 1 Tx antennas, 2 Rx antennas
–UE: 1 Tx antenna, 2 Rx antennas
–DL F-domain Scheduler: channel-aware
–UL F-domain Scheduler: channel-unaware
•Additional margins:
–Interference margin for 50% load (~1…2dB; due to own-
cell orthogonality)
–0 dB fast fading margin (due to scheduling gain)
–0 dB soft HO gain (no SHO in LTE)
–2.5 dB gain against shadowing
LTE 20MHz (1Mbps/64kbps) HSPA 5MHz (1Mbps/64kbps)
•Pedestrian A 3km/h
•Equipment parameters:
–Tx Power: NB 40W / UE 24 dBm
–Antenna Gain:NB 18 dBi / UE 0 dBi
–Feeder Loss: DL 0.5 dB / UL 0.5 dB (feederless)
–Noise Figure: NB 2.0 dB / UE 7 dB
•Other features:
–eNB: 1 Tx antennas, 2Rx antennas
–UE: 1 Tx antenna, 2 Rx antennas
•Additional margins:
–Interference margin for 50% load (~3dB)
–4dB fast fading margin (for slow moving mobiles)
–1dB soft HO gain
–2.5 dB gain against shadowing
DL 165dB* UL 160dB*
* Max allowable path loss (clutter not considered, only system gains/losses)
Propagation (see next slide for the results)
•Operating Band
–LTE & HSPA: 2100 MHz
•COST 231 Hata 2-slope propagation model with
–Antenna height NB: 30m
–Antenna height MS: 1.5m
•Clutter dependent figures (Dense Urban / Urban / Suburban / Rural)
–Std. dev.: 9 / 8 / 8 / 7 [dB]
–Cell area prob.: 93 / 93 / 93 / 90 [%]
DL 163dB* UL 160dB*
1/2

4. For internal use only
4 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE vs HSPA
Urban indoor (BPL 15dB BPL)
Uplink 64kbps Downlink 1Mbps (20MHz)
Existing WCDMA/HSPA 2.1 GHz grids can be reused for LTE deployment at 2.1 GHz
137dB
LTE &
HSPA
~1km
•LTE can be reasonably deployed using existing HSPA sites
•Whilst uplink limits the coverage, LTE Downlink offers higher data rates at the same distance
compared to HSPA
•Additional LTE potential: channel aware scheduling (UL), 4Rx div. (UL), TTI bundling (UL)
•LTE Downlink would require less power than HSPA for the same bandwidth
•The underlying site basis is still UMTS CS64 design
Limiting
link
143dB
LTE
1.33km
HSPA
141dB
1.16km LTE 2.5Mbps
BACK TO MENU
2/2

5. For internal use only
5 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE vs HSPA
•Enhanced Pedestrian A 5Hz (EPA05)
•Equipment parameters:
–Tx Power: eNB 40W / UE 24 dBm
–Antenna Gain:eNB 18 dBi / UE 0 dBi
–Feeder Loss: DL 0.5 dB / UL 0.5 dB (feederless)
–Noise Figure: eNB 2.0 dB / UE 7 dB
•Other features:
–eNB: 1 Tx antennas, 4 Rx antennas
–UE: 1 Tx antenna, 2 Rx antennas
–DL F-domain Scheduler: channel-aware
–UL F-domain Scheduler: channel-aware
•Additional margins:
–Interference margin for 50% load (~1…2dB; due to own-
cell orthogonality)
–0 dB fast fading margin (due to scheduling gain)
–0 dB soft HO gain (no SHO in LTE)
–2.5 dB gain against shadowing
LTE 20MHz (1Mbps/64kbps) HSPA 5MHz (1Mbps/64kbps)
•Pedestrian A 3km/h
•Equipment parameters:
–Tx Power: NB 40W / UE 24 dBm
–Antenna Gain:NB 18 dBi / UE 0 dBi
–Feeder Loss: DL 0.5 dB / UL 0.5 dB (feederless)
–Noise Figure: NB 2.0 dB / UE 7 dB
•Other features:
–eNB: 1 Tx antennas, 2Rx antennas
–UE: 1 Tx antenna, 2 Rx antennas
•Additional margins:
–Interference margin for 50% load (~3dB)
–4dB fast fading margin (for slow moving mobiles)
–1dB soft HO gain
–2.5 dB gain against shadowing
DL 165dB* UL 166dB*
* Max allowable path loss (clutter not considered, only system gains/losses)
Propagation (see next slide for the results)
•Operating Band
–LTE: 2600 MHz
–HSPA: 2100 MHz
•COST 231 Hata 2-slope propagation model with
–Antenna height NB: 30m
–Antenna height MS: 1.5m
•Clutter dependent figures (Dense Urban / Urban / Suburban / Rural)
–Std. dev.: 9 / 8 / 8 / 7 [dB]
–Cell area prob.: 93 / 93 / 93 / 90 [%]
DL 163dB* UL 160dB*
1/2

