1. July 2010
doc.: IEEE
July 2010
Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)
Submission Title: Proposal for TG6 Comment S9-69 Resolution
Date Submitted: 15 July, 2010
Source: Mark Dawkins, Alan Wong, Toumaz Ltd
Re: Response to IEEE Letter Ballot comments
Abstract: This document proposes a resolution for Letter Ballot 55, comment S9-69, specifically for the Narrowband PHY section.
Purpose: For discussion by IEEE TG6
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
Mark Dawkins and Alan Wong, Toumaz
Anuj Batra and Mark Dawkins, TI and Toumaz

2. Sensitivity (1) Comment(s): S9-69 Proposed Resolution: Discussion:
July 2010
Sensitivity (1)
Comment(s): S9-69
“The minimum receiver sensitivity is very strict for BAN (more tight than Zigbee and much more tight than Bluetooth LE), which could prevent low power designs. Better to define to a more relaxed sensitivity a) –76 dBm for IEEE b 11 Mb/s CCK b) –70 dBm for IEEE Std c) –75 dBm for IEEE Mb/s DQPSK d) –85 dBm for IEEE Std ”
Proposed Resolution:
Add additional margin to relax sensitivity requirements slightly
Change text in section lines to “The minimum input levels are measured at the antenna connector, where a noise figure of 13 dB, which may include losses due to external components, and an implementation loss of 6 dB have been assumed.”
Change minimum input levels (column 3) in Table 49 by increasing each value by 3dB (see next slide)
Discussion:
While we do not believe the sensitivity numbers should be made as relaxed as in the cases quoted in the comment, consideration of the terminology currently used in section (namely “The minimum input levels are measured at the antenna connector, where a noise figure of 10 dB (referenced at the antenna), an implementation loss of 6 dB, and antenna gain of 0 dBi for both the transmitter and receiver have been assumed.”) suggests that it is appropriate to include allowance for loss due to typical off chip matching/filtering components (which could be as high as 5dB).
Mark Dawkins and Alan Wong, Toumaz

3. July 2010
Sensitivity (2)
Frequency Band (MHz)
Information Data Rate (kbps)
Existing Sensitivity (dBm)
~ link margin (dB)
New sensitivity (dBm)
402 – 405
75.9
-98 16
-95
151.8 14
-92
303.6 10
-89
455.4
-86 5
-83
-93
tbd
-90
-87
187.5
-84
863 – 870
101.2
-97 27
-94
202.4 25
-91
404.8 18
607.1
-85 13
-82
902 – 928
121.4
-96
242.9 24
485.7
728.6 12
-81
950 – 956
& 17 15
971.4 7
The 10dB NF at present applies to the solution when measured at the antenna port
If a SAW filter is used, this could imply a silicon NF of 6dB
=> Relax sensitivity by 3dB
Silicon design is eased and link margin is still >0dB in all cases even in 99% fade conditions
Mark Dawkins and Alan Wong, Toumaz