Radio Channel Modeling and Simulation For A Stratospheric Platform Link

POLITECNICO DI TORINO
Corso di Laurea in Ingegneria delle Telecomunicazioni
Facolta di Ingegneria
Tesi di Laurea
Radio channel modeling and simulation for a stratospheric platform link

Relatori: Prof. Patrizia Savi Prof. Marina Mondin Ing. Fabio Dovis
Candidato: Roberto Fantini
Marzo 2001
Summary
A High Altitude Long Endurance (HALE) vehicle is a low cost stratospheric payload platform, ying at altitudes between 15 and 30 km, with a potential endurance of weeks to months. HALE platforms could play a role similar to arti cial satellites, with the major advantage of being less expensive, more adaptable and closer to ground. Thanks to its high position, a stratospheric platform can provide telecommunication services over a wide area. The radius of the cell covered by the platform can be evaluated geometrically, by supposing rectilinear propagation. In fact, the non-rectilinear propagation of the electromagnetic eld through the atmosphere can be taken into account by substituting the Earth 0 radius RE with a modi ed radius RE = RE , whose aim is to reform the local geometry of the Earth in order to transform curvilinear lines into rectilinear lines. Typically, in temperate zone = 4=3, and in this case the radius of the cell covered by the platform is about 100 km, so that the lower elevation angle at which the platform can be seen is 10 . In this thesis we have studied the propagation channel that characterizes the transmission from a stratospheric platform, and we have developed a simulation model of the channel. We have focused on describing both the average path loss at a given distance from the transmitter (large scale fading), as well as the rapid uctuation that a ects the received signal strength while moving in a small area (small scale fading). Free space attenuation, interference due to ground re ection, di raction by obstructions and rain attenuation are the basic mechanisms that a ect large scale propagation. The e ects of those mechanism when transmitting from a Ground Station (GS) or from a Platform Station (PS) to a receiver at a given ground distance has been compared. The ground distance has been
I
de ned as the distance from the receiver to the GS, or, in the case of the platform, from the point vertically below the platform to the receiver. The free space model developed by Friis enlightens the major disadvantage of the platform. Being placed at an height of 17 km, no transmission can be done from the platform with less attenuation than Afs = 118:6 dB in general, for a given ground distance, a signal transmitted from a GS has to cover a shorter path in order to be received, thus undergoing to a smaller free-space path loss. Interference due to ground presence can be estimated in a GS system using the two ray model. In this model the total received E- eld is the result of a direct line-of-sight component (ELOS ) and of a ground re ected component (Eg ). When the separation distance between the transmitter and the receiver is largely greater than their heights, ground tends to re ect like a perfect conductor, and the component Eg is equal in magnitude to ELOS , but near to be 180 out of phase, thus causing destructive interference. In the platform case ground can no longer be considered a perfect conductor. Thus, we have modi ed the two ray model, and the component Eg has been evaluated accordingly to the laws of re ection, by means of the Fresnel re ection coe cient. In this case interference due to Eg is strongly reduced and the received power falls o more slowly with distance. As a consequence for the rst eight kilometers of coverage a GS system undergoes to less attenuation because the transmitter is closer than in the PS case, but for greater ground distances the propagation conditions in the PS case are less severe and the received power is higher. Thanks to its high position, the platform should grant a direct link between the transmitter and the receiver. In that sense, a land mobile satellite (LMS) system experiment carried out in the framework of ESA's PROSAT progress showed that in rural environment, for an elevation angle between 39 and 13 , the platform should be in LOS for a percentage of time between 90% and 60%. However, in urban environment and for low elevation angles, the direct ray can be shadowed. In that case, di raction allows the radio signal to propagate up to the receiver. In a GS system path loss in urban environment can be expressed as the sum of free-space attenuation (Lfs), multiple di raction past rows of buildings (Lmd ), and di raction from one
II
building rooftop down to the receiver at street-level (Lrts). We have proved that in a PS system only one building can interfere with the signal transmission, because only one building can be inside the First Fresnel Zone, thus the total attenuation is given only by Lfs and Lrts. As a consequence the attenuation due to shadowing, whenever is present, is weaker than in a GS based system. Rain attenuation is proportional to the length of the path covered by the E- eld under the rain. Rain is generated in the rst 3 km of the atmosphere it follows that in a PS system, for ground distances greater than 3.048 km, the E- eld interacts with rain drops for a shorter path than in the GS case, thus undergoing to a lower level of attenuation. Small scale fading occurs when the received signal is the sum of di erent replicas of the same transmitted signal, that arrive to the receiver following di erent paths. Small scale fading is characterized by two functions, the power delay pro le, that describes dispersion in time of the received signal, and the Doppler spectrum, that is related to the movement of the transmitter and of the receiver and characterizes dispersion in frequency. Power delay pro les for terrestrial systems are well known, and usually have been obtained by measurements. In this work, the power delay pro le for the stratospheric channel has been estimated analytically, by modifying two models for ground based system, that were two-dimensional in nature. The models have been extended in order to be three-dimensional, so that they can take into account also the height of the platform and the fact that scatterers can be found only in a layer concentrated over the ground. Both the models yield to the same power delay pro le, and show that dispersion in time is largely lower in the PS case than in the GS case. In fact, being the elements of scattering only in a layer at ground level, the number of echoes in a PS based system is lower than in a GS based system. Moreover, the presence of a direct ray from the transmitter to the receiver makes the ratio between the power of the transmitted signal and the power of the interfering rays very high. It follows that the time support and rms delay spread of the power delay pro le are smaller in the case of the stratospheric channel than in traditional terrestrial systems. Doppler spectrum for ground system, where the transmitter is still, is given by the typical Jakes' model, while for the platform must be
III
evaluated taking into account that both the receiver and the platform move: as a consequence, dispersion in frequency is greater in the platform case. However, the reduced dispersion in time, and the presence of a direct ray that is more powerful than the interfering echoes, widely reduce the small scale fading e ects in a PS system, as pointed out by the simulation results obtained with the simulation model developed for TOPSIM.
IV
Table of contents
Summary 1 Introduction
1.1 The HALE platforms - an historical overview . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 HeliNet and HeliPlat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 Free space and 2-ray model . . . Visibility and Line Of Sight . . . Di raction . . . . . . . . . . . . . Absorption and Rain Attenuation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I
1 4
2 Large Scale Fading
10
10 22 25 33
3 Small Scale Fading and Multipath - A Theoretical Introduction 36
3.1 Multipath Channel Baseband Impulse Response . . . . . . . . 37 3.2 Power Delay Pro le and Coherence Bandwidth . . . . . . . . . 41 3.3 Doppler Spectrum and Coherence Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 4.1 Extension of the Rappaport's geometrical model to the platform case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2 Extension of Burr's channel model to the platform case . . . . 4.3 Comparison between the results obtained with Rappaport's and Burr's models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4 Doppler Spectrum for a Platform Based System . . . . . . . .
V
4 Small Scale Fading in a Platform Based System
49
50 55 68 71
TABLE OF CONTENTS
4.5 Coherence Bandwidth and Coherence Time of the Platform Channel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
5 The Simulation Program
5.1 Descriptions of Simulation Models for Di erent Mobile Radio Channels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 5.2 Description of the TOPSIM Simulation Block MUPATP . . . 85 5.3 MUPATP Block Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 5.4 Simulation Results Using the MUPATP Block . . . . . . . . . 103
77
Conclusions A The Simulation Block MUPATP B The Fortran Subroutine POWDEL Bibliography
107 109 115 119
VI
Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 The HALE platforms - an historical overview
In the recent years a great interest has arisen for the development of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles High Altitude Long Endurance (UAV-HALE) platforms. A HALE vehicle can be described as a low cost stratospheric payload platform, tailored for a wide range of applications within telecommunications and remote sensing, ying at altitudes between 15 and 30 km, with a potential endurance of weeks to months. Historically the HALE evolution can be seen as the convergence of three technology development paths for high-altitude surveillance aircraft, long endurance experimental aircraft and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Historical piloted aircraft designed for high altitude surveillance operations, such as the U-2 and its modern derivatives, have been developed with a capacity for ights at altitudes above 20 km but with an endurance of the order of hours. An experimental aircraft optimized for long endurance, the Voyager, has circumnavigated the Earth with a crew of two people. With a composite materials design, using conventional piston engines, it proved an endurance in excess of nine days at low altitude. Unmanned drones or RPV's (Remotely Piloted Vehicles) are receiving
1 { Introduction
increasing attention around the world for military applications. The research is primarily focused on the development of operational vehicles with improved performance in terms of autonomy this step is essential to make feasible the transition from RPV's to more autonomous UAV's. More recently, however, military high altitude designs are being developed for operational use. In the last decades several development programs have aimed to combine these three elds into an operational HALE system 13] 52] 43] 50]. In the late 1980's this culminated in an unmanned military technology demonstration aircraft, the Boeing Condor, that proved capacity to maintain a payload of several hundred kilograms above 20 km altitude for more than 48 hours 1]. With a limited energy supply, fuel-burning platforms are, however, by de nition limited in endurance. Several approaches to reach a longer presence in the Stratosphere have therefore been considered. Dominating in this category are solar powered solutions and supply system based on remote microwave transmission of energy from the ground. Solar powered vehicles have roots in the development of extremely low-speed and light-weight human powered aircraft, such as the Gossamer Albatross that crossed the English channel. Solar ight during day-time at low altitude and over considerably distances has been demonstrated by vehicles such as the Solar Challenger that crossed the English channel. The Icare, a German university e ort, proved that a conventional glider aircraft can be converted into a relatively robust solar powered aircraft capable of ight in less than perfect conditions at low altitudes. Solar powered long endurance aerial platform has proved to be feasible by the NASA Path nder, an experimental solar powered vehicle that has exceed 15 km altitude in a 12 hours ight. In the end, recent study produced within the NASA ERAST Program 3] has proven the viability of a solar powered aircraft for high altitude and long endurance ight using a new stratospheric platform called Centurion, that was de ned the rst \near eternal plane", and its last evolution, the Helios. Even if in the beginning HALE platforms were developed as a military
1 { Introduction
project, they seem suitable for a wide class of civilian applications, including: pollution monitoring, meteorologic measurement, real time monitoring of seismal or coastal regions and terrestrial structures, agriculture support, telecommunication services such as cellular/PCS, video-surveillance 18]. As a matter of fact they could play a role similar to arti cial satellites, with the major advantage of being less expensive, more adaptable and closer to ground moreover, HALE platform could be moved on demand in order to cover di erent regions and, in case of breakdown, they could land, be repaired and take o again. At present, in the international community, many projects of airborne platforms for telecommunication and video-surveillance services are under development. ESA/ESTEC has performed a feasibility study of HALEs, ying at height of 15-30 km, powered by means of solar cells or microwave transmission, for scienti c, video-surveillance or telecommunication applications 21]. NASA in 1993 started the Environmental Research Aircraft and Sensor Technology (ERAST) program 3] for the realization of unmanned aircrafts ying at subsonic speed, at a height of 30 km and with a 96 hour long endurance. In the eld of speci c telecommunication applications, such as digital broad-band communications, the Stratospheric Telecommunications Service from SkyStation Inc. 5] and the HALO Network (High Altitude Long Operation) project from Angel Technologies Inc. 2] are worth to be mentioned: the former plans to set up a 250 airships network, whereas the latter employs conventional manned aircrafts operating 24 hours a day over the supported metropolitan areas. In the military eld HALE UAV are experiencing a strong development (Global Hawk project by Darpa 1]), and it is expected that the development of military projects will provide the required technology, infrastructure and maturity for future civil HALE applications. In this work we will refer to the HeliPlat project, currently being developed at Politecnico di Torino and supported by the European Commission 4] 44].
1 { Introduction
1.2 HeliNet and HeliPlat