6. For internal use only
6 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE vs HSPA
Urban indoor (BPL [email protected] ; [email protected])
Uplink 64kbps Downlink 1Mbps (20MHz)
Existing WCDMA/HSPA 2.1 GHz grids can be reused for LTE deployment at 2.6 GHz
LTE2.6 &
HSPA2.1
~1km
•Additional enhancements can allow LTE being deployed on 2.6GHz band using existing HSPA grids
•Additional LTE potential: TTI bundling(UL)
•LTE&HSPA Downlink can be easily tuned with different RF part power settings
(up to 2x40W per sector with RRH, up to 2x60W per sector with RFM)
•The underlying site basis is still UMTS CS64 design
Limiting
link
141dB
LTE2.6
~1km
HSPA2.1
141dB
1.16km
BACK TO MENU
2/2

7. For internal use only
7 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE Data vs GSM Voice
•Enhanced Pedestrian A 5Hz (EPA05)
•Equipment parameters:
–Tx Power: eNB 40W / UE 24 dBm
–Antenna Gain:eNB 18 dBi / UE 0 dBi
–Feeder Loss: DL 0.5 dB / UL 0.5 dB (feederless)
–Noise Figure: eNB 2.0 dB / UE 7 dB
•Other features:
–eNB: 1 Tx antennas, 2 Rx antennas
–UE: 1 Tx antenna, 2 Rx antennas
–DL F-domain Scheduler: channel-aware
–UL F-domain Scheduler: channel-unaware
•Additional margins:
–Interference margin for 50% load (~1…2dB; due to own-
cell orthogonality)
–0 dB fast fading margin (due to scheduling gain)
–0 dB soft HO gain (no SHO in LTE)
–2.5 dB gain against shadowing
LTE 20MHz (1Mbps/64kbps) GSM Voice
•Flexi DTRXwith 1DDU combiner
•Equipment parameters:
–Tx Power: BTS 60W / MS 28 dBm
–Antenna Gain:BTS 18 dBi / MS 0 dBi
–Feeder Loss: DL 2 dB / UL 0 dB (TMA)
–Sensitivity: BTS -110.6 dBm / MS -105 dBm
•Other features:
–BTS: 1 Tx antennas, 2Rx antennas
–MS: 1 Tx antenna, 1 Rx antenna
•Additional margins:
–0.7 dB TMA insertion loss in DL
–3 dB body loss (voice handset)
DL 165dB* UL 160dB*
* Max allowable path loss (clutter not considered, only system gains/losses)
Propagation (see next slide for the results)
•Operating Band
–LTE: 2100 MHz
–GSM: 1800 MHz
•COST 231 Hata 2-slope propagation model with
–Antenna height NB: 30m
–Antenna height MS: 1.5m
•Clutter dependent figures (Dense Urban / Urban / Suburban / Rural)
–Std. dev.: 9 / 8 / 8 / 7 [dB]
–Cell area prob.: 93 / 93 / 93 / 90 [%]
DL 164dB* UL 159dB*
1/2

8. For internal use only
8 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE Data vs GSM Voice
Urban indoor (BPL 15dB)
Uplink
Existing GSM 1.8 GHz can be reused for LTE deployment at 2.1 GHz
LTE2.1 &
GSM1.8
~1km
•Additional enhancements can allow LTE being deployed on 2.6GHz band using existing GSM grids
•Additional LTE potential: channel aware scheduling(UL), 4Rx div. (UL), TTI bundling(UL)
•Existing site grids of GSM Voice and UMTS CS64 can be easily reused for LTE/HSPA deployment
Limiting
link
BACK TO MENU
2/2

9. For internal use only
9 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE Voice vs GSM Voice
•Enhanced Pedestrian A 5Hz (EPA05)
•Equipment parameters:
–Tx Power: eNB 40W / UE 24 dBm
–Antenna Gain:eNB 18 dBi / UE 0 dBi
–Feeder Loss: DL 0.5 dB / UL 0.5 dB (feederless)
–Noise Figure: eNB 2.0 dB / UE 7 dB
•Other features:
–eNB: 1 Tx antennas, 2 Rx antennas
–UE: 1 Tx antenna, 2 Rx antennas
–DL F-domain Scheduler: channel-aware
–UL F-domain Scheduler: channel-unaware
•Additional margins:
–Interference margin for 50% load (~1…2dB; due to own-
cell orthogonality)
–0 dB fast fading margin (due to scheduling gain)
–0 dB soft HO gain (no SHO in LTE)
–2.5 dB gain against shadowing
–3 dB body loss (voice handset)
LTE 20MHz Voice AMR12.2
1)
GSM Voice
•Flexi DTRXwith 1DDU combiner
•Equipment parameters:
–Tx Power: BTS 60W / MS 28 dBm
–Antenna Gain:BTS 18 dBi / MS 0 dBi
–Feeder Loss: DL 2 dB / UL 0 dB (TMA)
–Sensitivity: BTS -110.6 dBm / MS -105 dBm
•Other features:
–BTS: 1 Tx antennas, 2Rx antennas
–MS: 1 Tx antenna, 1 Rx antenna
•Additional margins:
–0.7 dB TMA insertion loss in DL
–3 dB body loss (voice handset)
DL 168dB* UL 161dB*
* Max allowable path loss (clutter not considered, only system gains/losses)
1)
4 HARQ transmissions with TTI Bundling at 2% residual BLER (packet loss rate)
Propagation (see next slide for the results)
•Operating Band
–LTE: 2100 MHz
–GSM: 1800 MHz
•COST 231 Hata 2-slope propagation model with
–Antenna height NB: 30m
–Antenna height MS: 1.5m
•Clutter dependent figures (Dense Urban / Urban / Suburban / Rural)
–Std. dev.: 9 / 8 / 8 / 7 [dB]
–Cell area prob.: 93 / 93 / 93 / 90 [%]
DL 164dB* UL 159dB*
1/2

