Doc.: IEEE 802.11-04/0143r0 Submission January 2004 Steve Brunson & Bob Soranno (JHU/APL)Slide 1 Improved Adjacent Channel Rejection Parameters to solve.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Doc.: IEEE /0006r0 Submission January 2006 Gerald Chouinard, CRCSlide 1 TV bands White Spaces and DTV receiver RF front-end performance and protection.
Advertisements

Doc.: IEEE Submission January 2004 Bill Byrnes, Shared Spectrum Co. Frequency Agile Spectrum Access Technologies This Presentation.
Doc.: IEEE /0060r0 Submission January 2004 Christopher Hansen, BroadcomSlide 1 Thoughts on TX Spectral Masks for n Christopher J. Hansen.
11th February 2000 BFWAtg(00)12. Structure of the presentation u Study objective and approach u BFWA characteristics u Interference analysis (worst case)
mmWave MIMO Link Budget Estimation for Indoor Environment
Doc.: IEEE /0229r0 Submission February 2012 Assaf Kasher, IntelSlide 1 Transmit Mask Correction Date: Authors:
Millimeter Wave Regulation IEEE EMC – DC/No. VA Mitchell Lazarus | January 31, 2012 Millimeter Wave Regulation IEEE EMC.
Doc.: IEEE /0436r0 Submission February 2011 Mediatek Path Loss and Delay Spread Models for 11ah Date: Authors: Slide 1.
Summary of Path Loss in Propagation
08/16/01.
Doc.: IEEE /1420r1Nov 2014 Submission Po-Kai Huang (Intel) Slide 1 The Impact of Preamble Error on MAC System Performance Date: NameAffiliationsAddressPhone .
ECE 4730: Lecture #5 1 Cellular Interference  Two major types of system-generated interference : 1) Co-Channel Interference (CCI) 2) Adjacent Channel.
2.4-GHZ RF TRANSCEIVER FOR IEEE B WIRELESS LAN UF# UF#
Ron Milione Ph.D. W2TAP W2TAP InformationModulatorAmplifier Ant Feedline Transmitter InformationDemodulatorPre-Amplifier Ant Feedline Receiver Filter.
NEWLINK  Wireless Equipment Copyrights 2004 w4 Cabling Systems NEWLINK.
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-11/1455r0 Nov 2011 Fei Tong,Les Smith, CSRSlide ah network outdoor deployment issues Date: 2011-Nov-03 Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0916r0 Submission September 2005 Slide 1 Adjacent channel interference and its impact on the Mesh MAC Date: Authors: Notice:
Satellite Microwave MMG Rashed Sr. Lecturer, Dept. of ETE Daffodil International University.
A Study into the Theoretical Appraisal of the Highest Usable Frequencies RA Contract AY 4329.
January 2005 Abbie Mathew, NewLANS Slide 1 IEEE /054r0 Submission Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks Submission.
Doc.: IEEE Submission November, 2011 Bob Conley et al., Gonzaga U, Eigen WirelessSlide 1 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal.
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0586r0 May 2014 Igal Kotzer, General MotorsSlide 1 Automotive Considerations for the Simulation Scenarios Date: 12-May-2014.
Frequency Sharing Study between FWA & FSS in the band MHz David Bryant Wireless Networks Presentation to UK W-LAN Advisory Group (Sharing &
Doc.: ax Submission Sept 2014 Slide 1 Effect of CCA in residential scenario part 2 Date: Authors:
Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks(WPANs) Submission Title: Link Budget for m Date Submitted: 5 March 2012.
Millimeter Wave Regulation IEEE EMC – DC/No. VA Mitchell Lazarus | January 31, 2012 Millimeter Wave Regulation IEEE EMC.
Submission doc.: /1320r00 Bo, Sun (ZTE Corp), et al Slide 1 11aj 45GHz Link Budget for use cases discussion Date: Authors: Nov 2012.
RF Propagation No. 1  Seattle Pacific University Basic RF Transmission Concepts.