HeliPlat is an unmanned, solar powered aircraft, especially tailored for long endurance operations at altitude of 17 km, which enables a payload of 100 kg and o ers an available power for telecommunications applications of 500-800 W. The project being developed by Politecnico di Torino was funded by the European Commission within the Fifth Framework programme, and involves a network of HeliPlats named HeliNet (i.e HELIplat NETwork) that will provide several services, such as: tra c surveillance, environmental monitoring, wireless telephone and broadband communication services, integrated and interactive remote sensing services and positioning services 32] 31]. In that sense, HeliNet should be intended as a network infrastructure that can provide services integrated with other systems, such as GPS or the European EGNOS and Galileo, or replace terrestrial networks whenever they are not cost-e ective, such as in rural or impervious regions, or when they became unavailable due to natural disaster or emergency. Platforms are expected to y in the stratosphere, an environment which signi cantly di ers from the lower part of the atmosphere. In Figure 1.1 the variations with respect to the altitude of few parameters (air density,pressure, temperature) are reported 51]. It can be noted that temperature has a non-linear characteristic: in the troposphere, from ground level to about 11 km, temperature decreases with altitude, whereas in the tropopause temperature ceases to decrease. This point is usually taken as the border between troposphere and stratosphere, and is quite distinct, being in the order of a hundred of meter in altitude. Above this level, in the stratosphere, temperature slowly begin to increase. Practically all weather related phenomena that may be detrimental to ight, such as clouds and thunder storms, are limited to the troposphere, thus wind speed is the only speci c factor that could interest the platform's operations. Wind speed generally increases with altitude from ground level to about 7 to 11 km, then steadily decreases in the lower stratosphere, reaching a minimum around 16 to 21 km. This is the best height to place the platform, being the wind speed relatively modest and comparable to ground level winds.
1 { Introduction
Atmospheric Conditions 30 Temperature Air Density Pressure
25
Altitude [km]
20
15
10
0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Relative to Ground Level
Figure 1.1. Atmospheric conditions as a function of increasing altitude
Above this level wind speed resumes to increase again. Following the previous consideration an altitude of 17 km is foreseen as operating altitude for HeliPlat. From such an altitude it can theoretically cover a very large area. In fact it can be easily proved 20] that the radius of the cell covered by the platform, taking into account only geometrical considerations and supposing rectilinear propagation (see Figure 1.2), can be written as: E (1.1) R = RE 2 ; ; arcsin R R+ h cos E where RE = 6370 km is the Earth radius, h=17 km the platform altitude, and the elevation angle of the platform with respect of the user position. The non-rectilinear propagation of the electromagnetic eld through the atmosphere can be taken into account by using the modi ed radius approach, 0 thus substituting the Earth radius RE with a modi ed radius RE = RE
1 { Introduction
Platform
Edge of the cell
Figure 1.2. Geometrical model for the estimation of cell radius.
whose aim is to reform the local geometry of the Earth in order to transform curvilinear lines into rectilinear lines. The parameter depends upon the variation of the refraction index with the altitude and upon the meteorological conditions. For temperate zones it can be taken as = 4=3. In Figure 1.3 is reported the cell radius as a function of the platform altitude for di erent elevation angles. Usually, when dealing with satellite based system, 10 is the lower elevation angle taken into account in order to de ne the coverage area of the system (see 30] or 48]) in the platform case, for an altitude of 17 km, this value of the elevation angle corresponds to a coverage radius of about 100 km, that in this thesis will be used as the maximum radius of the coverage area. In the following Chapters we will present a study on the propagation conditions from a stratospheric platform: as an example, we will refer to transmissions at a center frequency of 1.2 GHz. Propagation models have traditionally focused on describing both the
1 { Introduction
Cell radius R as a function of altitude and elevation angle 1000
100 Log(R) 10
1 0 5 10 15 20 Altitude [km]
= 0 = 10 = 20 = 30 = 40 = 50 25 30
Figure 1.3. Cell radius versus platform's altitude, for various elevation angles
average path loss at a given distance from the transmitter, as well as the rapid uctuation that a ects the received signal strength while moving in a small area. A propagation model that predicts the mean signal strength for an arbitrary transmitter-receiver separation is useful in estimating the coverage area of a transmitter and is usually referred to as a large-scale propagation model. On the other hand small-scale or fading models characterize the rapid variations of the received power over very small travel distances (of a few wavelengths) or short time durations (on the order of seconds). Small scale fading occurs when the received signal is the sum of di erent replicas of the same transmitted signal, that arrive to the receiver following di erent paths.
1 { Introduction
As a result, each replica has a random phase and arrives with a di erent delay: thus their sum may vary widely as the receiver is moved of a small fraction of a wavelength. Moreover it is well known that a mobile that receives a signal while moving at a certain velocity v experiences a shift in the center frequency of the received signal. This change in frequency, known as the Doppler shift, is related to the mobile velocity v and the angle of arrival of the received wave. When the received signal is the sum of di erent contributions that followed di erent paths, each contribution comes to the receiver with an arbitrary angle of arrival, thus experiencing a di erent change in frequency. This causes the received signal level to vary widely in time. In Chapter 2 the e ects of large scale fading are taken into account: the visibility of the platform is investigated, and the e ect of re ection, di raction and scattering from rain drops are evaluated in order to compare the performance of a transmitter placed at ground level with the platform solution. In Chapter 3 the theoretical aspect of small scale fading are presented: the concepts of dispersion in time and frequency are illustrated, as well as the de nition of power delay pro le and Doppler spectrum of a fading channel. A taxonomy of the radio mobile channel is presented and the de nitions of fast/slow and at/selective fading channel are given. In Chapter 4 the small scale fading characteristic of the platform channel are described. The power delay pro le is obtained on the basis of two di erent theoretical models, presented respectively by Rappaport with Liberti 40] 41] and Burr 11], that have been modi ed in order to suit the platform based system. The Doppler spectrum has been evaluated using the theoretical results obtained by M.Pent in 35] following the model for Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellites presented in 6]. In Chapter 5 the results obtained in the previous Chapters are used in order to develop a simulation model of the stratospheric channel the model has been integrated as a block for TOPSIM, a simulation tool for the analysis and design of communication systems developed by the Telecommunication
1 { Introduction
Group of Electronic Department of Politecnico di Torino. The block is presented, together with some simulation results that allow to highlight the behaviour of the block and the characteristics of the stratospheric channel.
Chapter 2 Large Scale Fading

In this Chapter we will focus our attention on the description of the three basic mechanisms that a ect large scale propagation: ground re ection, di raction and rain attenuation. We aim at comparing the e ects of those mechanisms in the performance of a ground-level station with respect to a transceiver on-board of a stratospheric platform. In particular, the total path loss experienced when transmitting from a Ground Station (GS) or from a Platform Station (PS) to a receiver at a given ground distance d will be compared. The ground distance can be de ned as the distance from the receiver to the GS or, in the case of a platform, from the platform sub-point (i.e. the point vertically below the intended location of the platform) to the receiver, as shown in Figure 2.1. To achieve our purpose we will use some traditional large-scale propagation models and develop their extension to the platform case.
2.1 Free Space Propagation and 2-ray Propagation Model

The rst model used in this section is the classical free space model 7]. Although this model is very simple, it enlightens the major disadvantage of a platform based transmission, i.e. the increased distance from the receiver. A second more realistic model, the two-ray model 56] 38], will be used to investigate the e ects of ground re ection on the path loss. It will be shown
10
2 { Large Scale Fading

PS
Platform height - h-
GS
RX
Ground Distance -d-
Figure 2.1. Side view of a stratospheric platform operating scenario
that in the platform case, the interference caused by the presence of the ground is reduced, so that the disadvantage due to the increased distance can be overcome. Free space propagation accounts for the signal attenuation due to the spherical spreading of the wavefront excited by a point source. The free space attenuation in the signal strength received at a distance r0 from the transmitter, is given by the Friis free space Equation 7]: 4 r0 2 Afs(r0) = (2.1)
where = c=f is the wavelength, c = 3 108 m/s the speed of light and f = 1:2 GHz the carrier frequency. As already mentioned, we consider a stratospheric platform operating at an altitude of 17 km. As a consequence, in the platform case the distance between the transmitter and the receiver is always at least r0 min = 17 km.
11
In this situation no transmission can be done with less attenuation than
Afs = 118:6 dB
(2.2)
In general, for a given ground distance, a signal transmitted from a GS has to cover a shorter path in order to be received, thus undergoing to a smaller free-space path loss. In fact, for a ground distance d, the T-R separation r0 in the GS case is just r0 = d, so that 4 d 2 Afs GS (d) = (2.3)
while in the PS case is r0 = d2 + h2, being h = 17 km the platform height, so that free space attenuation is:
Afs PS (d) = 4
d2 + h2
!2
(2.4)
Figure 2.2 shows a comparison of the free-space path loss experienced when transmitting from a GS or from a PS to a receiver with ground distance d. Using this model leads to conclude that a stronger path loss is experienced in a platform based system. However the free space propagation model should be used when interference from surrounding environment can be neglected, for example in satellite, or in microwave line-of-sight transmission. Both in the GS and in the PS case, for a carrier frequency of about 1.2 GHz, the direct path is seldom the only physical means for propagation, and hence the free-space propagation model is inaccurate. In order to achieve a reasonable prediction of the large scale signal strength, the 2-ray ground re ection model may be used. This model is based on geometric optics and considers both the direct path and a ground re ected propagation path between the transmitter and the receiver.
Ground Link
In the two-ray model (see Figure 2.3), the total received E- eld (ETOT ) is the result of the direct line-of-sight component (ELOS ) and the ground re ected
12
Free Space Attenuation 130 120 110 Path Loss [dB] 100 90 80 70 60 50 0 5 10 15 20 Platform Station Ground Station 25 30 35 40
d, ground distance [km]
Figure 2.2. Free-space attenuation at a given ground distance d for a PS and for a GS.
TX ELOS d h Ei
t
RX
Er = E g i d" r
hr
Figure 2.3. Two-ray ground re ection model
13
component (Eg ). Note that in most mobile communication systems the maximum T-R separation distance is at most only a few tens of kilometers, so that Earth surface may be assumed to be at. In the free space model, if E0 is the free space E- eld (in units of V/m) at a reference distance d0 from the transmitter, then for d > d0 the E- eld is given by E (d t) = E0d0 cos !c t ; d (2.5) d c where jE (d t)j = E0 d0=d represents the envelope of the E- eld at d meters from the transmitter. In the two-ray model, two propagating waves arrive at the receiver: the direct wave that travels for a distance d0, and the re ected wave that travels for a distance d00 . Suppose that the E- eld is linearly polarized and perpendicular to the plane of incidence, so that the model is easier to handle. The E- eld due to the line-of-sight component at the receiver can be expressed as 0 0 ELOS (d0 t) = Edd0 cos !c t ; d (2.6) 0 c whereas the E- eld for the ground re ected wave, which has a propagation distance of d00, can be expressed as 00 0d Eg (d00 t) = ;? Ed00 0 cos !c t ; dc (2.7) Equation (2.7) can be easily found according to the laws of re ection 36]. In general, re ection occurs when a radio wave propagating in one medium impinges upon another medium of di erent electrical properties. If the plane wave is incident on a perfect dielectric, part of the energy is transmitted in the second medium and part of the energy is re ected back into the rst one, with no loss of energy. If the second medium is a perfect conductor, then all incident energy is re ected back into the rst medium without loss of energy. The electric eld intensity of the re ected (Eg ) and transmitted (Et ) waves can be related to the incident wave (Ei) in the medium of origin through the Fresnel re ection coe cient ;. It can be shown that (see 38]): Eg = ;Ei (2.8) Et = (1 + ;)Ei (2.9)
14
and that
i
(2.10)
being i the angle of incidence of Ei , and r the re ection angle of Eg . The re ection coe cient ; is a function of the material properties and it generally depends on the wave polarization, angle of incidence, and the frequency of the propagating wave. In particular, as reported in 38], for the perpendicular polarization ;? can be expressed as: p sin i ; p r ; cos2 i (2.11) ;? = sin i + r ; cos2 i From Equation 2.11 it can be seen that for small values of i (grazing incidence) the re ected wave is equal in magnitude and 180 out of phase with the incident wave, i.e. ground tends to re ect like a perfect conductor, having ;? = ;1 and Et = 0. It follows that the electric eld ETOT (d t), sum of the line of sight component (2.6) and of the ground re ected component (2.7), can be expressed as: 0 00 0 0d ETOT (d t) = Edd0 cos !c t ; d + (;1) Ed00 0 cos !c t ; dc 0 c (2.12) Using the method of images 36], as shown in Figure 2.4, the path difference between the line of sight and the ground re ected paths can be expressed as = d00 ; d0 = (ht + hr )2 + d2 ; (ht ; hr )2 + d2
p p
(2.13)
where ht is the height of the transmitter and hr is the height of the receiver. When the T-R separation d is very large if compared to ht + hr , Equation (2.13) can be simpli ed using a Taylor series approximation (2.14) = d00 ; d0 2ht hr d As a consequence, the phase di erence between the two E- eld components and the time delay d between the arrivals of the two components are: = 2 = 2 fc (2.15) c
15