10. For internal use only
10 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE Voice vs GSM Voice
Urban indoor (BPL 15dB)
Uplink
LTE Voice provides same coverage as GSM Voice
LTE2.1 &
GSM1.8
~1km
•If only LTE supports GBR bearer for Conversational Voice (QCI=1), it is possible to cover GSM area
with LTE Voice service
•The loss from using more demanding codecs can be easily compensated at the cell-edge by higher
number of HARQ retransmissions in combination with TTI Bundling
Limiting
link
BACK TO MENU
2/2

11. For internal use only
11 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE Voice vs HSPA Voice
•Enhanced Pedestrian A 5Hz (EPA05)
•Equipment parameters:
–Tx Power: eNB 40W / UE 24 dBm
–Antenna Gain:eNB 18 dBi / UE 0 dBi
–Feeder Loss: DL 0.5 dB / UL 0.5 dB (feederless)
–Noise Figure: eNB 2.0 dB / UE 7 dB
•Other features:
–eNB: 1 Tx antennas, 2 Rx antennas
–UE: 1 Tx antenna, 2 Rx antennas
–DL F-domain Scheduler: channel-aware
–UL F-domain Scheduler: channel-unaware
•Additional margins:
–Interference margin for 50% load (~1…2dB; due to own-
cell orthogonality)
–0 dB fast fading margin (due to scheduling gain)
–0 dB soft HO gain (no SHO in LTE)
–2.5 dB gain against shadowing
–3 dB body loss (voice handset)
LTE 20MHz Voice AMR12.2
1)
HSPA 5MHz Voice AMR12.2
2)
•Pedestrian A 3km/h
•Equipment parameters:
–Tx Power: NB 40W / UE 24 dBm
–Antenna Gain:NB 18 dBi / UE 0 dBi
–Feeder Loss: DL 0.5 dB / UL 0.5 dB (feederless)
–Noise Figure: NB 2.0 dB / UE 7 dB
•Other features:
–eNB: 1 Tx antennas, 2Rx antennas
–UE: 1 Tx antenna, 2 Rx antennas
•Additional margins:
–Interference margin for 50% load (~3dB)
–4dB fast fading margin (for slow moving mobiles)
–1dB soft HO gain
–2.5 dB gain against shadowing
–3 dB body loss (voice handset)
DL 168dB* UL 161dB*
* Max allowable path loss (clutter not considered, only system gains/losses)
1)
4 HARQ transmissions with TTI Bundling at 2% residual BLER (53ms L1 delay) gain based on link level simulations (10dB over BLER10% dimensioning)
2)
2 HARQ transmissions with 10ms HSUPA TTI (50ms L1 delay) theoretical combining gain of 2..3dB
Propagation (see next slide for the results)
•Operating Band
–LTE: 2100 MHz
–HSPA: 2100 MHz
•COST 231 Hata 2-slope propagation model with
–Antenna height NB: 30m
–Antenna height MS: 1.5m
•Clutter dependent figures (Dense Urban / Urban / Suburban / Rural)
–Std. dev.: 9 / 8 / 8 / 7 [dB]
–Cell area prob.: 93 / 93 / 93 / 90 [%]
DL 169 dB* UL 161 dB*
1/3

12. For internal use only
12 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE Voice vs HSPA Voice
Urban indoor (BPL 15dB)
Uplink
LTE Voice provides same coverage as HSPA Voice
LTE2.1 &
HSPA2.1
~1km
•Both LTE and HSPA have the mechanism for improving VoIP coverage. They all “eat from the same
cake”. It is:
•In LTE TTI Bundling (bundling of consecutive TTIs to form effectively longer TTI and lower the
coding rate) + HARQ (PHY retransmissions)
•In HSPA 10 ms TTI to lower the coding rate + HARQ
Limiting
link
BACK TO MENU
LTE Voice
…means the support of QCI=1 GBR bearer for
Conversational Voice and RoHC (Robust Header
Compression).
HSPAVoice
…means the support of CS Voice over HSPA and RoHC.
2/3

13. For internal use only
13 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE Voice vs HSPA Voice
•Both LTE and HSPA are characterized by reduced latency compared to GSM/WCDMA
•Typically, voice frames are generated every 20 ms however it is possible to dimension the network for
higher L1 Voice service delay, e.g. ~50..70ms
•LTE four bundles can be transmitted using HARQ mechanism within 53 ms (16 ms is HARQ RTT in
case of TTI Bundling)
•HSPA one HARQ retransmissions can be performed within 53 ms delay however the TTI can be much
longer than in LTE (10 ms HSPA, 1 ms LTE)
LTE Voice provides same coverage as HSPA Voice
•For fair comparisons between LTE Voice and HSPA Voice, one should assume similar air interface
delay and same conditions with respect to the number of possible HARQ retransmissions
3/3

