1. Submission Title: [Adopted Proposals from May 18,2005 TG4a AM1]
Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)
Submission Title: [Adopted Proposals from May 18,2005 TG4a AM1]
Date Submitted: [24 May, 2005]
Source: [Vern Brethour] Company [Time Domain Corp.]
Address [7057 Old Madison Pike; Suite 250; Huntsville, Alabama 35806; USA]
Voice:[(256) ], FAX: [(256) ],
Re: [ a.]
Abstract: [Classes of service, Ranging protocols and SOP targets for a]
Purpose: [To document the proposals adopted in the session.]
Notice: This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P 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 acknowledges and accepts that this contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may be made publicly available by P
Brethour, Time Domain

2. May, 2005
This is after-the-fact documentation of the adopted items in the Cairns May 18-AM1 session.
The bandwidth and document server support was so horrible in Cairns that it was not possible to post this during the meeting. The next 6 slides which follow this cover slide are exactly the slides projected on the screen at the Wednesday May 18, 2005 AM1 session. The proposals on these slides were adopted by unanimous consent. Immediately after adoption in Cairns, the original .ppt file was transferred to the laptops of the sectary and the chair by thumb drive for incorporation into the minutes. However, in the first draft of the minutes, “MS_word” mangled the incorporation of the slides. The original slides are presented here in their native “.ppt” format.
Brethour, Time Domain

3. Ranging Protocols: We want them All !!!
May, 2005
Ranging Protocols: We want them All !!!
Device A
Device B
Two equations in two unknowns yield:
* US Naval Observatory, Telstar Satellite, circa 1962
Unmatched detect-delays in the two devices may require one-time offset calibration.
Unknown propagation delay
Unknown clock offset
Message 1
Message 2
Multiple measurements of tp and to yield finer precision & accuracy, and allow frequency offset correction.
Two way Ranging
Key:
Sync Pulse
Location Pulse
TDOA backhaul
Mode 2 - Active
controller
reference node
SOI
Key:
Sync Pulse
Location Pulse
Position Report
Mode 1 - Passive
controller
reference node
SOI
One way SOI does Tx
One way SOI does Rx
Brethour, Time Domain

4. We have general consensus favoring use of a Homogenous Preamble for Acquisition and Ranging.
May, 2005
Homogeneous preamble signal
4 ms
50 meter ranging
Data (to include the time stamp of when the delimiter was at the antenna of the transmitter.
Homogeneous preamble signal
500 us
20 meter Ranging
75 meter communications
Homogeneous preamble signal
50 us
30 meter communications
Brethour, Time Domain

5. Sharing (Ranging and Communications) the same Preamble leads us to a unified notion of “Classes of Service”
May, 2005
We can express this newer construct using the “Classification based on index parameters” similar to the way Yihong Qi organized IEEE a
Brethour, Time Domain

6. 15.4a Classes of Service (Not just about Ranging anymore)
May, 2005
15.4a Classes of Service (Not just about Ranging anymore)
Long preamble
Medium preamble
Short preamble
(4ms nominal)
(500us nominal)
(50us nominal)
Ranging to 50 m
Not appropriate for communications
Ranging to 20 m
Communications to 75 meters
Not appropriate for Ranging ?
Communications to 30 meters
Ranging to
10 m
communications to 30 m
Not appropriate for Ranging
communications to 10 m
Not appropriate for communications ?
Coherent receiver
Non-Coherent receiver
Brethour, Time Domain

7. Informal discussions are leaning toward supporting 6 SOPs.
May, 2005
Overlaying the performance targets for distance and resolution, we have SOP targets.
Informal discussions are leaning toward supporting 6 SOPs.
That is achievable as 2 code isolated piconets in each of 3 frequency isolated bands.
More would be great, but this seems like a reasonable target.
Brethour, Time Domain

8. May, 2005
Remaining work:
For ranging, it’s the signaling strategy in the homogenous header.
For general UWB, it’s the bandplan together with the signaling.
Brethour, Time Domain

9. May, 2005
Summary Slide for this submission (This slide was added after the fact – not shown in Cairns)
What exactly did we decide on May 18, AM1?
a will support 3 ranging protocols (slide 3).
a will use a homogenous preamble to support both acquisition and ranging (slide 4).
a will use 3 preamble lengths. The word “nominal” was added to qualify the time lengths (slide 4).
With 3 preamble lengths and 2 receiver types, a will support 6 classes of service (slide 6).
a signaling and bandplan will support at least 6 SOPs (slide 7).
Brethour, Time Domain