TX ELOS h t -h r ht Eg d" hr d RX
h t +h r
Figure 2.4. The method of images used to nd the path di erence between direct path and the re ected one
= c =2 f (2.16) c It should be noted that as d becomes large, the di erence between the distances d0 and d00 becomes very small, and the amplitudes of ELOS and Eg are virtually identical, so that the two E- eld components di er only in phase. That is E0 d 0 E0 d0 E0 d0 (2.17) 0 d d d00
d
Thus, Equation (2.12) can be expressed as

00 00 0 00 0d 0 ETOT (d t) = Edd0 cos !c t ; dc + !c d ; d ; Ed00 0 cos !c t ; dc 0 c 00 E0 d0 cos ! t ; d + ; cos ! t ; d00 (2.18) c c d c c Using Equation (2.18) and referring to the phasor diagram of Figure 2.5, the amplitude of the received total E- eld at a distance d from the transmitter
16
ETOT
E0 d0 /d
-E 0d 0 /d" E0 d0 /d"
Figure 2.5. Phasor diagram showing the E- eld components of the LOS, ground-re ected, and total received E- elds derived from Equation 2.18
can be written as
jETOT (d)j =
or
E0d0 2 (cos d
2 ; 1)2 + E0d0 sin2 d

p
(2.19) (2.20)
Using trigonometric identities, Equation (2.20) can be expressed as
jETOT (d)j = E0 d0 2 ; 2 cos d jETOT (d)j = 2 E0 d0 sin 2 d
(2.21)
Note that when =2 is less than 0.3 radian sin( =2) =2, so that Equation (2.21) can be simpli ed. Using Equations (2.14) and (2.15) 2 hthr < 0:3 rad (2.22) 2 d which implies that d > 20 3hthr 20hthr (2.23) It follows that, as long as d satis es (2.23), the received E- eld can be approximated as ETOT (d) 4E0 d0d2hthr (2.24)
17
The total received power is related to the electric eld amplitude by 2 PRX = jETOT j Aeq (2.25) Z0 where Z0 = 120 ' 377 is the intrinsic impedance of free space and Aeq is the e ective aperture of the receiving antenna, which can be expressed as: being GRX the gain of the receiving antenna in the direction of the radio wave arrival. Substituting (2.24) in (2.25), remembering the (2.26) and that at a distance d0 the power ux density can be expressed as 2 Pd = PTX G2TX = jE0j (2.27) 4 d0 Z0 so that (E0 d0)2 = Z0 PTX GTX (2.28) 4 the total received power at a distance d from the transmitter can be expressed as 2 2 t (2.29) PRX (d) = PTX GTX GRX hdhr 4 At large distances the received power falls o with distance raised to the fourth power, that is a much more rapid path loss than is experienced in free space. This is due to the interference of the ground re ected ray with the direct one: at grazing incidence (; ;1), and being d0 d00 , the re ected E- eld component and the line-of-sight E- eld component have the same magnitude. However, the former is near to be 180 out of phase with the latter, so that interference is near to be destructive, thus causing a very rapid power fall-o .
Aeq = 4 GRX
(2.26)
Stratospheric Platform Link

The approximations previously made no longer hold on if the transmitter is payload of a stratospheric platform. In the following it will be shown that
18
in this case the interference due to the re ected wave is less severe, so that power falls o more slowly with distance. For a platform based communication system, the total received E- eld, supposing that the transmitted E- eld is linearly polarized and perpendicular to the plane of incidence, can still be expressed as the sum of a direct E- eld, ELOS , and a re ected one, Eg , thus obtaining:
00 d + ;? E000 0 cos !c t ; d (2.30) d c As already mentioned, the re ection coe cient ;? is a function of the angle of incidence i when i approaches zero the ground tends to act as a perfect conductor, so that ;? ' ;1. However, as it can be seen from Figure 2.4 tan i = ht + hr (2.31) d thus i 0 if the ground distance d is very large compared to ht + hr . In the platform case, being ht = 17 km, this condition cannot be satis ed. In order to evaluate ;?, it is required the knowledge of the dielectric relative permittivity r of the re ecting ground. Typical values are r = 4 for poor ground, r = 15 for typical ground and r = 25 for good ground 38].
0 ETOT (d t) = Edd0 cos !c t ; d 0 c
E0 d0 /d
E0 d0 /d"
ETOT
Figure 2.6. Phasor diagram showing the E- eld components of the LOS, ground-re ected, and total received E- elds derived from Equation 2.30
19
Equation 2.9 is no longer valid and the magnitude of ETOT is in this case:
E0 d0 + ; E0 d0 cos ! d00 ; d0 2 + ; E0 d0 sin ! d00 ; d0 2 jETOT (d)j = ? d00 c ? d00 c d0 c c (2.32) as can be easily found from the phasor diagram of Figure 2.6. Note that Equation (2.32) can be written in the form
jETOT (d)j = E0 d0 f(d)

where
(2.33)
1 + ;? cos ! d00 ; d0 2 + ;? sin ! d00 ; d0 2 (2.34) f(d) = d0 d00 c c c d00 c is a function of the ground distance d through ;?, d0 and d00. With reference to Equations (2.25), (2.26) and (2.28) the total received power is then:
jETOT j2 2 G = P G G PRX (d) = Z 4 RX TX TX RX 4 0
f(d)
(2.35)
Once that the received power as a function of the ground distance between the transmitter and the receiver has been obtained, a comparison between the path loss in a PS based and in a GS based communication system can be done. Path loss in a GS based system can be found from Equation (2.29): d4 (2.36) AGS = h2h2 t r while path loss in a PS based system can be derived from Equation (2.35): (2.37) f(d) Equation (2.37) requires to evaluate d0, d00 and ;? for each ground distances d d0 and d00 can be obtained as already done by using the method of images (see Figure 2.4 and Equation (2.13)):
APS = 4
2 1
d0 = d00 =
p p
(ht ; hr )2 + d2 (ht + hr )2 + d2
(2.38) (2.39)
20

Attenuation with the 2-ray model 160 140 120 Path Loss [dB] 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 5 10 15 20 Platform Station Ground Station 25 30 35 40
Figure 2.7. Comparison between attenuation in a GS or PS based communication system

Gain of a PS with respect to a GS 40 20 0 -20 Gain [dB] -40 -60 -80 -100 -120 -140 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 d, ground distance [km] 35 40
Figure 2.8. Gain of a PS based system with respect to a GS based system
21
In Figure 2.7 path losses as a function of ground distance d for a GS and a PS based communication system are shown, while in Figure 2.8 the gain of a PS based system with respect to a GS based one is reported. For the rst eight kilometers of coverage, a GS system undergoes to less attenuation. This is due to the fact that the transmitter is closer than in the PS case. However, for greater ground distances, the propagation conditions in the case of a stratospheric platform are less severe, and the received power from a PS is higher. We can conclude that a stratospheric platform is more suitable than a ground station to cover a wide area where no obstruction are present, like in rural environment, because the received eld undergoes to a lower attenuation. Moreover, it should be noted that in the case of the platform the received power level varies more slowly than in the case of a ground-level transceiver and this can be a major advantage for certain services that require a constant received signal strength.
2.2 Visibility and Line Of Sight