14. For internal use only
14 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE TDD vs LTE FDD
•Enhanced Pedestrian A 5Hz (EPA05)
•Equipment parameters:
–Tx Power: eNB 2x20W / UE 24 dBm
–Antenna Gain:eNB 18 dBi / UE 0 dBi
–Feeder Loss: DL 0.5 dB / UL 0.5 dB (feederless)
–Noise Figure: eNB 2.0 dB / UE 7 dB
•Other features:
–eNB: 2 Tx antennas, 2 Rx antennas
–UE: 1 Tx antenna, 2 Rx antennas
–DL F-domain Scheduler: channel-aware
–UL F-domain Scheduler: channel-unaware
•Additional margins:
–Interference margin for 50% load (~1…2dB; due to own-
cell orthogonality)
–2.5 dB gain against shadowing
RL10 10MHz (1Mbps/64kbps) RL15TD 20MHz (1Mbps/64kbps)
•Enhanced Pedestrian A 5Hz (EPA05)
•Equipment parameters:
–Tx Power: eNB 2x20W / UE 24 dBm
–Antenna Gain:eNB 18 dBi / UE 0 dBi
–Feeder Loss: DL 0.5 dB / UL 0.5 dB (feederless)
–Noise Figure: eNB 3.0 dB/ UE 7 dB
•Other features:
–eNB: 2 Tx antennas, 2 Rx antennas (MRC)
–UE: 1 Tx antenna, 2 Rx antennas (MRC)
–DL F-domain Scheduler: channel-aware
–UL F-domain Scheduler: channel-aware
•Additional margins:
–Interference margin for 50% load (~1…2dB)
–2.5 dB gain against shadowing
DL 168dB* UL 160dB*
* Max allowable path loss (clutter not considered, only system gains/losses)
1)
3 HARQ transmissions with TTI Bundling at 1% residual BLER (packet loss rate)
Propagation (see next slide for the results)
•Operating Band
–FD-LTE: 2600 MHz
–TD-LTE: 2300 MHz
•COST 231 Hata 2-slope propagation model with
–Antenna height NB: 30m
–Antenna height MS: 1.5m
•Clutter dependent figures (Dense Urban / Urban / Suburban / Rural)
–Std. dev.: 9 / 8 / 8 / 7 [dB]
–Cell area prob.: 93 / 93 / 93 / 90 [%]
DL 165dB* UL 158dB*
1/2

15. For internal use only
15 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE TDD vs LTE FDD
Urban indoor (BPL 15dB)
Uplink 64kbps Downlink 1Mbps
LTE TDD loses ~2..3dB compared to FDD due to sharing resources in time
FD-LTE2.6
& TD-LTE2.3
~0.8km
•TD-LTE suffers from sharing resources in time between DL and UL. To provide the same data rate as
FD-LTE, TD-LTE must allocate two times more resources in frequency domain (~3dB loss)
•TD-LTE BTS is characterized by higher noise figure and less accurate CQI reporting because of
switching in time (~1dB loss)
•TD-LTE from the first commercial release RL15TD supports UL channel aware scheduling (~2dB
gain)
Limiting
link
143dB
TD-LTE2.3
1.2km
FD-LTE2.6
146 dB
1.3km
BACK TO MENU
2/2

16. For internal use only
16 © Nokia Siemens Networks
Beamforming vs Non-beamforming
•Enhanced Pedestrian A 5Hz (EPA05)
•Equipment parameters:
–Tx Power: eNB 2x20W/ UE 24 dBm
–Antenna Gain:eNB 18 dBi/ UE 0 dBi
–Feeder Loss: DL 0.5 dB / UL 0.5 dB (feederless)
–Noise Figure: eNB 3.0 dB / UE 7 dB
•Other features:
–eNB: 2 Tx antennas, 2 Rx antennas
–UE: 1 Tx antenna, 2 Rx antennas
–DL F-domain Scheduler: channel-aware
–UL F-domain Scheduler: channel-aware
•Additional margins:
–Interference margin for 50% load (~1…2dB; due to own-
cell orthogonality)
–2.5 dB gain against shadowing
RL15TD 20MHz (1Mbps/64kbps) RL15TD 20MHz BF(1Mbps/64kbps)
•Enhanced Pedestrian A 5Hz (EPA05)
•Equipment parameters:
–Tx Power: eNB 8x5W / UE 24 dBm
–Antenna Gain:eNB 15 dBi/ UE 0 dBi
–Feeder Loss: DL 0.5 dB / UL 0.5 dB (feederless)
–Noise Figure: eNB 3.0 dB / UE 7 dB
•Other features:
–eNB: 8-path EBB, 8 Rx antennas(MRC)
–UE: 1 Tx antenna, 2 Rx antennas (MRC)
–DL F-domain Scheduler: channel-aware
–UL F-domain Scheduler: channel-aware
•Additional margins:
–Interference margin for 50% load (~1…2dB)
–2.5 dB gain against shadowing
DL 165dB* UL 158dB*
* Max allowable path loss (clutter not considered, only system gains/losses)
1)
3 HARQ transmissions with TTI Bundling at 1% residual BLER (packet loss rate)
Propagation (see next slide for the results)
•Operating Band
–TD-LTE w/ BF:2600 MHz
–TD-LTE: 2300 MHz
•COST 231 Hata 2-slope propagation model with
–Antenna height NB: 30m
–Antenna height MS: 1.5m
•Clutter dependent figures (Dense Urban / Urban / Suburban / Rural)
–Std. dev.: 9 / 8 / 8 / 7 [dB]
–Cell area prob.: 93 / 93 / 93 / 90 [%]
DL 165dB* UL 159dB*
1/2

