doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission Doc.: IEEE /720r0 May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 1 Smart Grid ad hoc – May 2011 Date: 09 May 2011 Abstract: 1 – SGIP NIST PAP2 NameCompanyAddressPhone Bruce KraemerMarvell5488 Marvell Lane, Santa Clara, CA,

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 2

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 3 Abstract: This work area investigates the strengths, weaknesses, capabilities, and constraints of existing and emerging standards-based physical media for wireless communications. The approach is to work with the appropriate standard development organizations (SDOs) to determine the characteristics of each technology for Smart Grid application areas and types. Results are used to assess the appropriateness of wireless communications technologies for meeting Smart Grid applications.

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 4 PAP2 Links PAP02: Wireless Communications for the Smart Grid (6.1.5) Contents of this topicUseful Hot LinksAbstract:Abstract: Status of PAP02: Wireless Communications for the Smart Grid (6.1.5) Task Details: Description: Objectives: Why: Where: Who: 2011 Upcoming Meetings –May 10 - Teleconference 2:30pm ETMay 10 - Teleconference 2:30pm ET –May 24, June 7, June 21, July 5, July 19, Aug 2, Aug 16, Aug 30 - Teleconference 2:00pm ETMay 24, June 7, June 21, July 5, July 19, Aug 2, Aug 16, Aug 30 - Teleconference 2:00pm ET –July 12-14, SGIP Summer Meeting, Montreal CanadaJuly 12-14, SGIP Summer Meeting, Montreal Canada

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 5 Subscription to NIST PAP#2 To see the complete NIST Priority Action Plan list go here: sggrid/bin/view/SmartGrid/PriorityActionPlans#Individual_ PAP_Listshttp://collaborate.nist.gov/twiki- sggrid/bin/view/SmartGrid/PriorityActionPlans#Individual_ PAP_Lists To subscribe to PAP#2 mailing list go here: -PAP02WG&A=1http:// -PAP02WG&A=1

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 6 OpenSG SharePoint Documents ents/Forms/AllItems.aspxhttp://osgug.ucaiug.org/UtiliComm/Shared%20Docum ents/Forms/AllItems.aspx

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 7 NIST Timeline (Anticipated) Release of draft 0.6 Draft 0.5 July 28, 2010 Call for Input to Section 6 August 4, 2010 End of draft 0.5 review period September 15, 2010 December 3, 2010 November 4, 2010 OpenSG + PAP2 meeting, Fort Lauderdale SGIP face-to-face, St Louis Tentative PAP 2 meeting September 16, 2010 End of draft 0.6 review period September 30, 2010 October 29, 2010 Release of Version 1 January 15, 2011 Extended edit period Release of Version 2 ? June/July 2011 ? Continuation of project to extend findings August, 2009Project initiation

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 8 PAP#2 Version 1 Guideline for Assessing Wireless Standards for Smart Grid Applications Version 1.0 released Jan 13, sggrid/pub/SmartGrid/PAP02Objective3/NIST_PAP2_Guid elines_for_Assessing_Wireless_Standards_for_Smart_Grid_ Applications_1.0.pdfhttp://collaborate.nist.gov/twiki- sggrid/pub/SmartGrid/PAP02Objective3/NIST_PAP2_Guid elines_for_Assessing_Wireless_Standards_for_Smart_Grid_ Applications_1.0.pdf

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 9 Priority Action Plan for Wireless communications (PAP#2) Activity Summary Calls every two weeks – details on NIST Twiki Version 1 paper approved by SGIP board Procedures approved Current primary task is to qualify a propagation model that can be used for metering applications This task will extend to at least thru May 10th Next proposed task will be to re-work Section 4 - on the Matrix material

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission PAP#2 Procedures approved 14 voters, 12 yes, 0 no, 0 abs, 2 dnv May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 10

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 11 Next PAP 2 meetings Next face-to-face meeting –SGIP meeting July 12-14, Montreal Canada –Logistics available here: PAP 2 conference call schedule

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission 2011 NIST PAP2 Meeting History May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 12 Date & TimeAgenda & Slides PresentedApproved Meeting Minutes 4/26/11 2:00PM ETDownloadDownload (Unapproved) 4/12/11 2:30PM ETDownload 3/29/11 6:00PM ETDownloadDownload, Rural Area Propagation Analysis, SpreadsheetRural Area Propagation Analysis Spreadsheet Download 3/10/11 8:00AM PTDownload 2/25/11 3:00PM ETDownloadDownload, PAP02 Proposed Operating ProceduresPAP02 Proposed Operating Procedures Download 2/11/11 1:00PM ETDownload

