You are on page 1of 14

International Journal of Wireless Information Networks manuscript No.

(will be inserted by the editor)


IEEE 802.15.6 DPSK ImpulseRadio UltraWideband
Physical Layer: Receiver Architectures and
Interference Performance
Igor Dotlic Ryu Miura
Received: date / Accepted: date
Abstract The paper analyses performances of the two lowest data rates of Impulse
Radio UltraWideband DPSK physical layer of recently published IEEE 802.15.6
Body Area Networks standard. Two receiver architectures suitable for the recep-
tion of symbols with signal structure described in specication of this physical
layer, namely dutycycled sampling receiver and chirp receiver, are introduced.
Then, performance of these receiver architectures are analyzed through probabili-
ties of error in dierent phases of packet reception. Analysis has been performed in
the presence of dierent types of interference; namely Frequency Modulated Ultra
Wideband, WiMax and other colocated IEEE 802.15.6 ImpulseRadio Ultra
Wideband devices.
Keywords IEEE 802.15.6 Body Area Network (BAN) UltraWideband
(UWB) Interference.
1 Introduction
Body Area Network (BAN) is an emerging technology of wireless communication
between sensors located on and in the human body. More precisely, there are
two kinds of BAN. First is onbody BAN, which is comprised of communication
between onbody sensor nodes and onbody data hub and between onbody and
obody data hubs. Second kind of BAN, which will not be considered here, is
the inbody BAN which is comprised of wireless communication between sensor
nodes located inside the human body and an obody data hub. Applications of
the inbody BAN are exclusively medical. On the other hand, applications of the
onbody BAN can be categorized as medical or nonmedical. Dedicated Medical
Implant Communication System (MICS) band is regulated for the inbody BAN.
I. Dotlic & R. Miura
Dependable Wireless Laboratory, Wireless Network Research Institute,
National Institute of Information and Communications Technology
3-4, Hikarino-oka, Yokosuka, 239-0847, Japan
E-mail: {dotlic, ryu}@nict.go.jp
2 Igor Dotlic, Ryu Miura
In comparison, there is no regulatory decision on a dedicated frequency band for
the onbody BAN anywhere in the world [9]. With this motivation, currently
there is an initiative with US Federal Communication Commission (FCC) to allow
usage of Aeronautical Mobile Telemetry (AMT) spectrum for onbody medical
BAN [7]. Nonetheless, usage of this band, when adopted by FCC, will be limited
to onbody medical BAN inside USA. General medical onbody BAN as well
as nonmedical onbody BAN will still have to use unlicensed bands; namely,
IndustrialScienticMedical (ISM) bands and UltraWideband (UWB) band [9].
Standardization eorts in the IEEE 802.15.6 group for BAN [1] resulted in the
standard [8] that describes Physical Layers (PHYs) for both ISM and UWB bands
along with MICS band and Human Body Communications (HBC) BAN speci-
cations. ISM bands are already used by several personal wireless systems. Thus,
UWB represents an attractive alternative. High processing gain of the low data
rate UWB systems hold a promise of their high interferenceresilience. The list of
UWB PHYs included in the IEEE 802.15.6 standard [8] is as follows; Frequency
Modulated UWB (FMUWB), OnO Keying (OOK) Impulse Radio UWB (IR
UWB) PHY and Dierential Phase Modulation (DPSK) IRUWB PHY.
In order to protect foremostly medical applications, categorized as high Qual-
ity of Service (QoS) applications, against interference from other radios in the
unlicensed UWB band, the IEEE 802.15.6 standard mandates usage of DPSK
IRUWB PHY for these applications. The rationale for this decision is the fact
that, in its foreseen architecture, DPSK IRUWB PHY has superior interference
resilience compared to the foreseen OOK IRUWB PHY implementation.
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the interference performance of
IEEE 802.15.6 DPSK IRUWB PHY. This will be done in the following way. First,
we will introduce transmitted waveform types described in the standard in Sec. 2.
After that, in Sec. 3, the IEEE 802.15.6 DPSK IRUWB PHY packet structure will
be described. In Sec. 4 receiver architectures suitable for the waveform types and
the packet structure described in previous sections are introduced; namely, duty
cycled sampling receiver and chirp receiver. The main contribution of the paper
is given in the Sec. 5 where interference performance study of this PHY is carried