17. For internal use only
17 © Nokia Siemens Networks
Beamforming@2600 vs Non-beamforming@2300
Urban indoor (BPL 15dB)
Uplink 64kbps Downlink 1Mbps
Beamforming does not bring significant coverage gain,
however results in capacity boost
8Rx MRC
& 2Rx MRC
~0.8km
•Beamforming is not a coverage feature. Although it brings some gain (UL) it is mainly foreseen as
capacity booster (~50..60% gain)
•Simple coverage estimation for beamforming scenario suffers from much lower antenna (element)
gain compared to typical 3-sector (X-, XX-pol) antennas (~3..4dB loss)
•Available RL15TD HW: 2x20 RRH@2300MHz; 8x5W RRH@2600MHz
Limiting
link
143dB
2x2SFBC
1.2km
8x2 EBB
143 dB
1.1km
BACK TO MENU
2/2

18. For internal use only
18 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE Rural at 800MHz (Digital Dividend)
•Enhanced Pedestrian A 5Hz (EPA05)
•Equipment parameters:
–Tx Power: eNB 2x60W / UE 24 dBm
–Antenna Gain:eNB 18 dBi / UE 0 dBi
–Feeder Loss: DL 0.5 dB / UL 0.5 dB (feederless)
–Noise Figure: eNB 2.0 dB / UE 7 dB
•Other features:
–eNB: 2 Tx antennas, 2 Rx antennas
–UE: 1 Tx antenna, 2 Rx antennas
–DL F-domain Scheduler: channel-aware
–UL F-domain Scheduler: channel-unaware
•Additional margins:
–Interference margin for 50% load (~1…2dB; due to own-
cell orthogonality)
–1.9 dB gain against shadowing (only for moving mobiles)
LTE 10MHz
Propagation (see next slide for the results)
•Operating Band
–LTE: 800 MHz
•COST 231 Hata 2-slope propagation model with
–Antenna height NB: 50m
–Antenna height MS: see next slide
Study case
•Mobile (90% coverage reliability)
–Handset for LTE Voice services
•Wireless DSL (99% coverage reliability)
–USB modem,
–Indoor CPE,
–CPE & outdoor antenna.
1/3

19. For internal use only
19 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE Rural at 800MHz (Digital Dividend)
USB modem (10dB pen. loss)
Height = 1.5m;
Antenna gain = 0dBi;
Indoor CPE (10dB pen. loss)
Height = 3m (e.g. 1
st
floor);
Antenna gain = 2dBi;
Handset (outdoor coverage)
Height = 1.5m;
Antenna gain = 0dBi;
Downlink
AMR12.2,
G.711
1)
Uplink
30Mbps
peak
2)
512kbps
30Mbps
peak
2)
512kbps
1)
Dimensioning aligned with RL20 feature set (QCI=1 support, no TTI Bundling).
2)
Downlink does not limit the coverage (higher eNodeB transmit power in noise-limited deployment leads to better capacity); 2x60Wper sector is assumed.
3)
3dB penetration loss for window sill installation near non-coated regular window.
4)
Max allowable path loss (clutter not considered, only system gains/losses)
Outdoor CPE
Height = 5m (e.g. 1
st
floor);
Antenna gain = 14dBi;
50Mbps
peak
2)
2Mbps
Indoor CPE (3dB
3)
pen. loss)
Height = 3m (e.g. 1
st
floor);
Antenna gain = 2dBi;
18Mbps
peak
2)
128kbps
MAPL
4)
157dB
151dB
54km
36km
Cell range
150dB 17km
159dB 110km
152dB
157dB
50km
71km
BACK TO MENU
2/3
Terminal types

20. For internal use only
20 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE Rural at 800MHz (Digital Dividend)
AMR12.2
50Mbps/
2Mbps
2x60W
Format3Format1Format2Format0
20Mbps/128kbps
30Mbps/512kbps
30Mbps/512kbps
LTE deployment at Digital Dividend band provides extreme coverage and makes
difference for PRACH planning
•Format 0 is not applicable for coverage driven rural deployment because of too short Guard Time for timing
adjustment.
•Format 2 is not reasonable for rural deployment. It repeats the preamble sequence which is not needed in
open rural areas.
•Format 1 is the most reasoned choice for the majority of rural deployments at low band.
•Format 3 might be needed in case of high-end services to subscribers with outdoor CPE.
~110km
BACK TO MENU
3/3
PRACH deployment scenarios