In the previous section we have supposed that a direct path between the transmitter and the receiver can be found. In general, however, this is seldom a valid assumption for a transmission system. Shadowing from hills, mountains or from high buildings generally occurs, so that no direct path exists and the performance of the communication system is decreased. Being placed to an elevated height, the PS is less vulnerable to similar obstructions, so that Line of Sight (LOS) transmission can be generally taken into account. In this section we want to investigate the probability that a direct path exists in a PS based communication system. With reference to Figure 2.1, it is intuitive that the higher is the elevation angle , the lower is the probability of nding an obstruction along the direct path. A measure of the percentage of time in which no shadowing occurs for di erent values of the elevation angle has been obtained in 1987 by means of a land mobile satellite system propagation experiment developed in Europe
22
in the framework of ESA's PROSAT (phase II) progress 8]. The experiment was carried out using a 1.5 GHz signal transmitted from the MARECS satellite, and measuring the signal received from a van traveling through Spain, France and Sweden. Data were registered in urban, suburban and rural areas. Measurements taken in Spain correspond to an elevation angle of 39 , in North France to 26 , whereas in Sweden to 13 . In the platform case those elevation angles correspond to a ground distance of respectively 21 km, 35 km and 74 km. Environment Elevation Time in LOS Time with Time with angle faded signal no signal urban 13 1% 39 % 60 % 26 50 % 30 % 20 % 39 70 % 20 % 10 % rural 13 60 % 35 % 5% 26 80 % 18 % 2% 39 90 % 9% 1%
Table 2.1. Percentage of time with a certain signal level in di erent conditions.
In Table 2.1 the results obtained from the measure campaign are summarized. The cumulative distributions of Figure 2.9 have been obtained from measurements in urban environments, and give the percentage of time in which the received signal level, normalized to the line of sight received power, was above a threshold level. In Figure 2.10 the same cumulative distributions are reported for rural environment. As it was expected, the probability of being in LOS increases with the increasing of the elevation angle and it was obviously lower in urban environment than in rural environment. However, it should be noted that for high value of the elevation angle even in urban environment it is likely to have a direct path to the transmitter. This is a major advantage with respect to a ground level transceiver, that in urban environment usually cannot provide a LOS transmission, because high buildings shadow the transmitted signal. Thanks to its higher position, a stratospheric platform can be used to cover a large urban area, having a radius of tens of kilometers, granting
23
Figure 2.9. Cumulative distribution in time of received power level in urban environments
Figure 2.10. Cumulative distribution in time of received power level in rural environments
reliable transmission even in street canyons, where users cannot be reached by traditional ground-level stations. As already mentioned in Chapter 1, the coverage radius of a platform
24
based system should not be greater than 100 km, corresponding to an elevation angle of about 10 , that is also the lower elevation angle taken into account in satellite based system (see 30] or 48]). As a consequence, measurements made in Sweden can be considered a worst case for the platform based system.
2.3 Di raction
In the previous section it was shown that for high elevation angles a direct path between the PS and the receiver can usually be found. In this section we will show that, even when a direct path does not exist, the platform high position can weaken the e ect of shadowing from obstructions, making the path loss from a PS weaker than the GS one. It is well known that even when a direct path does not exist di raction allows the radio signals to propagate up to the receiver. In urban environment, for example, high buildings usually shadow the transmitted signal, but the transmission is possible thanks to the di racted eld. As a consequence, the received eld will be attenuated, and a deterministic prediction of the received signal strength cannot be practically done. Traditionally, in order to facilitate the propagation prediction for mobile radio systems in urban and suburban environments, radio signal variation over distance is described by an inverse power law, in association with lognormal shadowing. That is, the received signal from a mobile station placed at a distance r0 from a base station is proportional to
Lurb = 10 =10=r0
(2.40)
where is a random shadowing component and is the deterministic slope index of the inverse power law. In typical land mobile radio environments, the logarithm of the shadowing component is found to be a zero mean Gaussian random variable, with a standard deviation of 8 dB. The path loss component of the received signal, on the other hand, can be expressed in
25
logarithmic scale as a linear function of r0
L(dB ) = C + 10 log r0
(2.41)
where is typically ranging from 2 to 5 and C is an intercept point generally taken as the path loss at the distance of 1 kilometer. Experimental measurements show that, beyond 1 kilometer, radio signal generally decays continuously with distance. Hence, the slope index and the intercept point C , provide a simple meaningful measure of path loss, and are used to develop empirical path loss models. The slope index and the intercept point are generally obtained by eld measurements made in typical propagation environments. However, since they are developed on the basis of in site speci c measurements, empirical models are not suitable for a di erent propagation environment like the scenario of a platform based communication system. In order to investigate the propagation characteristics in urban and suburban environments when transmitting from a PS, we will refer to an analytical model developed by H.H.Xia and H.L.Bertoni et al. (see 53], 55], 57] and 29]). This model has been veri ed by extensive measurements made in the United States 58] and Europe 28], and has been partially incorporated in the COST231 model developed under the European Cooperation in the Field of Scienti c and Technical Research (COST) program for GSM system design 12]. Since the model in its original format involves multiple dimension integration, in this study we will use the simpli ed version presented in 54]. Unlike empirical models, the analytical model derives the path loss in urban and suburban environments as a result of signal reduction due to free space wave front spreading, multiple di raction past rows of buildings, as well as building shadowing. The structure of the model makes it suitable to investigate both the transmission from a GS than from a PS system. In fact, as explained in the following, in PS transmissions only the free space attenuation and the building shadowing have to be taken into account, while usually in GS transmissions also the di raction from rows of buildings must be considered. It is well known that the e ect of an obstructing object on the received power is negligible only if the object is out of the rst Fresnel zone 36].
26
Fresnel zones represent successive regions where secondary waves, due to the di racted eld, have a path length from the transmitter to the receiver which are n =2 greater than the total path length of a line-of-sight path.
z z0 TX
r0 h
Figure 2.11. First Fresnel zone in the platform case
In the case of the platform the border of the rst Fresnel zone is an ellipse having the platform and the receiver as foci. Referring to Figure 2.11, the ellipse equation can be derived from
p
(x ; x0 )2 + z2 +
which leads to 4(x2 ; k2 )x2 + 0 + + +

p
being r0 = x2 + z0 the line-of-sight path length and k = =2 + r0. 0 2 Solving Equation (2.43) for z = h allows to nd out the position xl where an object of height h enters the rst Fresnel zone.
111 000 111 000 111 011 000 100
RX x0 x
xl
x2 + (z ; z0)2 =
+ x2 + z0 0 2
(2.42)
2 4(z0 ; k2 )z2 ; 8x0z0 xz + 2 2 8x0 z0 ; 4x0 (r0 ; k2)]x + 2 8z0 x2 ; 4z0(r0 ; k2 )]z + 0 2 2 (r0 ; k2 )2 ; 4x2 z0 = 0 0
(2.43)
27
x0 , receiver x = jxl ; x0 j position (in km) (in m) 0 6 1 7.1 5 11.5 10 17.5 20 29.5 30 42.3 40 55.3 50 69.4 Table 2.2. Minimum distance x to consider an object of height 18 meters
out of the rst Fresnel zone.
Table 2.2 reports the minimum distance needed to consider a building of height 18 meters out of the rst Fresnel zone. It can be seen that although di raction from one building may occur, in uence from a second row of buildings is negligible. In fact, a second row of building will be separated from the receiver by the rst building and by one street width, thus being at an average distance of 50 meters. As a result, accordingly to 54], the path loss in the platform case can be expressed as the sum of two contributions: one due to the free space propagation (Lfs) and the other to di raction from a building rooftop down to the street level (Lrts ). Total path loss is thus:
Lp = Lfs + Lrts
(2.44)
Both mechanisms are well understood and can be represented with the simple formulas reported below. Free space loss accounts for the signal attenuation due to spherical spreading of the wavefront excited by a point source, and is given by:
Lfs = ;10 log 4 r (2.45) 0 where is the wavelength and r0 is the T-R separation. The di raction process of the radio wave traveling from the rooftop down to the street level is represented by the di racted rays generated at the building edges. These di racted rays can be calculated by means of the
28

z
TX -HI h b-HI TX -EQ TX -LO
Figure 2.12. Geometry used for the evaluation of di raction terms in the attenuation of the received signal.
Geometrical Theory of Di raction (GTD), thus obtaining the excess path loss Lrts due to a building presence. Being hm the height di erence between the average rooftop level and the receiver, and x the horizontal distance between the receiver and the di racting edge (see Figure 2.12), Lrts is given by: " # 1; 1 2 (2.46) Lrts = ;10 log 2 2r 2 + rts where = arctan( hm= x) and rrts = ( hm )2 + ( x)2 . Usually, in a ground based system multiple screen di raction (md) due to propagation past row of building also occurs. Based on the studies by Xia and Bertoni 57], this third factor is given by Lmd = ;10 log(Q2 ) (2.47) M The factor QM can be expressed in terms of Boersma functions IM ;1 q 57], 1 p X1 p q QM = M q! (2g | ) IM ;1 q (2.48) q=0 for M di racting screens. The dimension-less parameter g is given by g = p hb (2.49) db
p
1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 11 1111 00 0000 1 11 0 00 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1111111111111 0000000000000 1 0 1 111 0 000 111111111111 1111111111111111111 11111 000000000000 0000000000000000000 00000 1 11 0 00 1 0 1 0 1111 0000 1111 0000 1111 0000 1111 0000 1 11 11 0 00 00 1 0 11 111111 11 00 000000 00 11 00 1111 0000 1111 0000 1111 1111 11 0000 0000 00 11111 00000 1 111111 11 0 000000 00 11 00 1111 0000 1111 0000 1 111111 11 0 000000 00 11 00 1111 0000 1111 0000
h b-LO rrts h m RX x db x
29
where hb is the transceiver antenna height with respect to the average rooftop level, and db is the average separation distance between the rows of buildings (see Figure 2.12). The base station antenna can be above, at, or below the average rooftop level. The Boersma functions satisfy the recursion relation,
M ;2 X 1)( p In q;1 IM ;1 q = (M ;2Mq ; 1) IM ;1 q + 2p1 M n=1 M ; 1 ; n with initial terms, IM ;1 0 = M12=3 X 1 M ;1 1 IM ;1 1 = 4p 2=3 (M ; n)2=3 n=0 n
(2.50)
(2.51)
The slope index of Equation (2.40), appearing in the distance dependence 1=r0 of the received signal in the GS case, can be calculated 55] as = 2(1 + s) where log(Q s = ; log (M M +1=QM ))] + 1)=(M (2.52) (2.53)
This slope index starts at a value greater than 4 and decreases to a value less than 4 as the base station antenna height varies from below to above the rooftops. As demonstrated in 54], a simpli ed version of the factor QM (2.48) can be found in three di erent conditions: Base station antenna near to average roof top level QM = db r0 Base station antenna above the average roof top level (2.54)
QM
2:35
hb db r0
!0:9
(2.55)
30
Base station antenna below the average rooftop level 2 1; 1 QM = 2 (rdb; d ) p 2 + ( hb)2 + d2 0 b b being = arctan( hb =db)
(2.56)
Path Loss from GSs of Different Heights 280 260 240 220 200 180 160 140 0 5 10 Platform Station Ground Station - LO Ground Station - EQ Ground Station - HI 15 20 25 30
Path Loss [dB]
Figure 2.13. Comparison between path loss due to di raction using a PS or a GS with di erent antenna's height
In Figure 2.13 path loss in a PS system is compared with path loss in a GS based system having di erent antenna's height:
hb = 0 m, GS antenna at roof level (EQ case) hb = 15 m, GS antenna above roof level (HI case) hb = ;5 m, GS antenna below roof level (LO case) while Figure 2.14 reports gains of a PS based system with respect to GS systems.
31
Gain of a PS with respect to a GS 100 80 60 Gain [dB] 40 20 0 -20 -40 0 5 10 15 20 LO EQ HI 25 30
Figure 2.14. Gain of PS system with respect to GS systems having di erent antenna's height
As already seen, while di raction from one building is equally strong in platform case or in GS case, free space path loss is generally greater when transmitting from a platform. However, when GS antenna is placed at or below rooftop level, the third factor Lmd , that accounts for propagation past row of building and that is not present in the transmission from a stratospheric platform, is so strong to overcome free space path loss, thus obtaining a greater total path loss in the GS based system. On the other hand, when GS antenna is placed above rooftop level, Lmd is less severe, so that for small ground distances GS based system still undergoes to a weaker total path-loss. However, for ground distances greater than 6 km, Lmd increases so much that total path loss becomes greater in the GS based system. We can conclude that a stratospheric platform is suitable to be used in
32
urban environment not only because it is more visible, as shown in previous section, but also because shadowing, whenever it is present, is weaker than in a GS based system.
2.4 Absorption and Rain Attenuation

Rain is one of the most important atmospheric factor that can decrease the performance of a radio communication system. In fact, an electro-magnetic eld that travels through a rain layer interacts with rain drops, so that part of the transmitted energy is scattered throughout the region of interaction. As a result the received eld is attenuated. The speci c attenuation r (dB/km) is obtained from the rain rate r (mm/h) using the power law relationship 23]:
r
= kr
(2.57)
The values of k and can be obtained from ITU-R PN 838-1 and depend on climatic zone and transmission frequency. We can observe that for high frequency rain can cause a signi cant amount of attenuation, thus preventing great ground link lengths. This e ect is reduced when transmitting from a stratospheric platform, because rain is generated in the rst 2.5 - 3 km of the atmosphere. In a GS based system rain attenuation for a T-R separation d is simply:
Arg = r d
whereas in a PS based system is
(2.58) (2.59)
Arp = r lr
being lr the length of the path in which radio waves interact with rain drops. With reference to Figure 2.15, for a ground distance d, lr can be expressed as:
d 2 lr = hrl 1 + h
where hrl is the height of the rain layer and h the height of the PS.
(2.60)
33