out. We will investigate how much interference can this PHY withstand from other
colocated IEEE 802.15.6 UWB devices like IEEE 802.15.6 FMUWB devices and
other IEEE 802.15.6 DPSK IRUWB devices. Moreover, the investigation is made
of interference impact of licensed narrowband WiMax systems [12] which now
operate in the lower part of the UWB band regulated by the FCC. We end our
discussion with conclusions in Sec. 6.
2 Waveform types employed
2.1 General description
As Fig. 1 shows, signaling scheme used by the IEEE 802.15.6 IRUWB standard
comprises of a single uninterrupted package of energy per symbol. This is quite
dierent from a classic IRUWB signaling scheme also shown in Fig. 1, [11]; while
classic IRUWB transceiver has several ono cycles per symbol, IEEE 802.15.6
IRUWB [8], similarly to IEEE 802.15.4a [6] has only one. This technique of
Interference performance of IEEE 802.15.6 IRUWB UWB PHY 3
t
t
T
sym
T
w
Turning on time Turning o time
Fig. 1 IRUWB signalling strategies. Classic IRUWB signalling with several chips per sym-
bol (upper). IEEE 802.15.6 signalling using a single, uninterrupted waveform as symbol (lower).
transceiver dutycycling, i.e. turning transceiver on and o, improves power sav-
ings more than the classic IRUWB signaling scheme. The reason for this is that
in IEEE 802.15.6, in contrast with the classic IRUWB, transient power consump-
tion is made only in a single pair of transient periods for each symbol, as shown
in Fig. 1.
Four types of transmitted waveforms are included in the standard for both
IEEE 802.15.6 IRUWB PHYs [8]: chirp pulse, chaotic pulse, shortpulse burst
with static scrambling and shortpulse burst with dynamic scrambling. Neverthe-
less, for IEEE 802.15.6 DPSK PHY shortpulse burst with dynamic scrambling as
well as chaotic pulse are not used; their dynamic nature, i.e. property that they
change from symbol to symbol, would considerably increase complexity of both
synchronization and data detection. For this reason, we will limit our discussion
here to the two remaining transmitted waveform types that are indeed used in
IEEE 802.15.6 DPSK PHY: the shortpulse burst with static scrambling and the
chirp pulse. Both of these waveforms are static in nature, i.e. they remain the same
for all symbols in a packet, which considerably simplies detection of modulated
symbols.
What is common for both the shortpulse burst with static scrambling and the
chirp pulse is that duration of the transmitted waveform is not a function of its
type. Regardless of a data rate employed duration of the transmitted waveform
(T
w
) is related to the symbol period (T
sym
) used through the constant duty cycle
(DC) as
T
w
= DC T
sym
, (1)
for both the chirp pulse and the shortpulse burst. The usage of constant DC
provides a constant ratio of pulse radiated power to average Eective Isotropic
Radiated Power (EIRP) for all values of T
sym
, i.e. all data rates. In this way,
constant pulse power, convenient for the transmitter implementation, results in a
constant EIRP. On the other side, EIRP is bounded by regulatory and standard
spectral masks through the power spectrum of the waveform used.
Similar to IEEE 802.15.6 IRUWB OOK PHY, DC of 3.1 % (1/32) is used for
all parts of the packet transmitted at all data rates in the IEEE 802.15.6 DPSK IR
UWB PHY. This value of duty cycle is adopted since with peak-to-peak voltage of
600 mV (which is possilbe to implement at power supply voltages under 1 V) and
antenna with the standard impedance of 50 it produces EIRP of approximately
-15 dBm, which, for both types of the transmitted waveform used, ts well under
the spectral mask specied in the standard [8].
4 Igor Dotlic, Ryu Miura
2.2 Linear chirp pulse
First transmitted waveform considered is a linear chirp pulse of carrier frequency
f
0
, duration T
w
and frequency sweep f
c
; it has a complex envelope expressed as
c
w
(t) = exp
_
j2
_
f
0
t +
K
c
2
t
2
__
(t, T
w
/2, T
w
/2). (2)
Here, function (t, t
1
, t
2
) is a windowing function with limits t
1
and t
2
, while K
c
is a chirping slope dened as
K
c
=
f
c
T
w
. (3)
f
c
= 520 MHz that we will use here is the value dened in the standard for all
values of T
w
used.
2.3 Shortpulse burst with static scrambling
The second transmitted waveform considered is a shortpulse burst with static
scrambling; it was inherited from IEEE 802.15.4a standard [6]. Complex envelope
of the shortpulse burst with static scrambling can be expressed as
b
w
(t) =
B1