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 13

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission Primary PAP2 Work Items for past several weeks Terrain & Clutter Propagation loss models Characterization of deployment categories Rural (<1/person or household/sq mi …… Very Dense >10,000 people or households/sq mi May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 14

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission NIST PAP#2 Agenda for May 10, Review & Approve Today’s Agenda 2.Approve Prior Meeting Minutes 3.Operating Procedures Ballot Results 4.Current Tasks –Framework Proposal to Move Forward (Cunningham) –Updates to Section 4 Matrix (Kraemer) 5.Meeting announcements 6.New business May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 15

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission Update on Propagation Models May 10, 2011 Prepared by Doug Gray Consultant to WiMAX Forum

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission Outline Update on Erceg-SUI model ah work Closed form expression for atmospheric absorption 17

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission Modified Erceg–SUI Model Goal: Extend model to cover broader frequency range –Original: 1800 to 2700 MHz based on measurements at 1900/2000 MHz –Objective is to cover 1000 MHz to 4000 MHz Approach: Devise or modify a term to achieve a better fit to diffraction/foliage frequency dependence –Need up to 5 dB per octave for hilly terrain and foliage at low BS antenna heights –Current formulation provides 1.8 dB per octave (2000 MHz as basis) 18

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission Proposed Modification to Erceg–SUI Model Original formulation: –L = LOG(d 0 ) + 20LOG(f)+10(a-bh b +c/h b )LOG(d/ d 0 ) + 6 LOG(f/2000) - XLOG(h r /2); f in MHz, d 0 in m, h b is BS antenna height, h r is SS antenna height For Type A: a = 4.6, b = , c = 12.6, X = 10.8 For Type B: a = 4.0, b = , c = 17.1, X = 10.8 For Type C: a = 3.6, b = , c = 20, X = 20 Proposed modification: –L = LOG(d 0 ) + 20LOG(f)+10(a-bh b +c/h b )LOG(d/ d 0 ) + 6 (1+ ak/h b )LOG(f/2000) - XLOG(hr/2); k = 4 19 Freq Dependency in dB per Octave hbType AType BType C Type A Terrain: Hilly & moderate to heavy tree density Type B Terrain: Hilly & light tree density or Flat & moderate to heavy tree density Type C Terrain: Flat & light tree density

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission Excess Loss Frequency Dependence 20 BS at 10 m, SS at 2 m Excess loss for 2.4 km path length Foliage depth: 50 meters Obstruction height: 2 meters Diffraction Model: ~3 dB/octave Foliage Model: 2.9 to 3.5 dB/octave Original Erceg-SUI Modified Erceg-SUI k=4

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission Atmospheric Absorption 21 A dry air = [ /(f ) +4.81/((f-57) )] f 2 /1000 dB/km A water = [ ρ + 3.6/((f-22.2) ) /((f-183.3) ) + 8.9/((f-325.4) )] f 2 ρ dB/km –Where f is in GHz and ρ = water vapor density in g/m 3 –Plotted for ρ = 31.8 g/m 3 (100% humidity at 30 o C Source: ITU-R Rec ( )

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission Models vs. Smart Grid Requirements 22

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission Going Forward Modified Erceg-SUI Model is a good path loss model for suburban and most rural environments of interest covering 1000 to 4000 MHz with low to high BS antenna heights Model can also be applied to urban environments with BS antenna height at or above average rooftop heights –Confirmed by comparing to Hata and COST231 models ah work may provide a good model for <1000 MHz –Need solution for lower BS antenna heights (7-10 m) in rural with varied terrain and foliage characteristics May still have to treat “extreme” situations on a case by case basis –Use PtP models with link-specific GIS data – analyze each end-point – plus losses for below grade, enclosed meters, etc –Use free space loss and add excess loss for “average” foliage, terrain, or bldg clutter for general purpose wide area coverage Updated spread-sheet of propagation models –No major changes: some corrections & added place-holder for 11ah work 23

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission Extended Work Plan Proposal May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 24

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 25 Section 4 - Deliverables Paper & Matrix 1.Identify and fully define all necessary terminology (mesh, etc.) 2.Come up with sane metric definitions for Section 4 3.Come up with guidelines for filling out the wireless technologies matrix to make sure entries are comparable across technologies –This includes a selection of high priority, fully described “operating points” representing deployment scenarios 4.Come up with dates for submissions for column entries for the matrix and appoint coordinators for each technology represented in the matrix 5.Submit results to the PAP2 reflector and announce a comment period 6.Directly solicit SDO participation and schedule SDO calls to discuss submissions and comments on all of the above 7.Discuss & adjust the deliverables content using OpenSG as the venue and a proxy for the utility industry

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 26 References Previous major submission package to NIST Doc smart-grid-summary-input-to-pap-2-report-nov ppthttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/10/ smart-grid-summary-input-to-pap-2-report-nov ppt And therein:

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission Previous submissions to NIST PAP#2 consolidated-change-suggestions.ppthttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/10/ nist-pap-2-report-r5- consolidated-change-suggestions.ppt report-r6.dochttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/10/ comment-set-1-on-pap-2- report-r6.doc report-r6.ppthttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/10/ comment-set-2-on-pap-2- report-r6.ppt input-to-pap-2-report-nov-2010.ppthttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/10/ smart-grid-summary- input-to-pap-2-report-nov-2010.ppt May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 27

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission Revision of Section 4 in PAP2 During the May 10 th call I would like to begin discussion on revisions to Section 4 – Wireless Technology of the NIST_PAP2_Guidelines_for_Assessing_Wireless_Standards_for_Smart_Grid_Applications_1.0.pdf. NIST_PAP2_Guidelines_for_Assessing_Wireless_Standards_for_Smart_Grid_Applications_1.0.pd Introduction: Prior to the release of Guideline version 1, the IEEE 802 Smart Grid ad hoc generated a set of change recommendations for report Section 4 – Wireless Technology and an associated data collection matrix structure. The intent was to improve the technical accuracy of the Section 4 text and thereby to make it more useful to the Smart Grid community when considering or comparing wireless technology deployment options. The complete set of suggestions can be found at: ppthttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/10/ smart-grid-summary-input-to-pap-2-report-nov ppt and embedded in the document was a revised matrix under the name “V6-r1”. The proposed changes were not integrated into Guideline version 1 but it was agreed that they should be further considered as part of the process to produce Guideline version 2. I submit this material with the understanding it serves as a starting point for Section 4 revisions that will be more fully reviewed, rewritten and approved by the PAP2 membership before inclusion in Guideline version 2. It should also be noted that some data collected from SDOs will need to be re-collected when using the revised descriptions and definitions in Section 4. May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 28

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission Framework Questions & Comments In order to analyze an operational scenario we would need to have additional information on the number of nodes and their physical relationship. For example, in the ESI meter example below, how many nodes are there, where are they and what is the characteristic terrain class within which they are located? May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 29

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission Framework Questions & Comments - 2 Can assumed that all analysis would be based upon single technology deployment. Was there an expectation that a mixed technology deployment be analyzed? May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 30

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission Framework Questions & Comments - 3 The analysis of the suitability of a deployment requires a calculation of a link budget. Link budget calculations require using radio performance numbers that are not defined by technology standards documents but are vendor specific. Hence, there may be some differences between individual suppliers’ radio performance numbers. We propose that each technology use a single representative set of radio performance numbers. The chosen set of parameters needs to be specified and approved by PAP2. Additionally, the parameter values would be proposed by each SDO and approved by PAP2. E.g. Receive Antenna pattern and gain profile Transmit Antenna pattern and gain profile Receiver sensitivity Transmit power May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission Framework Questions & Comments - 4 The analysis of deployment performance is presumed to be based upon a point to point relationship between a transmitter receiver pair. No analysis of repeaters or mesh links would be performed. May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 32

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission Framework Questions & Comments – 5a The analysis of deployment performance could be based upon only the relationship between a transmitter receiver pair with messages being transferred from one radio MAC to another. Alternatively there could be a more comprehensive definition of end to end. May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell PHY MAC PHY MAC

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission Framework Questions & Comments – 5b The analysis of deployment performance could be based upon only the relationship between a transmitter receiver pair with messages being transferred from one radio MAC to another. Alternatively there could be a more comprehensive definition of end to end. How complete are the model end points? May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell PHY MAC PHY MAC

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission Minimum Output The initial “Framework Basics” document states: Minimum output: quantity of wireless std/tech/spectrum network gear required by endpoint density category, incremental gear type/count for RF propagation factors & engineering work-arounds for subscribers, and no endpoint coverage conditions There is no data traffic volume specfied. It is presumed that some portion of the OpenSG requirements would be selected to quantify the represenative data traffic to be used for analysis. Please identify the traffic flow. May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 35

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission Propagation Model Updates May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 36 As discussed in the Smart Grid Tuesday afternoon session of the interim meeting in Palm Springs, this is a link to the description of the COST231 Walfisch Ikegami propagation model which is applicable to sub-GHz frequencies, is friendly to outdoor Metering applications, suitable in preference to urban and suburban environments but I believe extensible to the rural environment. res/CDMA/Walfisch-Ikegami.htm

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission Propagation Model Updates May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 37 Ron Porat mentioned M

doc.: IEEE /0720r1 Submission EPRI UPDATE TIM GODFREY May 2011 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 38