1. Case study on a eMBMS implementation on a real mobile network 08/10/2013 Sebastien GRIMOUD
08/10/2013
Case study on a comparison between eMBMS and DVB-T2 on a high tower high power network

2. Results and interpretation
ToC
Problem statement
Simulation framework
Evaluation metric
Results and interpretation
08/10/2013
Case study on a comparison between eMBMS and DVB-T2 on a high tower high power network

3. Problem statement
Mobile networks are sometimes foreseen for broadcasting linear TV
Mobile networks count numerous sites and are therefore expensive
But network infrastructure is already rolled-out for mobile communications
Question is therefore to know whether the mobile infrastructure is suitable for broadcasting linear TV.
The contribution focus on the air interface. It does not prejudge of the capability of the backhaul.
Several reception modes are investigated.
Suitability of mobile technologies for linear-tv broadcasting targetting different reception mode is a key question for evaluating the benefits of network convergence.
08/10/2013
Case study on a comparison between eMBMS and DVB-T2 on a high tower high power network

4. Simulation framework
1150 NBs, corresponding to some real network sites.
Restricted service area.
H-Omnidirectional 4° downtilt (set by mobile service req.), 2500W ERP.
Fixed rooftop antenna (BT419), mobile outdoor and handheld indoor reception investigated.
Propagation FD 15000km.
Cyclic Prefix is 16µs for eMBMS (max available value).
A C/I margin is applied to meet a 70% of location service area criteria.
The network is assumed to be a national SFN.
SFN interference are derived according to EBU formula.
Antenna configuration is constrained by the mobile service requirements.
08/10/2013
Case study on a comparison between eMBMS and DVB-T2 on a high tower high power network

5. Evaluation metric
Broadcast is different from unicast transmission because:
retransmission mechanisms are not available;
MCS must be the same for the whole network.
Therefore, service is lost when the SINR is below the PR threshold.
The result is given in term percentage of the population located in the service area for different PR. A higher PR means a more efficient MCS and therefore a higher throughtput.
The service area is the set of pixels in the coverage area where the probability of service is higher than 70%. (SINR above the threshold).
The coverage area are the set of pixels where the probability of reception in the presence of noise only is higher than 95%.
The SFN interference reduces the coverage area. In order to mitigate the effect of SFN interference, robust MCS must be used. However this decreases the spectral efficiency.
08/10/2013
Case study on a comparison between eMBMS and DVB-T2 on a high tower high power network

6. Results and interpretation
PR 5dB
Fixed
Mobile
Indoor (area restricted to building raster)
Coverage
99.9 99
89.29
Service area (% pop) 85 87
eMBMS does not appear to be ready for ubiquitous service, especially for rooftop and mobile reception modes.
08/10/2013
Case study on a comparison between eMBMS and DVB-T2 on a high tower high power network