i=0
(1)
b
i
p(t iT
p
) exp(j2f
0
t), (4)
where p(t) is the IEEE 802.15.4a mandatory rootraisedcosine pulse waveform [6],
with duration T
p
= 2 ns; b
i
{0, 1}, i = 0, . . . , B 1 is a binary scrambling
sequence of the burst. In the case of burst with static scrambling, that we will use
here, the scrambling sequence b
i
is static, i.e. b
i
does not change from symbol to
symbol. In contrast, shortpulse burst with dynamic scrambling corresponds with
sequence b
i
that changes for every symbol. From (4) it is clear that duration of
the burst waveform is T
w
= BT
p
.
3 Packet structure
3.1 Components of the packet
Overall IEEE 802.15.6 packet structure is shown in Fig. 2. Packet consists of
Synchronization Header (SHR) followed by Physical Layer Header (PHR) and
Physical layer Service Data Unit (PSDU), also known as payload. The purpose of
SHR is synchronization and the purpose of PHR is to inform the receiver of several
parameters of the following PSDU transmission. PHR is always transmitted at the
mandatory data rate which is also lowest data rate described in the standard. On
the other hand, PSDU is transmitted at a data rate specied in the PHR.
Interference performance of IEEE 802.15.6 IRUWB UWB PHY 5
SHR PHR PSDU
Fig. 2 IEEE 802.15.6 DPSK IRUWB PHY packet structure.
3.2 SHR structure
Since at the beginning of a packet transmitter can use either shortpulse burst
or chirp waveform, when starting a synchronization, the receiver does not have
information of the type of SHR waveform transmitted, but only knows its duration
T
SHR
w
and time between consecutive waveforms (L 1)T
SHR
w
, where L =
1/DC = 32. The structure of SHR z
SHR
(t) has a form
z
SHR
(t) =
K

k=0
a
k
w
SHR
_
t kLT
SHR
w
_
, (5)
where K is the total length of SHR. Since dierential encoding is used, the total
number of SHR chips is K +1. w
SHR
(t) is SHR waveform, either of the form (2)
or (4), i.e. either chirp pulse or shortpulse burst, and a
k
are DBPSKencoded
chips
a
k+1
= a
k
b
k
, for 0 k < K 1, (6)
with a
0
being the reference DBPSK symbol of arbitrary phase, i.e.: a
0
= e
j
,
[0, 2). b = [b
k
]
K1
k=0
represents a columnvector of bipolar SHR sequences
b = [C
PA
; C
PA
; . . . ; C
PA
. .
M
PA
; C
SFD
]. (7)
b (7) consists of M
PA
times repetition of a preamble sequence C
PA
after which
there is one instance of a SFD sequence C
SFD
.
In the IEEE 802.15.6 standard T
SHR
w
is set to be 8 ns, while C
PA
is decided to
be one of 8 small Kasami set sequences of length 63. This set is divided in 2 subsets
of 4 sequences for channels with odd and even indexes respectively. Number of
sequence repetitions is M
PA
= 4. Based on our proposal, C
SFD
has been decided
to be the inversion of C
PA
sequence, i.e. C
SFD
= C
PA
. As we have shown in [4],
this choice of C
SFD
is optimal under assumption dim{C
SFD
} = dim{C
PA
}.
3.3 PHR and PSDU structure
Transmitted PHR and PSDU symbols are phase modulated waveforms of the
form (2) or (4). Waveform used is denoted w
PL
(t). The transmitter uses time
hopping which helps reduce MultiBAN Interference (MBI) in the multiBAN
environments and distribute it evenly among colocated BANs. Waveform of kth
transmitted phase-modulated symbol can be expressed as
z
k
PL
(t) = exp (j
k
) w
PL
(t l(k)T
h
kT
sym
) for 0 < k < P 1. (8)
Here, P is the number of encoded symbols in the packet and l(k) is a time-hopping
sequence with values
l(k) {0, . . . , T
sym
/T
h
1} (9)
6 Igor Dotlic, Ryu Miura
and following property
T
sym
+ (l(k) l(k 1)) T
h
T
g
, (10)
while T
g
is the guard interval employed to reduce Inter-Symbol Interference (ISI)
in the system [8]. Transmitted symbols are dierentially encoded

k+1
= (
k
+
k
) mod 2 for 0 < k < P 1. (11)
Here,
k
is the information-carrying phase of each symbol. In this work we will
consider DBPSK where
k
{0, }, although for higher data rates the standard [8]
also uses Grayencoded DQPSK where
k
{0,