Doc.: IEEE /0254r0 Submission May 2007 Sai Shankar N QualcommSlide 1 Aggregate Interference at DTV Receiver Date: Authors: Notice:
Doc.: IEEE /0553-r1 Submission April 2011 James Wang, et al, Mediatek COST231 Walfish Ikegame Model for for 11ah Date: Authors: Slide.
Doc.: IEEE /089 Submission January 2002 Steve Halford, IntersilSlide 1 Maximum Received Power for g Steve Halford Mark Webster.
Doc.: IEEE /0799r2 Submission June 2014 Nihar Jindal, Broadcom Modifications to Simulation Scenarios and Calibration Process Date:
Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [ k Link Budget Considerations] Date.
Doc.: IEEE /288 Submission July 2002 Intel Research and Development Slide 1 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks.
Doc.: IEEE −11−0506−01−004j TG4j Submission Nov 2011 Liang Li (Vinno)Slide 1 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks.
RF Propagation No. 1  Seattle Pacific University Basic RF Transmission Concepts.
Doc.: IEEE /0992r1 Submission September 2008 John R. Barr, Motorola Inc.Slide 1 20/40 MHz 11n Interference on Bluetooth Date: Authors:
Simulation Data for Letter Ballot Comments on Quasi-guard Subcarriers and Reverse Link Waveform Lai King (Anna) Tee January 15, 2007.
Doc.: IEEE /0632r0 Submission May 2015 Intel CorporationSlide 1 Experimental Measurements for Short Range LOS SU-MIMO Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0645 Submission May 2012 Open-Loop Link Margin Index for Fast Link Adaptation Date: Authors: Slide 1Yong Liu, Marvell,
Doc.: IEEE Submission Nov 2014 Link Budget Analysis for 40-50GHz Indoor Usage Date: Authors: Slide 1Jianhan Liu, Mediatek Inc.
Doc.: IEEE /559r0 Submission May 2009 Minyoung Park, Intel Corp.Slide 1 Analysis on IEEE c coexistence scheme Date: Authors:
A study on the coexistence between Direct Air to Ground Communication (DA2GC) and Radars in the 5 GHz band Peter Trommelen, Rob van Heijster, Arne Theil.
Doc.: IEEE /0992r0 Submission September 2008 John R. Barr, Motorola Inc.Slide 1 20/40 MHz 11n Interference on Bluetooth Date: Authors:
Noise Figure vs. IP3 Skip Crilly CTO, Cellular Specialties, Inc.
Bluetooth and WLAN coexistence in dense deployment scenarios
Support for Advance Antennas & Techniques in WNM
平成30年6月 March 2009 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: Technical requirements of Japanese.
A study on the coexistence between Direct Air to Ground Communication (DA2GC) and Radars in the 5 GHz band Peter Trommelen, Rob van Heijster,
LRTC 3.4 – 3.8 GHz Ericsson input PT1 XO 29 – 31/
Text proposal for using receiver information
Adjacent Channel Rejection Requirement
In-band interference effects on UWB
IEEE Interference Environment
Selectivity / Channel Rejection
6-10GHz Rate-Range and Link Budget
Submission Title: Link Budget for m
TG1 Required Detection SNRs Versus Protected Radii
Multi-channel interference mitigation
Month Year doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0 July 2015
Text proposal for using receiver information
Per-User Data Rate, Band and Bandwidth Options for VHT
Spectral Control Issues for TGg
Text proposal for using receiver information
White Space Regulatory Issues
Text proposal for using receiver information
Month Year doc.: IEEE /0xxxxr0 Sep 2008
Intel Validation of TGn Simulation Scenarios
Upper Layer Operation of Adjacent Channel Detector
Month Year doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0 Mar 2016
Presentation transcript:

doc.: IEEE /0143r0 Submission January 2004 Steve Brunson & Bob Soranno (JHU/APL)Slide 1 Improved Adjacent Channel Rejection Parameters to solve the Near-Far Interference Problem Steve Brunson & Bob Soranno The Johns Hopkins University – Applied Physics Lab

doc.: IEEE /0143r0 Submission January 2004 Steve Brunson & Bob Soranno (JHU/APL)Slide 2 Scenario of Interest Victim – A vehicle is parked in a gas station located on the corner of a major street. A large transaction is being performed on a short range link to an antenna under the canopy (~6m). (“Minimum” link power assumed) Interference – The roadway is 15 meters from the parked vehicle. Vehicles on the road may be conducting Traffic Probe transactions at 20 dBm and Vehicle-Vehicle transactions at 33 dBm in other channels.

doc.: IEEE /0143r0 Submission January 2004 Steve Brunson & Bob Soranno (JHU/APL)Slide 3 The Near/Far Problem Near – Loud transmitter on a different channel (interference) “Far” – Distant or weak transmitter in tuned channel (desired signal) Interferer “Keep Out” Range Desired– 15 m Interference Power –Most transmitters will be 33 dBm or less

doc.: IEEE /0143r0 Submission January 2004 Steve Brunson & Bob Soranno (JHU/APL)Slide 4 Mitigation Approaches Antenna Patterns –some help, but unfavorable geometries cannot be avoided Added IF filtering (SAW) – can be effective (40 dB beyond adjacent channel), but will increase cost (~$10?). Could be required for interference outside the DSRC band. Increased baseband filtering – effective, basis for Type 2 receiver Increased desired signal level – effective for short, low power links (-21 to -4 dBm required for 6 meter link with 0/0 dBi antennas)

doc.: IEEE /0143r0 Submission January 2004 Steve Brunson & Bob Soranno (JHU/APL)Slide 5 Measure of Effectiveness Interferer “Keep-Out” Range – How close can you let an out-of-channel interferer get before you start losing packets? Inputs: –Level of Desired Signal (relative to MDS) –Level of Interference Rejection –Interference Power Transmitted –Antenna Patterns (0 dBi omni’s assumed) –Propagation (free space assumed) Interference independent of own xmt pwr.

doc.: IEEE /0143r0 Submission January 2004 Steve Brunson & Bob Soranno (JHU/APL)Slide 6 Limiting Conditions Adjacent or Alternate Adjacent Channel Interference – leakage from strong signals in nearby channels Front End Saturation – nonlinear effects caused by strong signals in any other channel or out-of-band signals In general, Adjacent Channel problems seem more severe than Front End Saturation

doc.: IEEE /0143r0 Submission January 2004 Steve Brunson & Bob Soranno (JHU/APL)Slide 7 Keep-Out Range Plots Keep-Out Range vs Received Power Received Power from MDS to MDS + 20 dB –One line for each data rate with applicable MDS and ACI-rejection (per Atheros) –Blue Lines: Interference Power = 20 dBm –Green Lines: Interference Power = 33 dBm –Both antennas 0 dBi –15 meter line in RED Faster Modes Lower because of poorer MDS –[mds: dBm]

doc.: IEEE /0143r0 Submission January 2004 Steve Brunson & Bob Soranno (JHU/APL)Slide 8 Keep-Out Range: Type 2, Adj Chnl

doc.: IEEE /0143r0 Submission January 2004 Steve Brunson & Bob Soranno (JHU/APL)Slide 9 Keep-Out Range: Type 1, Adj Chnl

doc.: IEEE /0143r0 Submission January 2004 Steve Brunson & Bob Soranno (JHU/APL)Slide 10 Keep-Out Range: Type 1, Alt Adj Chnl

doc.: IEEE /0143r0 Submission January 2004 Steve Brunson & Bob Soranno (JHU/APL)Slide 11 Conclusions Type 1 receivers will experience losses with 20 & 33 dBm adjacent channel interferers, BUT early deployment densities will be low. Type 2 receivers will be OK except for high power interferers (40 & 44.8 dBm), but these should be low density and/or transitory. Antenna Patterns will help the situation in most cases, especially high EIRP transmitters (these have narrow regions of max EIRP).

doc.: IEEE /0143r0 Submission January 2004 Steve Brunson & Bob Soranno (JHU/APL)Slide 12 Back-up Slides

doc.: IEEE /0143r0 Submission January 2004 Steve Brunson & Bob Soranno (JHU/APL)Slide 13 Keep-Out Range: Type 2, Alt Adj Chnl

doc.: IEEE /0143r0 Submission January 2004 Steve Brunson & Bob Soranno (JHU/APL)Slide 14 Front End Saturation Saturation analysis based on information provided by Atheros Saturation can be caused by signals outside the DSRC band If out of band signals are a problem, a SAW filter in the IF may be required

doc.: IEEE /0143r0 Submission January 2004 Steve Brunson & Bob Soranno (JHU/APL)Slide 15 Saturation vs. ACI Max Gain Max Gain – 10 dB