1. Project hammer PC_CA_SWE_07 CA Celcom CA Project 2017-05-8
© Ericsson AB 2016

2. PC_CA_SWE_07 CA-report – DT KPI overview – 4G
Celcom CA Project
PC_CA_SWE_07 CA-report – DT KPI overview – 4G #
KPI
Cluster KPI Target
Result
PASS/
Remarks
Celcom
FAIL A
Coverage & Quality A
RSRP (Objective 95%)
95% of the sample
99.84%
Pass A
SINR (Objective >60% of samples >10dB; >95% samples >+5dB)
>=0 95% of the sample
99.58%
>=5 95% of the sample
94.25%
Fail
Refer to DT Analysis
>=10 60% of the sample
75.28% A
LTE cell overlapping (LTE1800)
No. of cells within 4dB window: >=4 <2% of area (RSRP>=-105 dbm)
1.13%
No. of cells within 4dB window: >=2 <30% of area (RSRP>=-105 dbm)
29.87%
No. of cell with 10dB window: >=7 <2% of area (RSRP>=-105 dbm)
1.66%
LTE cell overlapping (LTE2600)
0.48%
24.23%
0.11% A
Primary and Secondary Cities A
Download throughput (5Mbps where applicable as per design criteria)
95% of bins in a cluster >= 5Mbps
98.73% A
Upload throughput (250 kbps where applicable as per design criteria)
95% of bins in a cluster >= 250kbps
100.00% A
Mobility Test (PS Short Call Open mode) A
Network Accessibility Success 50km/h
>=99.5% A
Call Drop 50 km/h
<=0.6%
0.00% A
LTE -> UMTS re-selection success ratio
>=95% A
LTE <-> GSM re-selection success ratio A
Mobility Test (PS Long Call Locked to LTE) A
Download average throughput (long call locked to LTE)
95% of bins in a cluster meeting the throughput as per design A
Upload average throughput (long call locked to LTE) A
Intra-LTE Handover Failure
<= 2% A
CS Services A
CSFB call setup success rate
>=98% A
CSFB Call setup time
95% of samples <=6.5 sec for Mobile-to-Mobile calls
19.00% A
Reselection time back to LTE (after CSFB)
95% <=5 sec
43.41%
© Ericsson AB 2016

3. PC_CA_SWE_07 _DT KPI—4G DT KPI lte SINR#
KPI
Cluster KPI Target
Result
PASS/
Remarks
Celcom
FAIL A
SINR (Objective >60% of samples >10dB; >95% samples >+5dB)
>=0 95% of the sample
99.58%
Pass
>=5 95% of the sample
94.25%
Fail
Refer to DT Analysis
>=10 60% of the sample
75.28%
SINR After
SINR Before
SINR Simulation Plot
Area 2
Area 2
Area 1
Area 1
Area 3
Area 3
Summary:
3 areas are identified with bad SINR, cycled as the above. PA
Comments 1
Bad SINR due to no dominate cell 2 3

4. PC_CA_SWE_07 _DT KPI—4G DT KPI lte SINR 1/3
SINR Before
SINR Simulation Plot
Google Earth Footprint
SINR After
1020m
1130m
710m
DL Throughput
QL41015_8_1 Sector View
Area 1:
analysis:
SINR is bad due to no dominate cell in area 1.
QL10073(Height:30m)is about 1020m from PA1;QL10066(Height:64m)is about 1130m from PA1;QL41015(Height:15.2m)is about 710m from PA1.
After the action as left, SINR in this area is improved obviously.
Cell
Height
PCI MT ET
Opt ET
DIR
QL10066_8_3 64 24 9 10
310
QL10073_8_2 30 92 5 7
220

5. PC_CA_SWE_07 _DT KPI—4G DT KPI lte SINR 2/3
SINR Before
Google Earth Footprint
Google Street View
SINR Simulation Plot
670m
740m
SINR After
Area 2:
Analysis:
SINR is bad due to no dominate cell in area 2.
QL10071(Height:24m) is about 670m form Area 2;QL10067(Height:30m) is about 740m from Area 2.
Downtilts has been made as below, but no better performance showed;and this is dense forest area, coverage is also essential, so the change was rolled back.
Cell
Height
PCI MT ET
Opt ET
DIR
QL10071_8_1 24
121 3 5 60

6. PC_CA_SWE_07 _DT KPI—4G DT KPI lte SINR 3/3
SINR Before
RSRP
DL Throughput
SINR After
QL10440_8_2 Sector View
Area 3:
Analysis:
Bad SINR is due to no dominate cell in this area.
Though QL10440_8_2 point directly at the road, lots of building and forest block its signal.
DL throughput is acceptable as average bitrate>7Mbps.
After action as left, SINR in this area is improved obviously.
Cell
Height
PCI MT ET
Opt ET
DIR
QL10440_8_2 36 41 1 3
190
QL10065_8_1 30 10 2 5 6
100

7. Celcom CA Project
© Ericsson AB 2016