/2, ,
3
/2}. The phase of the
rst symbol transmitted
0
is completely arbitrary, i.e.
0
[0, 2}, since its
only purpose is to be a reference symbol for dierential detection of the rst
informational symbol.
The mandatory lowest raw data rate of IEEE 802.15.6 DPSK IRUWB PHYs,
that will be considered here and that is always used for the PHR is 490 kbps using
DBPSK modulation [8], yielding T
sym
= 2048 ns and T
PL
w
= DCT
sym
= 64 ns .
Second data rate that we will considered here is twice larger than the mandatory,
980 kbps which for DBPSK modulation employed yields T
sym
= 1024 ns and
T
PL
w
= DC T
sym
= 32 ns. The PSDU is BCH(63, 51) encoded, while PHR
encoding uses a shortened version of the same code.
4 Receiver architectures
In this paper we will consider performance of IEEE 802.15.6 DPSK IRUWB PHY
with two receiver architectures shown in Fig. 3: the dutycycled sampling receiver
and the chirp receiver. These receiver architectures were described in our previ-
ously published work [2,3]. In short, during PSDU detection, both the dutycycled
sampling receiver and the chirp receiver operate only at a portion of T
sym
which is
comparable or equal to T
PL
w
. In this way, both receiver architectures are ecient
in power consumption by operating at time intervals in which instantaneous power
level of the received signal is having signicant values and switching o during the
rest of T
sym
.
Performance of the sampling receiver is independent of a type of waveform
transmitted, as long as its duration T
w
is known to the receiver. Hence, the sam-
pling receiver is able to work with either of the transmitted waveform types de-
scribed in Sec. 2 without signicant change in performance. In contrast, the chirp
receiver can only receive chirp pulse. For this reason, the chirp receiver can operate
only during PSDU reception when informed in the PHR that the used transmit-
ted waveform is indeed chirp pulse. The chirp receiver also needs to operate in
the sampling receiver conguration during synchronization, SHR and PHR detec-
tion. Main property of the chirp receiver is that it compresses the received signal
in frequency by mixing it with the locally generated chirp pulse. Hence, chirp
receiver needs lower number of samples per symbol than sampling receiver, i.e.
lower digital backend complexity. However, regardless of the lower digital back
end complexity, the performance of the chirp receiver is better than that of the
sampling receiver in many scenarios studied [2, 3].
Interference performance of IEEE 802.15.6 IRUWB UWB PHY 7
h
LP
(t) ADC
90