PS
Platform height -h-
Rain Layer - h rl -
RX
Ground Distance - d -
Figure 2.15. Side view of a PS operating scenario with a hrl high rain layer
Figure 2.16 reports the gain of a PS based system with respect to a GS system for a 3 km high rain layer, which can be easily found as the ratio of Equation (2.59) and (2.58). Note that this gain does not depend on the speci c attenuation r , and so it is not a function of frequency. As it was expected, a ground distance dc from which rain attenuation is less severe in a PS system exists. The cross-over distance dc can be easily found, being the point in which lr (dc) = dc. Remembering Equation (2.60), dc can be expressed as: dc = q hrl 2 (2.61) ;h rl 1; d Cross-over distances for typical rain layer height are reported in Table 2.3.
hrl , rain layer dc, cross-over height (in km) distance (in km) 2 2.014 3 3.048
Table 2.3. Cross-over distance from which rain attenuation is less severe for a PS than for a GS
34
Gain in Rain Attenuation of a PS w.r.t. a GS 10
Gain [dB]
-5
-10
-15 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 d, ground distance [km]
Figure 2.16. Gain in rain attenuation of a PS with respect to a GS for a 3 km high rain layer
35
Chapter 3 Small Scale Fading and Multipath - A Theoretical Introduction

Small scale fading is used to describe the rapid uctuation of the received signal strength when traveling through short distances or when considering short time interval, so that large scale path loss e ects can be neglected. Small scale fading, or simply fading, is caused by the interference of several versions of the same transmitted radio signal, that arrive to the receiver following di erent paths. These radio waves, called multipath waves, combine at the receiver giving a resultant signal which can vary widely in amplitude and phase. These variations depend on the distribution of the delays and relative power of the multipath waves, on the speed of the receiver, and on the time-frequency characteristics of the transmitted signal. The three most important small scale fading e ects are: Time dispersions (echoes) caused by multipath propagation delays Rapid uctuation on the received signal strength when traveling through short distances Random frequency modulation due to varying Doppler shifts on di erent multipath waves
36
3 { Small Scale Fading and Multipath - A Theoretical Introduction
As a result of time dispersion and frequency modulation the received signal fades. In the following it will be shown that two signal su ciently separated in frequency (time) can experience di erent attenuation levels because of time dispersion (frequency modulation). In this Chapter we will focus on the description of small scale fading as it is experienced in a typical GS based transmission. It will be shown that the properties of a fading channel can be described by two functions, the power delay pro le and the Doppler Spectrum we will show how to derive the coherence bandwidth and the coherence time from the power delay pro le and from the Doppler spectrum, and we will discuss how those parameters interfere in de ning whether a channel is at or selective in frequency, and fast or slow in time.
3.1 Multipath Channel Baseband Impulse Response

The small scale variations of a mobile radio signal can be directly related to the impulse response of the mobile radio channel. A mobile radio channel can be modeled as a linear lter with a time varying impulse response: the ltering nature of the channel is caused by the sum of amplitudes and delays of the multiple arriving waves at any instant of time, while the time variation is due to the motion of the receiver, as well as to the motion of the transmitter or of other elements in the propagation environment. As an example consider the case where time variation is due strictly to the receiver motion in space (see Figure 3.1): for a xed position d, the channel between the transmitter and the receiver can be modeled as a linear time invariant system. Note that the di erent multipath waves have propagation delays which vary over di erent spatial locations of the receiver. Thus, the impulse response of the linear time invariant channel is a function of the position of the receiver and of time: h(d t). Let x(t) represent the transmitted signal, then the received signal y(d t) at a certain position d can be expressed as a convolution of x(t)
37
Figure 3.1. A receiver experiencing di erent transmission channels while moving in space
with h(d t).
y(d t) = x(t) h(d t) =

Z t
Z 1
;1
x( )h(d t ; ) d
(3.1)
For a causal system, h(d t) = 0 for t < 0, and Equation (3.1) reduces to
y (d t ) =
If the receiver moves on the ground at a constant velocity v, the position of the receiver can be expressed as
;1
x( )h(d t ; ) d
(3.2)
d = vt
Substituting (3.3) in (3.2), we obtain
(3.3) (3.4)
y(vt t) =
Z t
;1
x( )h(vt t ; ) d
Since v is a constant, y(vt t) is just a function of t. As a consequence, Equation (3.4) can be expressed as
y(t) =
Z t
;1
x( )h(vt t ; ) d = x(t) h(vt t)
(3.5)
Therefore x(t) represents the transmitted bandpass waveform, y(t) the received waveform, and h(t ) the time variant impulse response of the radio
38
channel. The variable t represents the time variations due to motion, whereas represents the channel multipath delay for a xed value of t (see Figure 3.2). One may think of as being a vernier adjustment of time. If the multipath channel is assumed to be a band-limited bandpass channel, which is reasonable, then it may equivalently be expressed by a complex baseband impulse response hb(t ) 37], with the input and output being the complex envelope representations of the transmitted and received signals, respectively: 1 r(t) = 1 c(t) 1 h (t ) (3.6) 2 2 2 b where c(t) and r(t) are related to x(t) and y(t) through:
x(t) = Refc(t) exp(j 2 fct)g y(t) = Refr(t) exp(j 2 fct)g
(3.7) (3.8)
The lowpass characterization removes the high frequency variations caused by the carrier, making the signal analytically easier to handle. In order to nd out an expression for the channel baseband response hb (t ), it is useful to discretize the multipath delay axis into equal time delay segments usually called excess delay bins 38], where each bin has a time width of = i ; i;1 : any signal received within the ith bin is represented as a single multipath component having excess delay i . For convention, 0 = 0 is the excess time delay of the rst arriving multipath component, and neglects the propagation delay between the transmitter and the receiver, while i = i is the relative delay of the ith multipath component as compared to the rst arriving component. This technique of quantizing the delay bins determines the time delay resolution of the channel model, and the useful frequency span of the model can be shown to be 1=(2 ). Therefore, the model may be used to analyze signals having a bandwidth not greater than 1=(2 ). Since the received signal in a multipath channel is the sum of di erent echoes, each having a di erent amplitude, delay and phase, the baseband impulse response of the channel can be expressed as:
39
hb (t ) =
N ;1 X i=0
ai ( t) exp(j 2 fc i (t) + ( t)) ( ; i (t))
(3.9)
where ai ( t) and i(t) are respectively the real amplitude and excess delay of the ith multipath component. Note that some excess delay bins may have no multipath components at certain time t, since ai( t) may be zero. The phase term 2 fc i (t) + ( t) in (3.9) represents the phase shift due to free space propagation of the ith multipath component, plus any phase shift that the transmitted signal experiences along the transmission path. In general the phase term is simply represented by a single variable i( t) which lumps together all the mechanism for phase shifts of a single multipath component within the ith path.
t h(t, )
Figure 3.2. An example of the time varying impulse response model for a multipath radio channel
In the following section it will be shown that the channel baseband response can be used to obtain the power delay pro le of the channel, which is a useful mean to describe the time dispersive properties of the channel.
40
3.2 Power Delay Pro le and Coherence Bandwidth

For small scale channel modeling, the power delay pro le P ( ) of the channel is found by taking the spatial average of jhb(t )j2 over a local area. The power delay pro le is used to determine some parameters that quantify the time dispersive properties of a multipath channel. The most commonly used are the mean excess delay ( ) and the rms delay spread( ). The mean excess delay is the rst moment of the power delay pro le and is de ned to be P P 2 k k ak k = P P ( k ) k (3.10) = P a2 k k k P ( k) The rms delay spread is the square root of the second central moment of the power delay pro le and is de ned to be = where
2=
q
2 ; ( )2
(3.11) (3.12)
P 2 2 ka P k 2k
It should be noted that the power delay pro le and the magnitude frequency response (the spectral response) of a mobile radio channel are related through the Fourier transform. Thus, an equivalent description of the channel in the frequency domain can be obtained using its frequency response characteristic. Analogous to the delay spread parameter in the time domain, the coherence bandwidth Bc is used to characterize the channel in the frequency domain. Coherence bandwidth is a statistical measure of the range of frequencies over which the channel can be assumed to be at, i.e. a channel which passes all frequencies with approximately equal gain and linear phase. On the other hand, when a transmitted signal has a bandwidth greater than Bc the channel must be considered frequency selective. Coherence bandwidth and rms delay spread are related to each other: it can be shown 26] that if the coherence bandwidth is de ned as the bandwidth over which the frequency correlation is above 0.9, then Bc is approximately (3.13) Bc = 501
k ak
P 2 k P ( k) k P
k P ( k)
41
Power delay pro les are usually obtained through measurements taken in di erent environments. In Table 3.1 are reported some results obtained from di erent measurements, while Table 3.2 reports the continuous power delay pro le de ned in the recommendation CEPT/GSM 05.05. Environment Frequency (MHz) urban 910 urban Suburban Suburban Indoor Indoor 892 910 910 850 1900 RMS Delay Notes Spread ( ) 1300 ns Avg. New York City 600 ns Std. Dev. 3500 ns Max. 10-25 us Worst case San Francisco 200-310 ns Averaged typical case 1960-2110 ns Averaged extreme case 270 ns Max. O ce building 70-94 ns Avg. Three San Francisco 1470 ns Max. buildings Ref. 14] 39] 15] 15] 17] 46]
Table 3.1. Typical measured value of RMS Delay Spread
In general, urban environment is subject to a stronger time dispersion, because there are more scatterers surrounding the receiver, while in rural environment time dispersion is less severe. Note that in hilly environments it is possible to nd a two-peaks power delay pro le, the second peak being caused by a cluster of strong scatterers that are far away from the receiver, such as mountains, skyscrapers or buildings.
3.3 Doppler Spectrum and Coherence Time

Delay spread in time domain and coherence bandwidth in frequency domain are parameters which describe the time dispersive nature of the channel in a local area. However, they do not give any informations about the time varying nature of the channel caused by either relative motion between the receiver and the transmitter, or by movement of objects in the channel. In the following it will be shown that these e ects are taken into account by the Doppler Spectrum of the channel.
42
Urban non-hilly Area - Typical case
P( ) =
8 ; < e
e; 0
0 < < 7 us elsewhere 0 < < 5 us 5 < < 10 us elsewhere 0 < < 0:7 us elsewhere 0 < < 2 us 15 < < 20 us elsewhere
Urban hilly Area - Bad case
P ( ) = : 0:5e(5; ) 0 P( ) =
e;9:2 0 0:1e(15; ) 0
Rural non-hilly Area - Typical case
Rural hilly Area - Typical case
P( ) = :
8 < e;3:5
Table 3.2. Examples of power delay pro les de ned in Recommendation CEPT/GSM 05.05
It is well known that a mobile, moving at a certain velocity v, which receives a radio wave of frequency fc, experiences a Doppler shift in the received frequency, given by f = v cos fc (3.14) c where is the angle of arrival of the received wave with reference to the direction of motion of the mobile, and c is the speed of light. In a multipath channel echoes experience di erent shifts in frequency, since they have di erent angles of arrival. Therefore the multipath channel is dispersive in frequency. A simple model that describes the frequency dispersive nature of a multipath channel was introduced by Jakes 24]. The model considers plane waves from stationary scatterers that are incident on a mobile which is traveling in the x-direction with velocity v, as shown in Figure 3.3. The x-y plane is assumed to be horizontal. The vehicle motion
43