21. For internal use only
21 © Nokia Siemens Networks
Typical LTE Data Link Budget (FDD)
Typical LTE Link Budget depending on the feature set is about 160..165dB maximum
allowable path loss usually limited by uplink coverage
•LTE Link Budget is limited by uplink in most of the cases
•UL Cell Range is mainly determined by the amount of allocated resources
(due to Tx power sharing over allocated subcarriers)
•DL Cell Range is mainly determined by the total eNB power and less by throughput requirement
(due to Tx power sharing over all available subcarriers)
•DL Pathloss may be lower for low bit rate services due to turbo-coding efficiency degradation and less
accurate channel estimation
•Additional UL improvement: 4Rx diversity (~3..4.5dB), channel aware scheduling (~2..4dB), IRC
BACK TO MENU

22. For internal use only
22 © Nokia Siemens Networks
Baseband capacity (1/1/1 10MHz2x2MIMO site with FSMD)
Subscription rate
Overbooking factor
Average data rate (Busy Hour)
Adaptive 2x2 MIMO
2Mbps
25
=2 Mbps / 25 = 0.08 Mbps
20% gain
Neighbour cell load 50% 40% gaincompared to 100% load
Bandwidth 10MHz(50 PRBs)
Average cell throughput =1.16bps/Hz x 1.2 x 1.4x 10MHz= 19.5 Mbps
#Active users = 19.5 Mbps / 0.08 Mbps ~= 240
240
240
240
720 active UEs @ FSMD
10MHz@cell
HW limit for 1+1+1 10MHz 3x420
Baseband is not likely to be a limiting factor in LTE dimensioning
•Base band capacity for LTE System Modules (FSMD & FSME) is sufficient to handle increasing offered
traffic in terms of average throughput and the number of served users.
1/2

23. For internal use only
23 © Nokia Siemens Networks
Baseband capacity (1/1/1 20MHz2x2MIMO site with FSMD)
Subscription rate
Overbooking factor
Average data rate (Busy Hour)
Adaptive 2x2 MIMO
2Mbps
25
=2 Mbps / 25 = 0.08 Mbps
20% gain
Neighbour cell load 50% 40% gaincompared to 100% load
Bandwidth 20MHz(50 PRBs)
Average cell throughput =1.20bps/Hz x 1.2 x 1.4x 20MHz= 40.3 Mbps
#Active users = 40.3 Mbps / 0.08 Mbps ~= 500
500
500
500
1500 active UEs @ FSME
20MHz@cell
HW limit for 1+1+1 20MHz 3x840
BACK TO MENU
Baseband is not likely to be a limiting factor in LTE dimensioning
•Base band capacity for LTE System Modules (FSMD & FSME) is sufficient to handle increasing offered
traffic in terms of average throughput and the number of served users.
2/2

24. For internal use only
24 © Nokia Siemens Networks
Typical LTE Controlling Link Budget (FDD)
Control channels are not likely to limit LTE coverage
•The design of control channels for LTE is different than it is for WiMax. Control channels are more robust
against interference thus do not cause significant problems concerning coverage
•Robust modulation schemes (BPSK, QPSK) and additional mechanisms improving the robustness (e.g.
aggregation levels for PDCCH) are applied for control channels
•Typical FDD LTE coverage (~160dB with 1Mbps/64kbps; same assumptions) is also achieved by control
channels
•In particular scenario, the coverage of CCH can differ from the presented performance because of many
factors impacting the required SINR (e.g. PUCCH format, PRACH preamble format, Msg3 payload, PDCCH
aggregation, etc.)
•Enhanced Pedestrian A 5Hz (EPA05)
•Equipment parameters:
–Tx Power: eNB 2x60W/ UE 24 dBm
–Antenna Gain: eNB 18 dBi / UE 0 dBi
–Feeder Loss: DL 0.5 dB / UL 0.5 dB (feederless)
–Noise Figure: eNB 2.0 dB/ UE 7 dB
•Other features:
–eNB: 2 Tx antennas, 2 Rx antennas (MRC)
–UE: 1 Tx antenna, 2 Rx antennas (MRC)
–HARQ for RACH Msg3 (sent on PUSCH)
•Additional margins:
–Interference margin 3dB for all except from RACH Msg3 (1dB)
–Gain against shadowing 0dB
LTE CCH Link Budget (20MHz)
BACK TO MENU
1/2

25. For internal use only
25 © Nokia Siemens Networks
Typical LTE Controlling Link Budget (TDD)
Control channels are not likely to limit LTE coverage
•The design of control channels for LTE is different than it is for WiMax. Control channels are more robust
against interference thus do not cause significant problems concerning coverage
•Robust modulation schemes (BPSK, QPSK) and additional mechanisms improving the robustness (e.g.
aggregation levels for PDCCH) are applied for control channels
•Typical TD-LTE coverage (~158dB with 1Mbps/64kbps; same assumptions) is also achieved by control
channels
•In particular scenario, the coverage of CCH can differ from the presented performance because of many
factors impacting the required SINR (e.g. PUCCH format, PRACH preamble format, Msg3 payload, PDCCH
aggregation, etc.)
•Enhanced Pedestrian A 5Hz (EPA05)
•Equipment parameters:
–Tx Power: eNB 2x20W/ UE 24 dBm
–Antenna Gain: eNB 18 dBi / UE 0 dBi
–Feeder Loss: DL 0.5 dB / UL 0.5 dB (feederless)
–Noise Figure: eNB 3.0 dB/ UE 7 dB
•Other features:
–eNB: 2 Tx antennas, 2 Rx antennas (MRC)
–UE: 1 Tx antenna, 2 Rx antennas (MRC)
–HARQ for RACH Msg3 (sent on PUSCH)
•Additional margins:
–Interference margin 3dB for all except from RACH Msg3 (1dB)
–Gain against shadowing 0dB
LTE CCH Link Budget (20MHz)
BACK TO MENU
2/2