Carrier pulse generator Detection


h
LP
(t) ADC
(a) Sampling receiver.
h
LP
(t) ADC
90

Chirp pulse generator Detection


h
LP
(t) ADC
(b) Chirp receiver.
Fig. 3 Receiver architectures used.
For PHR and PSDU reception of the IEEE 802.15.6 DPSK IRUWB PHY
described in Sec. 3 we used chirp and dutycycled sampling receivers with on time
equal to T
PL
w
. The dutycycled sampling receiver uses sampling period of T
s
= 2 ns
and thus makes 32 complex samples per symbol for T
PL
w
= 64 ns and 16 complex
samples per symbol for T
PL
w
= 32 ns. Due to lower dimension of the signal being
sampled in the chirp receiver, it uses T
s
= 4 ns for both T
PL
w
values used and and
makes 16 complex samples for T
PL
w
= 64 ns and 8 complex samples per symbol for
T
PL
w
= 32 ns. We will use an integrateanddump lter as antialiasing lowpass
lter (h
LP
(t) in Fig. 3) in both receivers for its low implementation complexity.
For detection throughout the packet (SFD, PHR and PSDU) Samplewise DPSK
(SDPSK) detection is used [2]. The synchronization method employed is one that
we have developed in [4] for the SHR specications given above. We will perform
numerical evaluations on IEEE 802.15.6 UWB channel model 3 [13] with 1000
packets of the random size between 0 and 256 octets transfered at every of 100
scenarios, giving 100000 packets transfered in total for each signal to interference
ratio or number of interfering transmitters present.
5 Numerical performance study
5.1 FMUWB interference performance
FMUWB [5] is one of UWB PHY layers described in the IEEE 802.15.6 [8]; its
primary application is very low data rate UWB BAN. For this reason, performance
8 Igor Dotlic, Ryu Miura
of the DPSK IRUWB PHY we are considering here in this type of interference
is important in the cases of possible colocated IEEE 802.15.6 DPSK IRUWB
PHY BANs and IEEE 802.15.6 FMUWB PHY BANs operating on the same IEEE
802.15.6 UWB channel. Performances of the two receiver architectures introduced
at two data rates considered in the presence of FMUWB interference operating
on the same UWB channel located at f
0
= 8 GHz are shown in Fig. 4.
During the synchronization both receivers perform similarly, regardless of a
data rate. However, in PHR and PSDU detection the sampling receiver shows
considerably better performance. Nevertheless, both receiver architectures are able
to operate in the presence of very strong FMUWB interference, at least 10 dB
stronger than useful signal, with packet error rate under 1%.
5.2 WiMax interference performance
WiMax is the licensed system for last mile wireless broadband access based upon
IEEE 802.16 standard [12]. At present, WiMax operates in the lower part of the
FCC UWB band and WiMax modems are currently being installed in devices that
are very likely to be colocated with IEEE 802.15.6 BANs, e.g. mobile phones
and laptop computers. Hence, it is important for the IEEE 802.15.6 IRUWB
DPSK PHY considered to be resistant to this type of interference. We carried out
performance study of the IEEE 802.15.6 IRUWB DPSK PHY in the presence
of the WiMax interference. WiMax interference has the same carrier frequency
as the IEEE 802.15.6 IRUWB DPSK PHY of f
0
= 4 GHz. In this performance
study minimal and maximal bandwidths of the WiMax systems of 1.25 MHz and
20 MHz respectively are used. Results of this performance study are show in Fig.
5. Both receiver architectures considered perform worse under WiMax than under
FMUWB interference. Performance of the sampling receiver proved to be almost
independent of WiMax interference bandwidth. In contrast, performance of the
chirp receiver is better when interference bandwidth is lower.
5.3 MultiBAN interference performance
In order to evaluate the performance of the receiver architectures considered in
multiBAN environments, we simulated packet trac with Poisson arrivals having
a rate of = 150
packs
/s and minimum time between packets of 0.1 ms; the packet
size is random between 0 and 256 octets; this yields average throughput of 154
kbps if there is no packet loss. As can be seen in Fig. 6, each BAN transmits in
roughly 35 % of time when using the mandatory data rate. We simulated two
aforementioned data rates at two dierent power levels of interfering BANs at the
receiver: 1st in which interfering BANs are having the same received power level
as the BAN the receiver belongs to (NearFar=0 dB) and 2nd in which the level of
power received from interfering BANs is 10 dB higher than the power of the BAN
that the receiver belongs to (NearFar=10 dB). This can be regarded as realistic,
since the levels of interference in multiBAN scenarios relative to the levels of
signals of interest can be high due to shadowing of the BANs own node of interest
and line of sight propagation from nodes belonging to interfering BANs [10]. In
Interference performance of IEEE 802.15.6 IRUWB UWB PHY 9
20 18 16 14 12 10 8
10
5
10
4
10
3
10
2
10
1
10
0
Signal to interference ratio (dB)
P
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
o
f
p
a
c
k
e
t
l
o
s
s
w
i
t
h
d
i

e
r
e
n
t
c
a
u
s
e
s
(a) Mandatory raw data rate of 490 kbps.
20 18 16 14 12 10 8
10
5
10
4
10
3
10
2
10
1
10
0
Signal to interference ratio (dB)
P
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
o
f
p
a
c
k
e
t
l
o
s
s
w
i
t
h
d
i