y
n-th echo
RX v
n
x
Figure 3.3. The geometry considered in Jakes' model for the evaluation of the Doppler spectrum.
introduces a Doppler shift in every wave
!n = 2 fn = 2 v fc cos n (3.15) c being fc the frequency of the transmitted carrier frequency. If the transmitted signal is vertically polarized, the eld component seen at the receiver are: Ez = E0
N X n=1 N X
Cn cos(!ct + n )
(3.16) (3.17) (3.18) (3.19) (3.20)
Hx = ; E0 Cn sin n cos(!ct + n) Z0 n=1 N E0 X C cos cos(! t + ) Hy = Z n n c n 0 n=1

where
n
= !nt +
and Z0 is the free-space wave impedance, E0 Cn is the real amplitude of the nth wave in the Ez eld. The n are random phase angles uniformly
44
distributed from 0 to 2 . Furthermore, the Cn are normalized so that the P 2 ensemble average is < N=1 Cn >= 1. It can be shown that for a number of n multipath waves N su ciently high, the envelope r of the received Ez eld is a random variable, having a Rayleigh probability density:
(
p(r) =
r e;r2 =2b b
r 0 r<0
(3.21)
2 where b = E0 =2 is the mean power of the received signal. Furthermore, if the distribution of power with the echoes' Direction Of Arrival (DOA) is a uniform distribution, the power spectrum of Ez is:
" #;1=2 b 1 ; f ; fc 2 SEz (f ) = f fm m
(3.22)
where fm = v=c fc is the maximum Doppler shift. In some environments the random multipath components are superimposed on a stationary dominant signal. In this case, the envelope of the received signal is a random variable that follows a Ricean distribution 38]: (A 0 r 0) (3.23) 0 r<0 The parameter A denotes the peak amplitude of the dominant signal and I0 is the modi ed Bessel function of the rst kind and zero order. The power spectrum of the received signal is:
(
p(r) =
2 2 r e; (r +bA ) I ; Ar 2 0 b b
0 SEz (f ) = SEz (f ) + A2 (f ; fc ; fa)
(3.24)
where fa = fm cos 0 is the Doppler shift experienced by the direct wave, having an angle of arrival 0 . The model shows that when a pure sinusoidal tone of frequency fc is transmitted, the received signal spectrum, also called the Doppler spectrum, will have components in the range fc ; fm to fc + fm . It can be shown that if the baseband signal bandwidth is much greater than fm the e ects of Doppler spread are negligible at the receiver 24]. Coherence time TC is used to characterize the time varying nature of the frequency dispersiveness of the channel in the time domain. The maximum
45
Doppler spread and coherence time are inversely proportional to one other. That is, TC f1 (3.25) m Coherence time is actually a statistical measure of the time duration over which the channel impulse response is essentially invariant, and quanti es the similarity of the channel response at di erent times. In other words, coherence time is the time duration over which two received signal have a strong potential for amplitude correlation 24]. If the coherence time is de ned as the time over which the time correlation function is above 0.5, then the coherence time is approximately 47] TC 16 9f (3.26) m If the channel impulse response changes rapidly within the symbol period of the transmitted signal, the channel is said to be a fast fading channel, otherwise is said to be a slow fading channel. The time variant properties of the Rayleigh fading signal can be described with the aim of two statistics that were computed by Rice 42] for a mathematical problem which is similar to Jakes' fading model. Those statistics provide simple expressions for computing the average number of level crossing and the duration of fades, and are known as the level crossing rate (LCR) and the average fade duration 42]. The level crossing rate is de ned as the expected rate at which the Rayleigh fading envelope, normalized to the local rms signal level, crosses a speci ed level in a positive-going direction. The number of level crossing per second is given by
NR =
Z 1
rp(R r) dr = 2 fm e;
(3.27)
where r is the time derivative of r(t) (i.e., the slope ), p(R r) is the joint density function of r and r at r = R, fm is the maximum Doppler frequency and = R=Rrms is the value of the speci ed level R, normalized to the local rms amplitude of the fading envelope. Equation (3.27) gives the value of
46
NR , the average number of level crossing per second at speci ed R. The level crossing is a function of the mobile speed as is apparent from the presence of fm in Equation (3.27). From this Equation it can be derived that the signal envelop experiences very deep fade only occasionally, whereas shallow fades are frequent. The average fade duration is de ned as the average period of time for which the received signal is below a speci ed level R. For a Rayleigh fading signal, this is given by 1 Pfr Rg (3.28) R= NR where Pfr Rg is the probability that the received signal is less than R and is given by X (3.29) Pfr Rg = 1 T i fi
where f i is the duration of the fade and T is the observation interval of the fading signal. The probability that the received signal is less than the threshold R is found from the Rayleigh distribution as Pfr Rg =
Z R
p(r) dr = 1 ; e;
(3.30)
where p(r) is the pdf of a Rayleigh distribution. Thus, using Equations (3.27), (3.28) and (3.30), the average fade duration as a function of and fm can be expressed as
e; p 1 ; (3.31) R= fm 2 Average fade duration primarily depends upon the speed of the mobile, and decreases as the maximum Doppler frequency fm becomes large. This can be understood remembering that a channel with a high value of fm is a channel with short coherence time, i.e. a channel that varies rapidly. As pointed out by E.Damosso and L.Stola in 16], theoretically only the bandwidth fm of the Doppler spectrum a ects the values of NR and R , so that the general trend of the Doppler spectrum is not really determinant in
2
47
evaluating the performance of a communication channel. As a consequence Jakes' Doppler spectrum, that is the correct Doppler spectrum only in the case of omni-directional antennas that receive echoes with uniformly distributed DOAs, is used also in the modeling of radio channels that do not respect those conditions.
48
Chapter 4 Small Scale Fading in a Platform Based System

As shown in Chapter 3, a mobile radio channel is characterized by the Power delay pro le and the Doppler spectrum. With the growth of cellular and mobile communications, several theoretical and experimental models for the mobile radio channel have been presented. However, usually those models and measurements deal with ground communication systems, and with a still transmitter, being usually a xed antenna. In this Chapter we will study the small-scale characteristics of a channel in a scenario in which the transmitter is payload of a stratospheric platform. The rst part of the Chapter is devoted to the study of the Power delay pro le for a platform based system. Power delay pro les derived from measures at ground level are in site speci c and cannot be adapted to the platform case. In order to nd out a realistic power delay pro le for the platform case, we have considered two analytical models proposed respectively by Rappaport with Liberti 40] 41] and Burr 11], and we have extended them to the platform case. In the second part of this Chapter we will focus on the Doppler spectrum of the platform based system, and we will present an analytical model developed by M.Pent et al. 35].
49
4 { Small Scale Fading in a Platform Based System
4.1 Extension of the Rappaport's geometrical model to the platform case

The geometrical model presented by Rappaport considers a transmitter and a receiver having separation d0 (Figure 4.1). Scatterers are assumed to lie in the horizontal plane which includes the transmitter and a receiver. If a LOS path exists between the transmitter and the receiver, then the rst component of the total received signal will arrive with a path delay t0 = d0=c where c is light speed. It is assumed that scatterers are uniformly distributed in space and have equal scattering cross sections. As noted in 34] all the scatterers giving rise to single bounce components arriving between time t0 and time ti = t0 + i (i.e all scatterers giving rise to echoes with excess delay lower than i), lie in the region bounded by an ellipse with parameters (4.1) a = cti 2 p b = a2 ; f 2 (4.2) where f = d0=2, as shown in Figure 4.1. As shown in 27], it is possible to nd out an expression for the cumulative distribution function (cdf) of the excess delay i , by introducing a maximum path delay, m , which de nes a windows such that 0 i < m for all i. The ratio of the area of the ellipse corresponding to delay i , AGS ( ), to the area of an ellipse corresponding to m , AGS ( m ), leads to an expression for the cdf FGS ( ): A FGS ( ) = A GS(( )) (4.3) GS m By di erentiating the cdf, we obtain the probability density function (pdf). The same steps can be followed in the platform case. The geometry of the system is more complex, because the receiver and the transmitter are no longer on the same plane, in fact also the height of the transmitter must be considered. Introducing a Cartesian reference system, consider the receiver placed at a point R of coordinates (x0 ,0,0), while the transmitter is placed in p T (0,0,z0). The direct transmission path is then r0 = x2 + z0 , which leads 0 2 to a propagation delay 0 = r0=c, being c the light speed. A re ected wave
50

y b/2
a/2 x
TX
RX
Figure 4.1. The ellipse containing scatterers that cause echoes with an excess delay lower than i
impinging at the receiver with an excess delay must have covered a path length
k = r0 + c
(4.4)
The set of points for which the distance from the transmitter T plus the distance from the receiver R is k is an ellipsoid having T and R as foci. A re ected ray with an excess delay between 0 and must be originated by a scatterer S inside the ellipsoid : that is, a wave traveling from the transmitter T to the scatterer S, impinges on the scatterer and is re ected toward the receiver, covering a total path length shorter than k (see Figure 4.2). However, it is reasonable that scatterers can be found only in a thin layer close to the ground: in fact scattered waves are mainly due to high buildings, trees, poles, or hills, that cannot be found above a certain height h. As a result, the volume V ( ) containing scatterers that cause a re ected wave with an excess delay between 0 and is the intersection between the ellipsoid and the layer of height h. The volume V ( ) is thus de ned as the
51

z
TX (0,0,z0 )
S
zs < h
RX (x0 ,0,0)
x
Figure 4.2. The ellipsoid containing scatterers that cause excess delays lower than i , and a scatterer S of height zs < h contained in the ellipsoid (Extension of the Rappaport model).
set of points (x y z) that satisfy:

( p
(x ; x0 )2 + y2 + z2 + x2 + y2 + (z ; z0 )2 < k( ) 0<z<h
(4.5)
Starting from Equation (4.5), it is possible to obtain the expression of the volume V as a function of . In fact V ( ) can be calculated by evaluating the area A(z ) of the ellipse due to the intersection of the ellipsoid with a plane z = const (see Figure 4.3), and then by integrating this area with z varying from 0 to h. A(z ) can be expressed as:
A(z ) = a(z )b(z )
(4.6)
52

z
TX
111111111111 000000000000 111111111111 000000000000 A(z) 111111111111 000000000000 111111111111 000000000000 111111111111 000000000000
RX
x
Figure 4.3. The area A(z ) intersection of the ellipsoid parallel to x-y
with a plane
where a e b are the semi-axes of the ellipse, and can be evaluated observing that, for a given height z, the abscissa x of one point of the ellipse is:
x(y z ) = xc(z ) xd (y z )
where and where 2 0 xc(z ) = ;x0 + x0 kk2+; xxz0 z ; x0z0 2 2 2
0 3 2 2
(4.7) (4.8) (4.9)
k p xd (y z ) = 2k2 ; 2x2 p(y z )