26. For internal use only
26 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE Spectral Efficiency (10MHz; 800EU,2.1GHz,2.6GHz)
Spectral Efficiency depends on many factors & assumptions
•Spectral Efficiency (SE) decreases with larger and larger ISD (Inter Site Distance) because more UEs suffer from Tx power
limitation and more experience call drops
•LTE Uplink SE is more sensitive to larger ISD because of low UE output power
•LTE SE strictly depends on the channel bandwidth. Frequency diversity can be fully exploited only in the bandwidth wider than
5 MHz
•Potential UL capacity improvement: interference aware scheduler, Power Control optimization, 4Rx diversity (MRC/IRC),
Virtual MIMO
•Potential DL capacity improvement: 4x4MIMO, beamforming, MU-MIMO
•Comparisons or performance statements usually refer to ISD=500m (3GPP Macro Case 1)
•The figures above were simulated for 100% neighbour cell load which means the numbers can be higher for realistic
scenarios when neighbour cells are not fully loaded all the time
Downlink 1x2SIMO Uplink 1x2SIMO
Spectral Efficiency depends on many factors & assumptions
1/2

27. For internal use only
27 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE Spectral Efficiency vs channel bandwidth
Spectral Efficiency depends on many factors & assumptions
•LTE SE strictly depends on the channel bandwidth. Frequency diversity can be fully exploited only in the bandwidth wider than
5 MHz. In channels with very limited number of PRBs (1.4MHz, 3MHz), there is much lower probability of selecting resources
which are not affected by frequency-selective fading. This results in overall capacity degradation and is especially dangerous for
service perception of cell-edge users.
•15MHz and 20MHz channels are slightly better than reference case of 10MHz
•Reference case can be obtained from previous slide (10MHz, SIMO). SE for specific channel bandwidth can be calculated by
multiplying the reference case by percentage values presented on the above charts.
Best Spectral Efficiency can be achieved for bandwidth>5MHz
Downlink Uplink
BACK TO MENU
2/2

28. For internal use only
28 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE Spectral Efficiency (DL)
SIMO Spectral Efficiency (100% load)
Adaptive Open Loop 2x2 MIMO
1.26 bps/Hz
20% gain
Neighbour cell load 50% 40% gaincompared to 100% load
Bandwidth 20MHz(100 PRBs)
Average cell throughput =2.32bps/Hz x 20MHz= 46 Mbps
Closed Loop MIMO 10% gain (over Open Loop 2x2MIMO)
Spectral Efficiency (100% load) =1.22bps/Hz x 1.2 x 1.1 = 1.66 bps/Hz
1)
Realistic network dimensioning:
Spectral Efficiency (50% load) =1.66bps/Hz x 1.4 = 2.32 bps/Hz
Product-aligned dynamic system level simulations:
LTE DL Spectral Efficiency is ~1.8 bps/Hz
•10% discrepancy between 3GPP Release 8 target (1.8 bps/Hz) and simulated values (1.66 bps/Hz) comes
from the difference in simulation methodology (see note
1)
) and specifics of UE implementation
•For planning exercise, realistic load condition should be assumed. At typical 50% neighbour load, the cell
could serve ~46Mbps (~150Mbps in average per 3-sector site)
•LTE DL Spectral Efficiency is about 3..4 times higher than reference HSPA Release 6performance which
gives ~0.6 bps/Hz
(under similar simulation assumptions; HSDPA with 1Tx/2Rx, LTE with 2Tx/2Rx; see 3GPP TR 25.913 for performance requirement details)
1)
The simulator is normally used to evaluate real network
performance under real world condition (full interference
modeling, control channels, L2/L3, UE mobility with
handovers, full time scale, CQI errors). There is always a
gap compared to simplified 3GPP models (no L2/L3, no
mobility, perfect Link Adaptation, static snapshots, etc.).
BACK TO MENU