e
r
e
n
t
c
a
u
s
e
s
(b) Raw data rate of 980 kbps, twice larger than mandatory.
Fig. 4 Performance of two receiver architectures introduced under FMUWB interference.
Legend: Sync. fail Sampling ( ), SFD misdetection Sampling ( ), PHR+PSDU
misdetection Sampling ( ), Sync. fail Chirp ( ), SFD misdetection Chirp ( ),
PHR+PSDU misdetection Chirp ( ).
the environment simulated interfering BANs randomly choose between chirp pulse
and shortpulse burst as transmitted waveforms.
Results shown in Figs. 7 and 8 imply higher multiBAN interference resilience
of the chirp receiver compared to the sampling receiver at both data rates consid-
ered. This is especially true for the NearFar=0 dB (Figs. 7(a) and 8(a)), while for
10 Igor Dotlic, Ryu Miura
20 18 16 14 12 10 8
10
5
10
4
10
3
10
2
10
1
10
0
Signal to interference ratio (dB)
P
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
o
f
p
a
c
k
e
t
l
o
s
s
w
i
t
h
d
i

e
r
e
n
t
c
a
u
s
e
s
(a) 1.25 MHz bandwidth.
20 18 16 14 12 10 8
10
5
10
4
10
3
10
2
10
1
10
0
Signal to interference ratio (dB)
P
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
o
f
p
a
c
k
e
t
l
o
s
s
w
i
t
h
d
i

e
r
e
n
t
c
a
u
s
e
s
(b) 20 MHz bandwidth.
Fig. 5 Performance of two receiver architectures introduced under WiMax interference at
mandatory (lowest) raw data rate of 490 kbps. Legend: Sync. fail Sampling ( ), SFD
misdetection Sampling ( ), PHR+PSDU misdetection Sampling ( ), Sync. fail
Chirp ( ), SFD misdetection Chirp ( ), PHR+PSDU misdetection Chirp ( ).
the NearFar=10 dB (Figs. 7(b) and 8(b)) the performance dierence is consider-
ably smaller. At the mandatory data rate and at NearFar=0 dB the packet error
rate with the chirp receiver can be kept under 1 % for over 10 colocated BANs.
This property of high multiBAN interference resilience of the chirp receiver could
Interference performance of IEEE 802.15.6 IRUWB UWB PHY 11
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
B
A
N
N
o
.
2
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
B
A
N
N
o
.
3
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
Time (s)
B
A
N
N
o
.
1
Fig. 6 Simulated trac for 3 BANs with arrival rate = 150
packs
/s and minimum time
between packets of 0.1 ms at the mandatory data rate. Shaded areas represent periods when
packets are transmitted. Each subplot represents a single trac realization for a BAN with
No. given on the y axis.
be quite important in hospitals where scenarios with many colocated BANs are
likely.
6 Conclusions
Interferencerobust performance of the 802.15.6 IRUWB DPSK standard is es-
sential for its success, especially in medical BAN applications. UWB band is unli-
censed and scenarios with several colocated UWB transmitters of a dierent kind
operating on the same channel are possible. Indeed, there is a need for a IEEE
802.15.6 IRUWB DPSK receiver design to exploit the high processing gain of the
low data rate IRUWB communication schemes employed in order to make the
receiver performance interferencerobust and thus suitable for applications that
require high QoS, like medical BAN. In this work we examined the performance
of the two lowest data rate modes of this PHY using two dierent receiver archi-
tectures suitable for the standardcompliant transceivers: dutycycled sampling
receiver and chirp receiver. In numerical tests performed the chirp receiver has
shown considerably better performance in multiBAN environments compared to
the sampling receiver. On the other side, the sampling receiver has shown better
performance under IEEE 802.15.6 FMUWB and WiMax types of interference.
12 Igor Dotlic, Ryu Miura
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
10
5
10
4
10
3
10
2
10
1
10
0
Number of interfering BANs
P
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
o
f
p
a
c
k
e
t
l
o
s
s
w
i
t
h
d
i

e
r
e
n
t
c
a
u
s
e
s
(a) NearFar=0 dB.
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
10
5
10
4
10
3
10
2
10
1
10
0
Number of interfering BANs
P
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
o
f
p
a
c
k
e
t
l
o
s
s
w
i
t
h
d
i

e
r
e
n
t
c
a
u
s
e
s
(b) NearFar=10 dB.
Fig. 7 MultiBAN performance comparison of chirp and sampling receivers at mandatory
(lowest) raw data rate of 490 kbps. Legend: Sync. fail Sampling ( ), SFD misdetection
Sampling ( ), PHR+PSDU misdetection Sampling ( ), Sync. fail Chirp ( ),
SFD misdetection Chirp ( ), PHR+PSDU misdetection Chirp ( ).
Nevertheless, both receiver architectures are able to sustain relatively high levels
of all types of interference considered.
Interference performance of IEEE 802.15.6 IRUWB UWB PHY 13
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
10
5
10
4
10
3
10
2
10
1
10
0
Number of interfering BANs
P
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
o
f
p
a
c
k
e
t
l
o
s
s
w
i
t
h
d
i