0
2 2 3 p(y z ) = 4z0 z2 + 2x2 z0 + 4x2y2 ; 4k2z2 ; 4z0 z ; 4k2y2 ; 2x2 k2 0 0 0 2 4 ;2z0 k2 + 4k2z0 z + 4x2z2 + k4x4 z0 ; 4x2 z0z (4.10) 0 0 0 Thus, as we can observe in Figure 4.4: a = xd(0 z ) (4.11)
53
b(z)
xc - xd y
A(z)
xc xd
a(z)
xc + xd
Figure 4.4. The ellipse of area A(z ) and the semi-axes a(z ) and b(z )
and b is the ordinate y for which
xd (b z ) = 0
(4.12)
Substituting a and b in (4.6) leads to 2 k(k2 ; x2 ; z0 ) 4z(z ; z) + k2 ; x2 ; z2 0 p A(z ) = (4.13) 0 0 0 4 (k2 ; x2)3 0 where A(z ) is a function of through k, which is given in (4.4). Equation (4.13) can be easily integrated:
V( )=
and yields to:
Z h
A(z ) dz
(4.14)
4 (c2 2 V ( ) = ; p 2 + 22r02c )(r0 + c3 ) 3 h3 ; 2z0 h2 ; (c2 2 + 2r0c )h 4 (z0 + c + 2r0c ) (4.15)
54
As previously done in the GS case, the cdf of the excess delay can be expressed as the ratio between the volume V ( ) and the volume that corresponds to the maximum excess delay of the system, V ( m):
V (4.16) FPS ( ) = V (( )) m while the pdf can be found by di erentiating (4.16): fPS ( ) = V (1 ) dV (4.17) m d Equations (4.16)and (4.17) require the knowledge of the maximum path delay m . Even if values of m for the GS based case are well known, there are no measurements available for the platform case. The development of the second model presented in this Chapter leads to value of m that are in the order of hundreds of nanoseconds, which is considerably less than the GS based case. In Figure 4.5 and 4.6 the distribution of delay and the pdf of delay, calculated with m = 0:150 us, x0 = 40 km and h = 21 m are reported. Values given to x0 and h a ect the shape of the distribution, as shown in Figure 4.7, 4.8, 4.9 and 4.10. In Figures 4.7 and 4.8 are shown the distributions and pdfs of the delay for h = 21 m and x0 from 0 to 100 km with a step of 20 km, while Figures 4.9 and 4.10 report the distributions and pdfs of the delay for x0 = 40 km and h varying from 11 m to 51 m with a step of 10 m. Note that even if the curves obtained are di erent, the general shape of the distribution is maintained in a rst order of approximation it is reasonable, in the development of a channel model, to use one speci c value for x0 and h and consider the related curve as a general distribution of the delay for the platform case.
4.2 Extension of Burr's channel model to the platform case

As shown by A. G. Burr in 11], it's possible to obtain the power-delay pro le of a radio channel assuming a Poisson-distributed statistic for the echo delays.
55
Distribution of the Delay 1
0.8
x0= 40 km
0.6 F() 0.4 0.2 0 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 Excess Delay [s] 0.14 0.16
Figure 4.5. Delay's distribution obtained using the extension of Rappaport's geometrical model, with m = 0:150 s, x0 = 40 km and h = 21 m.
This assumption was already suggested by A. S. Bawja in 9], and by Saleh and Venezuela in 45], and was used to get an analytical expression for the experimental distribution of delays measured in some environments. If we use a Poisson distribution, then the probability that at some time the number N of echo arrivals is equal to i is:
i ;() P fN = ig = ( ) ie (4.18) ! The Poisson parameter ( ) gives the probability of an echo's arrival within an in nitesimal time interval, divided by that time interval:
P fN 2 md (m+1)d ] = 1g = ( )d
(4.19)
As shown by Burr, if we consider a transmitter and a receiver both lying over the ground at a distance d, surrounded by a uniform distribution of scatterers, Equation (4.19) can also be expressed as the probability that a
56
Pdf of the Delay 14 12 x0= 40 km 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 Excess Delay [s] 0.14 0.16
Figure 4.6. Delay's pdf obtained using the extension of Rappaport's geometrical model, with m = 0:150 s, x0 = 40 km and h = 21 m.
scatterer will be found within an elliptical annulus of in nitesimal thickness corresponding to that time interval. If we assume that scatterers are uniformly distributed over the ground with a density per unit area , then the probability of nding a scatterer in the elliptical annulus of area dA is:
f()
P fN 2 md (m+1)d ] = 1g = dA =
which yields to:
Ad
(4.20)
(2 2 2 2 ( )d = cp c 2 ;d ) d (4.21) 4 c2 ; d2 However we are interested in studying a system in which the transmitter is on a platform ying at a certain height z0 . In this case the model developed by Burr can no longer be used, because the scatterers are concentrated on a layer over the ground, so that they surround only the receiver.
57
Distribution of the Delay 1 h= 21 m 0.8
0.6 F() 0.4 x0= 0 km
0.2
x0= 100 km
0 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 Excess Delay [s] 0.14 0.16
Figure 4.7. Delay's distribution with m = 0:150 s, h = 21 m and x0 varying from 0 to 100 km with step 20 km.
Using this particular geometry, Equation (4.19) must be expressed as the probability that a scatterer can be found in a volume dV corresponding to echoes with a delay in the range m d (m + 1) d ], i.e. in which the distance of the scatterer from the transmitter added to the distance from the receiver ranges between kmin = r0 + c m d and kmax = r0 + c (m + 1) d , being r0 the distance between transmitter and receiver, and where the height of the scatterer is between 0 and a certain maximum height h. If we assume that the scatterers are uniformly distributed over the ground with a density , we obtain:
P fN 2 md (m+1)d ] = 1g = dV
which yields to ( )d = dV = V ( ) d
(4.22) (4.23)
An expression for the volume V ( ) has been already given in Equation (4.15). By deriving Equation (4.15) it is possible to nd an analytical expression for
58
Pdf of the Delay 14 12 h= 21 m 10 x0= 0 km f() 8 6 4 2 0 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 Excess Delay [s] 0.14 0.16 x0= 100 km
Figure 4.8. Delay's pdf with m = 0:150 s, h = 21 m and x0 varying from 0 to 100 km with step 20 km
the Poisson parameter :
( )= V( ) (4.24) As mentioned before, represents the density of scatterers in the area of interest. In general, surfaces of buildings, as well as trees, poles or vehicles are the most important elements of scattering. In this work we will assume that a scatterer can be found once every 10 m, which is reasonable, thus obtaining = 106 km;3. From the Poisson assumption previously made it follows that the interarrival time between two echoes is exponentially distributed with mean delay 1= ( ). As a consequence, the Poisson parameter given in Equation (4.24) can be interpreted as the frequency of echo arrivals and the average number n( ) of echoes received in an interval of time T around the instant corresponding to a delay can be approximately expressed as: n= ( ) T = V( ) T (4.25)
59
Distribution of the Delay 1 x0= 40 km 0.8
0.6 F() 0.4 h= 51 m 0.2 h= 1 m 0 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 Excess Delay [s] 0.14 0.16
Figure 4.9. Delay's distribution with m = 0:150 s, x0 = 40 km and h varying from 11 to 51 m with step 10 m
Using Equations (4.21) and (4.24) it is possible to compare the frequency of arrivals in the case of a GS based system and in the case of a platform based system: Figure 4.11 shows the comparison in the case in which the transmitter and the receiver are at a ground distance of 40 km. In the GS case a scatters'density = 104 km;2 has been taken, so that even in the ground case a scatterer can be found once every 10 m. It can be seen that for small values of excess delay the frequency of arrivals is lower in the platform case than in the GS case. It will be shown that echoes with small delay are less attenuated than those with a great delay, so causing a major interference with the direct ray. Having a smaller number of powerful echoes, platform based system undergoes to a less severe fading. Given the average number of echoes received in an interval around as a function of (4.25), it is possible to nd out an expression for the average power delay pro le PPS ( ) of the PS based system. In fact, the average total power received in can be expressed as the product between the average
60
Pdf of the Delay 14 12 x0= 40 km 10 h= 51 m f() 8 6 4 2 0 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 Excess Delay [s] 0.14 0.16 h= 1 m
Figure 4.10. Delay's pdf with m = 0:150 s, x0 = 40 km and h varying from 11 to 51 m with step 10 m
power of a single echo having delay , Ps( ), with the average number of echoes having delay , n( ):
PPS ( ) = Ps( )n( )
(4.26)
Equation (4.26) requires the knowledge of Ps( ). In the following we derive an expression for Ps( ) assuming all scatterers of the same height zs. As already stated, an echo received with an excess delay must have covered a path length k( ) = r0 + c , being r0 the distance between the stratospheric platform and the receiver. In the assumption of scatterers of the same height, the scatterer S that produced the echo can be found somewhere in the ellipse shown in Figure 4.12. If the scatterers are uniformly distributed in space, we can assume that the coordinate ys of the scatterer S is uniformly distributed between ;b(zs ) and b(zs) (see Figure 4.12), where b can be found accordingly to Equation (4.12) . Following Equation (4.7), the abscissa xs is:
xs = xc xd (ys)
(4.27)
61
Poisson Parameter for d= 40 km 70 65 60 10 Log10() 55 50 45 40 35 0 1 2 3 4 5 Excess Delay [s] 6 7 PS with =10 km GS with =104 km-2
6 -3
Figure 4.11. Poisson parameter in the GS case (dotted line) and in the PS case (solid line)
Assuming a uniform distribution of the scatterers, the abscissa is, with equal probability, xs+ = xc + xd(ys) and xs; = xc ; xd (ys), that is: Pfxs = xs+ = xc + xd (ys)g = Pfxs = xs; = xc ; xd (ys)g = 0:5 (4.28) As a consequence, the distance between the scatterer S and the receiver can be written as:
2 rs (ys) = x2 + ys s
q
(4.29)
Thus, as it can be seen from Figure 4.13, an echo with excess delay covers a path length k ; rs from the transmitter to the scatterer S (path TX -S ) and a path length rs from the scatterer S to the receiver (path S -RX ). As shown in Chapter 2 usually a stratospheric platform and a point at ground level are in line of sight, and the height of the platform is su cient to neglect e ects due to ground re ection, so that free space propagation can be taken into account for path TX -S . Power received from the scatterer S
62
b(z s )
A(z s )
xc
a(zs )
Figure 4.12. The ellipse of area A(zs ) and the semi-axes a(zs ) and b(zs )
is scattered all around according to the radar cross section (RCS) r of the scatterer 51]. The total power re ected in the direction of the receiver is then: (4.30) Pr s (rs (ys)) = PTX GTX 4 (k ; rr (y ))2 s s If we assume free space propagation also for the path S -RX , then the received power due to a scatterer of ordinate ys is:
Ps (rs (ys)) = PTX GTX 4 (k ; rr (y ))2 (4 r (y ))2 GRX (4.31) s s s s Note that Ps is a function of the random variable ys, whose distribution is ys U (;b(zs ) b(zs)), and of the values taken by rs that can be either rs+ or rs; according to the abscissa xs . The average value of Ps can thus be calculated as: Ps = E fPs(rs+)g Pfxs = xs+g + E fPs(rs;)g Pfxs = xs;g
(4.32)
63

z
TX
r0
k - r s+ -
k S RX rs+ -
Figure 4.13. The path covered by an echo having delay , impinging on a scatterer S .
Ps(rs+(ys)) dy 0:5 + Z b Ps(rs;(ys)) dy 0:5 Ps = (4.33) s s 2b 2b ;b ;b Using Equations (4.33), (4.25) and (4.26) we have numerically evaluated the power delay pro le for the platform case. In Figure 4.14 is shown the power delay pro le obtained assuming the receiver at x0 = 20 km, a density of scattering point of = 106 km;3 , and using a radar cross section r of 20 m2. This value corresponds to the radar cross section of a at metal plate having an edge long 0.5 m, in the case of normal incidence. In fact, as shown in 25], the RCS of a metal plate in this case can be approximated to 2 =4 A (4.34)
r
that is
Z b
where A is the physical area of the plate. For a wavelength of 0.25 m, i.e a carrier frequency of 1.2 GHz, r = 20 m2 is obtained for A = 0:32 m2
64
Normalized Power Delay Profile 0 -5 -10 P/PLOS [dB] -15 -20 -25 -30 -35 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 Excess Delay [s] 0.12 0.14
Figure 4.14. Power delay pro le for a platform based system
Note that the model holds as long as the free space propagation law used in (4.31) is valid, i.e. as long as the receiver is in the far eld region with respect to the scatterers. This condition is satis ed when:
rs(ys) 4 (4.35) It can be seen from Figure 4.12 that, for a given value of , rs (ys) takes its smallest value for ys = 0, with abscissa xs+. In this case (see Figure 4.15) rs becomes: 2 (x0 + rs)2 + z0 = (k ; rs)2 (4.36) The far eld condition is therefore: 2; 2; 2 (4.37) rs = k 2(k x0 x )z0 4 + 0 that leads to k
2 2 4 + z0 + (x0 + 4 )
r
(4.38)
65