29. For internal use only
29 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE Spectral Efficiency (UL)
Neighbour cell load 50% 40% gaincompared to 100% load
Bandwidth 20MHz(100 PRBs)
Average cell throughput =0.98bps/Hz x 20MHz= 19.6 Mbps
Realistic network dimensioning:
Spectral Efficiency (50% load) =0.7bps/Hz x 1.4 = 0.98 bps/Hz
LTE DL Spectral Efficiency is ~1.8 bps/Hz
•For planning exercise, realistic load condition should be assumed. At typical 50% neighbour load, the cell
could serve ~19.6Mbps (~60Mbps in average per 3-sector site)
•System simulation of product RRM for LTE Uplink proves that 3GPP Release 8 target of 0.7 bps/Hz can be
achieved
•Open Loop Power Control is a key point in optimizing UL capacity and user throughput performance
•LTE UL Spectral Efficiency is about 2..3 times higher than reference HSUPA Release 6performance which
gives ~0.3 bps/Hz
(under similar simulation assumptions; HSUPA with 1Tx/2Rx, LTE with 1Tx/2Rx; see 3GPP TR 25.913 for performance requirement details)
1)
The simulator is normally used to evaluate real network
performance under real world condition (full interference
modeling, control channels, L2/L3, UE mobility with
handovers, full time scale, CQI errors). UL implementation
is precise as much as possible due to perfectly known
eNB PHY/RRM functionality.
BACK TO MENU
Spectral Efficiency (100% load) = 0.7 bps/Hz
1)
Product-aligned dynamic system level simulations:

30. For internal use only
30 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE 3-sector vs 6-sector
•Enhanced Pedestrian A 5Hz (EPA05)
•Equipment parameters:
–Tx Power: eNB 40W / UE 24 dBm
–Antenna Gain:eNB 18 dBi / UE 0 dBi
–Feeder Loss: DL 0.5 dB / UL 0.5 dB (feederless)
–Noise Figure: eNB 2.0 dB / UE 7 dB
•Other features:
–eNB: 1 Tx antennas, 2 Rx antennas (MRC)
–UE: 1 Tx antenna, 2 Rx antennas (MRC)
–DL F-domain Scheduler: channel-aware
–UL F-domain Scheduler: channel-unaware
•Additional margins:
–Interference margin for 50% load (~1…2dB)
–0 dB fast fading margin (due to scheduling gain)
–0 dB soft HO gain (no SHO in LTE)
–2.5 dB gain against shadowing
LTE 3-sector (1Mbps/64kbps) LTE 6-sector (1Mbps/64kbps)
•Enhanced Pedestrian A 5Hz (EPA05)
•Equipment parameters:
–Tx Power: eNB 40W / UE 24 dBm
–Antenna Gain:eNB 19.5 dBi/ UE 0 dBi
–Feeder Loss: DL 0.5 dB / UL 0.5 dB (feederless)
–Noise Figure: eNB 2.0 dB / UE 7 dB
•Other features:
–eNB: 1 Tx antennas, 2 Rx antennas (MRC)
–UE: 1 Tx antenna, 2 Rx antennas (MRC)
–DL F-domain Scheduler: channel-aware
–UL F-domain Scheduler: channel-unaware
•Additional margins:
–Interference margin for 50% load (~2..3dB)
–0 dB fast fading margin (due to scheduling gain)
–0 dB soft HO gain (no SHO in LTE)
–2.5 dB gain against shadowing
DL 165dB* UL 160 dB*
* Max allowable path loss (clutter not considered, only system gains/losses)
Propagation
•Operating Band
–LTE: 2600 MHz
•COST 231 Hata 2-slope propagation model with
–Antenna height NB: 30m
–Antenna height MS: 1.5m
•Clutter dependent figures (Dense Urban / Urban / Suburban / Rural)
–Std. dev.: 9 / 8 / 8 / 7 [dB]
–Cell area prob.: 93 / 93 / 93 / 90 [%]
DL 166dB* UL 161dB*
1/3

31. For internal use only
31 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE 3-sector vs 6-sector
Urban indoor (BPL 17dB BPL)
3-sector 6-sector
LTE 6-sector site solution reduces the number of coverage sites by ~35%
•LTE 6-sector site solution gives a benefit of larger coverage (mainly due to higher gain
antennas) and different network layout
•It can happen that average interference level is higher from the point of a single cell
nevertheless 6-sector solution requires 35% less sites compared to corresponding 3-sector
configuration
BACK TO MENU
Cell Range = 0.73 km
Cell Area = 0.35 km2
Site Area = 1.04 km2
Inter Site Distance = 1.1km
Cell Range = 0.77 km
Cell Area = 0.26 km2
Site Area = 1.54 km2
Inter Site Distance = 1.3km
2/3

32. For internal use only
32 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE 3-sector vs 6-sector
LTE 6-sector site solution brings ~80% site throughput gain compared to 3-sector
•Single cell capacity decreases 6% mainly because of increased inter-cell interference (more
neighbours higher interference)
•In total per site, capacity is increased by 80..90% compared to 3-sector site
•User experience is also improved (for cell-center as well as cell-edge UEs)
Mean CELL throughput Mean SITE throughput Instantaneous USER throughput
BACK TO MENU
3/3

33. For internal use only
33 © Nokia Siemens Networks
LTE Tooling Landscape
Planning data, digital maps, site locations…
HW/system configuration…
Dimensioning tool
Real network field trial
Planning tool (path loss maps)
Dynamic sys-level simulator
Performance evaluation before trial set-up,
Feeding trial equipment with the input.
Hexagonal layout simulations for the dim. tool,
Validation of MCS/RxSens./… vs distance, etc.
Trial results validation against
simulator outcomes.
Data import to planning & opt tools
R&D link level simulator
Tooling chain within NSN LTE Network Engineering
BACK TO MENU