1. Celcom LTE CA Project_OSS
celcom LTE FDD CA project
PC_CA_ERE_01 oss KPI justification - Appendix
© Ericsson AB 2017

2. Celcom LTE CA Project_OSS
4G OSS Justification
© Ericsson AB 2017

3. Hammer Project Celcom CA SSO Project
4G oss kpi justification #
Name
Target Value (weekly average) Neighbouring Site
Baseline KPI (12/12/ /18/2016)
Result (2017/05/ /05/31)
PASS/FAIL A
Data CSSR (%)
99.83
99.78
FAIL A
RRC Setup Success Rate (%)
99.94
99.91 A
RRC Connection Setup Success Rate (service)
99.96 A
E-RAB Call Setup Success Rate(%)
99.89
99.86 A
CSFB Setup success rate
99.67
PASS A
eRAB Drop Call Rate(%)
0.11
0.10 A
DL Packet Loss Rate(%)
0.39
0.07 A
UL Packet Loss Rate(%)
0.00
0.16 A
Intra-LTE Handover Success Rate(%)
98.40
98.95 A
Network Availability Cell Level(%)
100.00 A
IRATHO Success Rate(%)
97.62
97.91 A
VolTe CSSR(%) A
IRATHO_L2W_SR(%)
For monitoring only A
Cell DL Average Throughput (Mbps)
9.91
13.33 A
Cell UL Average Throughput (Mbps)
0.79
0.87 A
Total DL Traffic Volume (GBytes) A
Total UL Traffic Volume (GBytes)
901.22 A
Avg DL User THP (Mbps)
10.81
14.07 A
Avg UL User THP (Mbps)
0.61
0.75 A
Max & Average No. of user number for RRC and ERAB
No of RRC Average:15.06; No of RRC Max:13.99; No of eRAB Average:16; No of eRAB Max:11.31
No of RRC Average:16.48; No of RRC Max:15.12; No of eRAB Average:17; No of eRAB Max:13.47 A
Avg UL Interference(dBm) A
Voice Traffic (LTE+3G+2G)
>Lower A
Data Traffic (LTE+3G+2G)
>Higher A
Resource Block Utilization
UTIL_PRB_DL:13.3; UTIL_PRB_UL:5.56
UTIL_PRB_DL:14.02; UTIL_PRB_UL:5.42 A
CA capabale users
N/A A
No of CA users A
CA user Ratio
© Ericsson AB 2017

4. Hammer Project Celcom CA SSO Project
Data CSSR & RRC & RRC SERVICE & ERAB SSR
Analysis:
The CSSR for Data, RRC, RRC Service and ERAB call setup success rate of the neighbor sites are 99.78%, 99.91%, 99.94%, 99.86% which has a slight degradation compare with the baseline 99.83%, 99.94%, 99.96%, 99.89%.
The degradation is mainly cause by the adjusting of qrxlevmin (from -120 to -124) which aiming to keep more users on 4G, the subscribers at the cell edge will stick to LTE with low poor RF condition while the 4G total volume increased as a result, it’s an exceptional decrease just as below summary in mail.
Baseline
Result
qrxlevmin
© Ericsson AB 2017

5. Hammer Project Celcom CA SSO Project
UL Packet Loss Rate
Analysis:
The UL Packet Loss Rate for the neighbor site is 0.16% which is a litter worse than baseline(0%).
UL Packet Loss Rate increase since feature TCPO activated. Feature TCPO will impact on counter pmpdcpPktLostUI shows in Alex. The TCP Optimization feature is useful to provide a low queuing delay, while maintaining high link utilization and thereby improving the perceived end-user performance in terms of system responsiveness without sacrificing throughput. The feature is also capable of maintaining a more stable cell throughput under load, and will benefit the DL packet loss as below;
UL Package Loss Rate=100*[pmpdcpPktLostUI/(pmpdcpPktLostUI+pmpdcpPktReceivedUI)]
Feature TCPO Activated
Result
Baseline
© Ericsson AB 2017

6. Hammer Project Celcom CA SSO Project
Voice Traffic (LTE+3G+2G)
Analysis:
The Voice Traffic (LTE+3G+2G) is for the neighbor sites which is lower than baseline
More users might use voice call on Apps like WhatsApp, WeChat, Line instead of traditional voice call on cellphone. And we can see that data traffic increased a lot through below picture.
Baseline
Result
© Ericsson AB 2017

