Doc.: IEEE 802.11-06/0385r0 Submission March 2006 A. Kapur, et al, Broadcom CorporationSlide 1 EVM Specification Issues for TGn Notice: This document has.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Doc.: IEEE /0930r0 Submission July 2006 Nancy Cam-Winget, Cisco Slide 1 Editor Updates since Jacksonville Notice: This document has been prepared.
Advertisements

Doc.: IEEE /0534r0 Submission May 2005 Steve Shellhammer, Intel CorporationSlide 1 Thoughts on Modifications of the TGn Functional Requirements.
Doc.: IEEE /0054r0 Submission May 2011 Slide 1Hyunduk Kang, et al, ETRI Discussion on mode of management service Notice: This document has been.
Doc.: IEEE /2237r0 Submission July 2007 Emily Qi, Intel CorporationSlide 1 TGv Redline D1.0 Insert and Deletion Notice: This document has been.
Doc.: IEEE /1528r0 Submission 22 September 2006 Naveen Kakani, Nokia, IncSlide 1 TGn PSMP adhoc Group September Closing Report Notice: This document.
Doc.: IEEE /0197r0 Submission March 2005 Nancy Cam-Winget et alSlide 1 TAP & JIT Merge Process Notice: This document has been prepared to assist.
Doc.: IEEE /0215r1 Submission January 2006 Jesse Walker, Intel CorporationSlide 1 TGw Closing Report Notice: This document has been prepared to.
Doc.: IEEE /0652r1 Submission May 2007 Emily Qi, Intel CorporationSlide 1 TGv Redline D0.12 Insert and Deletion Notice: This document has been.
Coexistence Motions for LB84 Comment Resolution
LB84 General AdHoc Group Sept. Closing TGn Motions
LB84 General AdHoc Group Sept. Closing TGn Motions
[ Interim Meetings 2006] Date: Authors: July 2005
TGn Sync Atlanta Presentation on Confirmation
Motions Date: Authors: January 2006
IEEE White Space Radio Contribution Title
London TGu Motions Authors: January 2007 Date: Month Year
LB73 Noise and Location Categories
LB73 Noise and Location Categories
Waveform Generator Source Code
March 2014 Election Results
TGp Closing Report Date: Authors: July 2007 Month Year
Attendance and Documentation for the March 2007 Plenary
Attendance and Documentation for the March 2007 Plenary
[ Policies and Procedure Summary]
[ Policies and Procedure Summary]
Motion to accept Draft p 2.0
[place presentation subject title text here]
Motions Date: Authors: January 2006
(Presentation name) For (Name of group) (Presenter’s name,title)
TGp Motions Date: Authors: November 2005 Month Year
TGp Closing Report Date: Authors: March 2006 Month Year
TGn PSMP ad hoc Agenda – September 14 ‘06
TGu-changes-from-d0-02-to-d0-03
ATSC DTV Receiver Performance Multipath Equalization
Contribution on Location Privacy
Call for OLSR Participation
TGp Closing Report Date: Authors: March 2006 Month Year
Reflector Tutorial Date: Authors: July 2006 Month Year
TGv Redline D0.07 Insert and Deletion
TGv Redline D0.06 Insert and Deletion
Experimental DTV Sensor
IEEE P Wireless RANs Date:
TGu-changes-from-d0-01-to-d0-02
LB73 Noise and Location Categories
PHY CID 3242 Date: Authors: September 2007 September 2007
IEEE White Space Radio Intended timeline
TGy draft 2.0 with changebars from draft 1.0
TGv Redline D0.10 Insert and Deletion
IEEE WG Opening Report – July 2007
WAPI Position Paper Sept 2005 Sept 2005 IEEE WG
Redline of draft P802.11w D2.2 Date: Authors:
TGr Proposed Draft Revision Notice
TGu-changes-from-d0-02-to-d0-03
[ Policies and Procedure Summary]
March Opening Report Date: Authors: March 2011
Beamforming and Link Adaptation Motions
[ Policies and Procedure Summary]
PHY CID 3242 Date: Authors: September 2007 September 2007
Beam Ad Hoc Agenda Date: Authors: March 2007 March 2007
Draft P802.11s D1.03 WordConversion
Questions to the Contention-based Protocol (CBP) Study Group
Motion to go to Letter Ballot
EC Motions – July 2005 Plenary
TGu-changes-from-d0-04-to-d0-05
TGu-changes-from-d0-03-to-d0-04
TGu Motions Date: Authors: May 2006 May 2006
PSMP Adhoc Oct TGn Adhoc
WAPI Position Paper Sept 2005 Sept 2005 IEEE WG
TGr Proposed Draft Revision Notice
TGp Motions Date: Authors: January 2006 Month Year
Presentation transcript:

doc.: IEEE /0385r0 Submission March 2006 A. Kapur, et al, Broadcom CorporationSlide 1 EVM Specification Issues for TGn Notice: This document has been prepared to assist IEEE It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein. Release: The contributor grants a free, irrevocable license to the IEEE to incorporate material contained in this contribution, and any modifications thereof, in the creation of an IEEE Standards publication; to copyright in the IEEE’s name any IEEE Standards publication even though it may include portions of this contribution; and at the IEEE’s sole discretion to permit others to reproduce in whole or in part the resulting IEEE Standards publication. The contributor also acknowledges and accepts that this contribution may be made public by IEEE Patent Policy and Procedures: The contributor is familiar with the IEEE 802 Patent Policy and Procedures, including the statement "IEEE standards may include the known use of patent(s), including patent applications, provided the IEEE receives assurance from the patent holder or applicant with respect to patents essential for compliance with both mandatory and optional portions of the standard." Early disclosure to the Working Group of patent information that might be relevant to the standard is essential to reduce the possibility for delays in the development process and increase the likelihood that the draft publication will be approved for publication. Please notify the Chair as early as possible, in written or electronic form, if patented technology (or technology under patent application) might be incorporated into a draft standard being developed within the IEEE Working Group. If you have questions, contact the IEEE Patent Committee Administrator at. Date: DD Authors:

doc.: IEEE /0385r0 Submission March 2006 A. Kapur, et al, Broadcom CorporationSlide 2 Comment on EVM Specifications At first glance, the tx EVM requirement doesn’t appear to depend on the type of impairment at the transmitter. A closer look leads to different conclusions. Three (nonlinear) tx impairments were considered: –PA IMD due to choice of PA output back-off (OBO), using RAPP model –I-Q imbalance (gain and phase) –Phase noise, varying the close-in density level in dBc/Hz We assume that the receiver is “perfect” (i.e., free from nonlinear impairment). –Clearly, this is not the case. –I-Q imbalance and phase noise will be present. EVM limits must be specified assuming the mandatory TGn configuration for the number of spatial streams, e.g. 2x2 for 2 spatial streams. –ZF, MLD, other (?) receiver types may be considered.

doc.: IEEE /0385r0 Submission March 2006 A. Kapur, et al, Broadcom CorporationSlide 3 Comments on EVM Specification Varying the tx impairments, we want to determine the EVM values at which a target FER floor or maximum sensitivity degradation is reached. –It is possible that EVM values resulting from different combinations of tx impairment levels will result in different levels of rx degradation. Since the specification does not break out EVM due to each type of tx impairment, we must “assume the worst” and select the lowest EVM number which ensures compliance with our FER floor and senstivity degradation requirements. –Some number around 0.5 to 1 dB degradation in rx sensitivity is probably o.k.

doc.: IEEE /0385r0 Submission March 2006 A. Kapur, et al, Broadcom CorporationSlide 4 EVM Test System Model PA OBO I-Q imb PN TX ZF or MLD RX {H k } ZF RX Vary channel model (ch. B, D NLOS) Record sensitivity, FER floor for each receiver type. Record EVM. Vary PA OBO, PN

doc.: IEEE /0385r0 Submission March 2006 A. Kapur, et al, Broadcom CorporationSlide 5 Tx EVM vs. Tx Impairments EVM (dB) Nominal impairments: PA OBO11.0 dB PN dBc/Hz CFO31.0 ppm I-Q imb0.1 dB / 0.9 deg. Increased impairments: Nominal + PN-97.5 dBc/Hz-31.9 PN-95.0 dBc/Hz-30.7 PN-92.5 dBc/Hz-29.1 PN-90.0 dBc/Hz-28.1 PA OBO10.0 dB-31.2 PA OBO9.0 dB-28.7 PA OBO8.5 dB-27.3 PA OBO8.25 dB-26.6 PA OBO8.0 dB-26.0

doc.: IEEE /0385r0 Submission March 2006 A. Kapur, et al, Broadcom CorporationSlide 6 ZF Rx, Effect of Different Tx Impairments on EVM, Rx Sensitivity Note that the input SNR requirements are excessively high. However, MLD, which achieves 1% FER at a reasonable input SNR is more sensitive to the tx- side nonlinear impairments.

doc.: IEEE /0385r0 Submission March 2006 A. Kapur, et al, Broadcom CorporationSlide 7 Conclusions PN close-in density of dBc/Hz results in -29 dB EVM but an unacceptable loss in rx sensitivity. It looks like -33 dB is a more reasonable EVM limit for MCS 15 if PN is the dominant source of impairment (ZF degrades 0.7dB w.r.t. ideal case). PA OBO has a large effect on tx EVM, and -31 dB EVM appears to be an acceptable limit if only PA IMD is considered (ZF degrades 0.7dB w.r.t. ideal case).

doc.: IEEE /0385r0 Submission March 2006 A. Kapur, et al, Broadcom CorporationSlide 8 Motion Motion to adopt text in document 11-06/0446r0 into the TGn draft