e
r
e
n
t
c
a
u
s
e
s
(a) NearFar=0 dB.
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
10
5
10
4
10
3
10
2
10
1
10
0
Number of interfering BANs
P
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
o
f
p
a
c
k
e
t
l
o
s
s
w
i
t
h
d
i

e
r
e
n
t
c
a
u
s
e
s
(b) NearFar=10 dB.
Fig. 8 MultiBAN performance comparison of chirp and sampling receivers at raw data rate
of 980 kbps. Legend: Sync. fail Sampling ( ), SFD misdetection Sampling ( ),
PHR+PSDU misdetection Sampling ( ), Sync. fail Chirp ( ), SFD misdetection
Chirp ( ), PHR+PSDU misdetection Chirp ( ).
References
1. IEEE 802.15 WPAN task group 6 body area networks (BAN). URL http://www.ieee802.
org/15/pub/TG6.html
2. Dotlic, I., Kohno, R.: Performance analysis of Impulse Radio UltraWideband dierential
detection schemes for Body Area Networks. In: IEEE 21st International Symposium on
14 Igor Dotlic, Ryu Miura
Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications Workshops (PIMRC Workshops), pp.
72 77 (2010). DOI 10.1109/PIMRCW.2010.5670515
3. Dotlic, I., Kohno, R.: Low Complexity Chirp Pulsed Ultra-Wideband System with Near-
Optimum Multipath Performance. IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications 10(1),
208 218 (2011). DOI 10.1109/TWC.2010.111910.100246
4. Dotlic, I., Kohno, R.: Preamble Structure and Synchronization for IEEE 802.15.6 Impulse
Radio UltraWideband Physical Layer. In: 5th International Symposium on Medical In-
formation and Communication Technology, ISMICT (2011)
5. Gerrits, J.F.M., Kouwenhoven, M.H.L., van der Meer, P.R., Farserotu, J.R., Long, J.R.:
Principles and limitations of ultrawideband FM communications systems. EURASIP J.
Appl. Signal Process. 2005(1), 382396 (2005)
6. Kinney, P.W., Brethour, V., Bain, J., Houghton, P., Lampe, J., Brethour, V., Sahinoglu,
Z., Orlik, P., Lakkis, I., Hach, R., Lee, K.K., Welborn, M., Bain, J., Rolfe, B.A., Welborn,
M., Gentile, C., McLaughlin, M.: IEEE Standard for PART 15.4: Wireless MAC and PHY
Specications for Low-Rate Wireless Personal Area Networks (LR-WPANs): Amendment
1: Add Alternate PHY. URL http://standards.ieee.org/about/get/802/802.15.html
7. Krasinski, R.: FCC MBAN Rulemaking Status Update. IEEE 802.15 WPAN (IEEE
P802.15-12-0012-00-004j) (2012)
8. Lewis, D.: IEEE P802.15.6-2012 Standard for Body Area Network. IEEE 802.15 WPAN
(2012)
9. Li, H.B., Schwoerer, J., Yoon, Y., Yang, J.F.W., Sayraan, K., Miniutti, D., Lewis, D.:
IEEE 802.15.6 Regulation Subcommittee Report. IEEE 802.15 WPAN (IEEE 802.15-08-
0034-15-0006) (2010)
10. Miniutti, D., Smith, D., Hanlen, L., Zhang, A., Boulis, A., Rodda, D., Gilbert, B.: PHY
Interference Statistics and MAC Simulations. IEEE 802.15 WPAN (IEEE 802.15-09-0671-
00-0006) (2009)
11. Win, M., Scholtz, R.: Impulse radio: how it works. IEEE Communications Letters 2(2),
3638 (1998). DOI 10.1109/4234.660796
12. Yaghoobi, H.: Scalable OFDMA Physical Layer in IEEE 802.16 Wireless MAN. Intel
Technology Journal 8(3), 201212 (2004)
13. Yazdandoost, K.Y.: Channel Model for Body Area Network (BAN). IEEE 802.15 WPAN
(IEEE P802.15-08-0780-12-0006) (2010)

You might also like