7. Celcom LTE CA Project_OSS
3G OSS Justification
© Ericsson AB 2017

8. 3G oss kpi justification#
Description
Target Value
Technology
Baseline KPI
Result
PASS/FAIL
comments 3G to to A
Cell Availability
Maintain/Improved
98.47
99.99
Pass A
CSSR_AMR
99.83
99.84 A
CSSR_PS A
AMR Call Drop Ratio
0.21
0.12 A
PS Service Drop Ratio
0.37
0.42
Fail A
SHO Success Rate (AMR Service)
99.96
99.97 A
SHO Success Rate (PS Service)
99.93
99.95 A
HS-DSCH Service Cell Change Success Rate A
HSDPA RAB Setup Success Rate
99.33
99.27 A
HSUPA RAB Setup Success Rate
99.92 A
HSDPA Retainability
0.38 A
HSUPA Retainability
0.36 A
CS Inter-RAT Handover Success Ratio
99.88 A
CS Inter-Frequency HHO Success Rate
99.13
98.25 A
PS Inter-Frequency HHO Success Rate
98.18
97.62 A
RTWP A
PRACH propagation delay(KM)
0.56 A
CS Traffic(Erl) A
CS RAB attempt
PS RAB attempt A
PS traffic(MB)

9. Hammer Project KV020 S-KPI CBO
3g OSS JUSTIFICATION – ps dcr
Baseline
Result
The weekly PS DCR was 0.42% while the baseline was 0.37%.
The recently degradation was mainly due to EA40003 transmission quality degradation, for the detail please find the attach as reference.
© Ericsson AB 2016

10. 3g OSS JUSTIFICATION – PS DCR
As shown, the EA40003 with transmission quality issue from Apr 5, issue had reported to eportal, which need to check the transmission quality.
This site was located at urban area, will affect the user experience badly.

11. 3g OSS JUSTIFICATION – hs rab sr
Baseline
Result
The weekly HS RAB SR was 99.27% while the baseline was 99.33%.
Based on the trending, we can see the HS RAB SR was generally maintained at the same level compare with baseline.

12. 3g OSS JUSTIFICATION – hs rab sr
UCell Id
09.HS RAB SR(%)
10.EUL RAB SR(%)
EA40517_4_2
EW10037_2_3
EW10004_1_2
EW10003_3_2
EW10005_3_1
As checked the worst 5 cells, the failure was mainly due to the “FailAfterAdm”, which normally suspect due to transmission quality issues, and no resource congestion observed.

13. 3g OSS JUSTIFICATION – cs ifho sr
Baseline
Result
The IFHO SR was generally maintained at the same level compare with baseline until Apr 10.
Worst relation analysis given at the following slides.

14. 3g OSS JUSTIFICATION – ps ifho sr
Baseline
Result
The IFHO SR was generally maintained at the same level compare with baseline until Apr 10.
Worst relation analysis given at the following slides.

15. 3g OSS JUSTIFICATION – cs ifho sr
UtranCell
UtranRelation
IFHO Failures_CS
IFHO SR_CS(%)
EW10004_3_2
EW10004_2_2 19
74.67
EW10517_1_2
EW10517_2_2 12
95.56
EW10003_3_1
EW10003_1_1 10
EW10002_1_1
EW10002_2_1 7
94.31
The daily IFHO failure times was very few, and NB relation was defined properly.
The CS IFHO SR was fluctuation due to less samples.

16. 3g OSS JUSTIFICATION – ps ifho sr
UtranCell
UtranRelation
IFHO SR_PS(%)
IFHO Failures_PS
EW10041_3_3
EW10041_1_1
34.04 31
EA40005_4_1
EW10005_2_1
89.86 28
EW10002_1_2
EA40005_4_3
79.39 27
EW10004_3_2
EW10004_2_2
75.00
The daily IFHO failure times was very few, and NB relation was defined properly.
The PS IFHO SR was fluctuation due to less samples.

17. Celcom LTE CA Project_OSS
2G OSS Justification
© Ericsson AB 2017

18. 2G OSS Justification Refer to OSS Analysis # Description Target Value
Technology
Baseline KPI (12/12/2016~12/18/2016)
Result(5/4/2017-5/10/2017)
PASS/FAIL
comments 2G A
Cell Availability
Maintain/Improved
99.97
100.00
PASS A
CSSR_Voice
99.72
99.73 A
DCR_Voice
0.24
0.22 A
PS_Drop
1.00 A
Timing Advance A
CS Traffic
Fail
Refer to OSS Analysis A
TCH attempt
519691
385520 A
PS traffic(GB)
238.67
205.94

19. 2G OSS Justification-Cs traffic
baseline
result
Performance analysis:
It shows 2G+3G CS traffic increased except weekend;
2G CS traffic and TCH attempts decreased due to voice traffic shifted to 3G;

20. 2G OSS Justification-ps traffic
baseline
result
Performance analysis:
2G PS traffic decrease 32.8GB and 3G+4G PS traffic increase GB a week compared with baseline.
2G PS traffic decreased due to PS traffic shifted to 3G/4G;
It shows 2G+3G+4G PS traffic increased after CA on air;

21. Celcom LTE CA Project_OSS
© Ericsson AB 2017