z z 0
TX
k- rs
RX
x 0 rs
S
x
Figure 4.15. Evaluation of the smallest rs
By substituting k = r0 + c we obtain:
2 z0 + (x0 + 4 )2 ; r0 (4.39) c The power delay pro le of Figure 4.14 obtained with a carrier frequency of 1.2 GHz and receiver position x0 = 20 km, is valid for 0:12 ns. Note that the power delay pro le has been evaluated by assuming free space propagation also for the path S -RX , even if it is covered at ground level. As mentioned in Chapter 2, for ground level transmission a higher order attenuation law is most commonly used instead of the second order free space attenuation law, so that interference due to ground re ection is taken into account. However, the ground re ection model can be used only if the distance between the transmitter and the receiver satis es Equation 2.23. For the path S -RX Equation 2.23 is satis ed when (4.40) r > 20hshRX 4 +
s
q
where hs is the height of the scatterer and hRX is the height of the receiver. Assuming hs = hRX = 1:5 m, and following the same steps as from Equation
66
(4.36) to (4.39), we obtain that the two-ray ground re ection model is valid for echoes with an excess delay > 1:08 us. However, it can be seen from Figure 4.14 that echoes with so a great delay are already too much attenuated to be taken into account. Table 4.1 reports a comparison between some parameters derived from the power delay pro le PPS ( ) and the same parameters obtained by measurements made for Land Mobile Satellite (LMS) communications. The rms delay spread obtained from PPS ( ) is = 21 ns, while measurements reported in 33] present a rms delay spread varying between 8 ns to 102 ns, as shown in Figure 4.16. In the case presented in 33], the transmission is at L-Band (1540-1560 MHz) and S-Band (2315-2335 MHz), and it was radiated from an helicopter acting as an alternative platform, with the aim of simulating a low orbit satellite. The helicopter ew at altitudes of 450 m to 730 m above sea level, and it allowed measurements for elevation angles in the range 15 ; 80 . In Figure 4.17 are presented the measurements of the ratio between the carrier power and the multipath content of the received signal (C/M ratio) obtained in 33]. The measurements are in the range between 14.6 dB and 19.7 dB, that is in good agreement with the calculated value of 18.4 dB. We de ne the maximum excess delay max as the excess delay for which the average received power is attenuated more than 30 dB with respect to the direct signal. From the power delay pro le PPS ( ) we nd out a maximum excess delay max = 128 ns. In 19] plots of power delay pro les obtained from a channel simulator for land mobile satellite systems are shown. In this simulator the mobile's surrounding are characterized by topographical and land use data, as well as by random obstacles generated by algorithms based on the Landscape Generation Model (LGM). Using ray-tracing techniques, the simulator provided the power delay pro les of Figure 4.18. It can be seen that a two peaks power delay pro le can be experienced, thus causing a maximum excess delay in the order of 500 ns. But when a single peak is present, the maximum excess delay is between 150 ns and 200 ns, in good agreement with the value obtained from PPS ( ).
67
Delay Spread vs. Elevation Angle 110 100 90 Delay Spread [ns] 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 30 35 L-Band S-Band 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 Elevation Angle [Deg.] 75 80
Figure 4.16. Results of Delay Spread at L-Band (continuous line) and S-Band (dotted line) presented by Parks in 33]
Value obtained Value obtained by PPS ( ) by measurements Mean excess delay ( ) 12 ns rms delay spread ( ) 21 ns 8-102 ns 33] C/M ratio 18.4 dB 14.6 - 19.7 dB 33] 128 ns 200 ns 19] max at -30 dB
Table 4.1. A comparison between parameters evaluated from PPS ( ), and values obtained by measurements for LMS system
4.3 Comparison between the results obtained with Rappaport's and Burr's models
Starting from the Burr's model we have nd out an expression for the power delay pro le that characterizes the transmission channel of a stratospheric platform. The power delay pro le is expressed as the product of the average power of an echo having delay , Ps( ), and the average number of echo
68
C/M Ratio vs. Elevation Angle 20
19 C/M ratio [dB]
18
17
16
15 L-Band S-Band 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 Elevation Angle [Deg.] 75 80
14
Figure 4.17. Results of C/M ratio at L-Band (continuous line) and S-Band (dotted line) presented by Parks in 33]
having delay , n( ), where n( ) is found assuming a Poisson distribution for the number of echoes arrivals. On the other side, using Rappaport's geometrical model an expression for the distribution of the excess delay can be found. In this section it will be shown that starting from this distribution it is possible to nd out the average number of echo arrivals n( ) in a form equivalent to the Burr's model. Let's assume that N echoes are received with an excess delay in the range f0 m g, each echo being independent and having the distribution for the excess delay given in (4.16). The probability that an echo has an excess delay in an interval T around can be approximated to:
p( ) = fPS ( ) T
(4.41)
69
Figure 4.18. Plots of the power delay pro le obtained with the channel simulator developed in 19].
where fPS ( ) is the pdf of the echo delay given in (4.17). Thus, the probability of having n( ) echoes in the interval T can be expressed as a binomial: Pfn( )g = whose mean value is
N n
pn( )(1 ; p( ))N ;n
(4.42)
N n( ) = E fn( )g = Np( ) = V ( ) T dV (4.43) d m Comparing Equation (4.43) with the average number of echoes obtained by Burr's model (4.25) we note that they both depend on the di erential of the volume V ( ), and they di ers only for a constant multiplicative term. In the Burr's model, this term is the density of the scatterers , while in the Rappaport's model is N=V ( m ), that is strongly correlated with , being the ratio between the total number of signi cant echoes received, N , and the volume from which they come, V ( m ). We can conclude that both models lead to the same average power delay pro le, the only di erence being a multiplicative constant that in both cases represents the density of scatterers.
70
4.4 Doppler Spectrum for a Platform Based System

The Doppler spectrum for a platform based system was already evaluated by M.Pent et al. in 35]. In the following the developed channel model is summarized. The relative position of the platform and the mobile is de ned through the use of the azimuthal angles p, m (that identify the platform and the mobile movement directions with respect to their line of conjunction on the horizontal plane), '0 (the azimuth angle under which the mobile see the platform), and the distance d0 between the mobile and the platform projection on the ground, as shown in Figure 4.19.
x-z plane
p
x-y plane
0
d0
m m
p
p
m
d0
Figure 4.19. Relative positions and velocity vectors of the platform p and the mobile m
With the help of this de nitions three di erent zones in the area below the platform can be identi ed: the inside-orbit zone (IOZ): 0 < d0 < 10 km, '0 2 60 90 ] the out-orbit zone (OOZ): 10 < d0 < 30 km, '0 2 30 60 ] the far-orbit zone (FOZ): 30 < d0 < 100 km, '0 2 10 30 ] The following three di erent positions of the mobile are considered:
'0 = 75 in the IO zone '0 = 45 in the OO zone
71
IOZ ;180 60 OOZ ;45 30 FOZ ;30 10
< < < < < <
< +180 < 90 < +45 < 60 < +30 < 30
Table 4.2. DOA angle distribution for the signals arriving to the platform base station
'0 = 15 in the FO zone

In this conditions the mean signi cant scatterers are (see Table 4.2): uniformly distributed within the IO zone. The platform catches echoes from azimuthal angles uniformly distributed in ;180 + 180 ] and elevation angles 2 60 90 ]: uniformly distributed inside an annular sector around the mobile in the OO zone. The platform receives signal components from angles 2 ;45 + 45 ] and 2 30 60 ] uniformly distributed inside an annular sector aroun the mobile in the FO zone. The signals impinging the platform antenna come from uniformly distributed angles 2 ;30 30 ] and 2 10 30 ]. The study of a system with both moving antennas can be found in 6], where it is shown that the global Doppler spectrum S (f ) can be obtained as the convolution of the two Doppler spectra obtained assuming that only the rst (the second) is moving, while the second (the rst) is still:
S (f ) =
+1
For the previous hypothesis, the Doppler spectrum Sm (f ) in the case that only the receiver is moving is the well known Jakes' model Doppler spectrum given in (3.22), where the maximum Doppler shift is fd m = vm f0=c, being vm the mobile's speed. The derivation of the Doppler spectrum Sp(f ) is more complicated because both the elevation angle and the radiation pattern of the antenna on
;1
Sm( )Sp(f ; ) d
(4.44)
72
board have to be considered. A study on the e ect of a moving antenna in a three dimension space can be found in 24]. The essential result is that the Doppler power spectrum can be written as I Sp(f ) = kp G( )P ( ) f ; f0 ; fc0 vp ar ( ) d (4.45) where: is the solid angle of the signal impinging the platform antenna
d = cos( )d d G( ) = G( ), is the power gain of the platform antenna
(4.46)
vp is the platform speed vector, constant for short time intervals vp jvpj (4.47)
ar ( ) is the unit propagation vector for a wave impinging with angle ,
vp ar ( ) = vp cos( ; p ) cos
(4.48)
kp is a multiplicative constant function of the average received power P ( ) is the probability that a ray is received at the platform, coming from direction ar ( ). On the basis of previous assumptions
(
P( ) =
P0 0
I
1<
< 2 1< < 2 elsewhere
(4.49)
where the intervals ( 1 2) and ( 1 2) are the limit angles de ned in Table 4.2. Moreover the following Equation must hold:
P( ) d = 1
(4.50) (4.51)
so that
1 P0 = ( ; )(sin ; sin ) 2 1 2 1
73
Being the direction of arrival (DOA) of echoes bounded in the limit of Table 4.2, and because of the non-uniform antenna radiation pattern, the value of p in uences the Doppler spectrum. The support of the Doppler power spectrum Sp(f ) is fm fM ], where fm = vpcf0 min fcos( p ; )g fM = vpcf0 max fcos( p ; )g (4.52) as can be found from Equations (4.45) and (4.48). These values are approximate, since they do not re ect the presence of a non-omnidirectional antenna.
p
0 45 90 0 45 90 0 45 90
Zone of the fm=fd p fM =fd p receiver -1 1 IOZ -1 1 -1 1 0.703 1 OOZ 0 1 -0.703 0.703 0.866 1 FOZ 0.260 0.966 -0.5 0.5
Table 4.3. Normalized support of Sp(f ), as a function of p and the zone of interest fd p = vp f0 =c is the maximum Doppler shift.
In Table 4.3 are reported values of fm and fM normalized to the maximum Doppler shift due to the platform movement fd p = vpf0 =c. The values are presented for the three zone previously introduced (IOZ, OOZ, FOZ), and for di erent values of p, corresponding to the platform approaching the receiver ( p = 0), in an oblique movement with respect to the receiver ( p = 45 ), and moving perpendicular to the receiver ( p = 90 ). From Equation (4.44) it follows that the support of the global Doppler power spectrum is the sum of the support of Sm (f ) and of Sp(f ). This leads to a global support of fm ; fd m fM + fd m].
74
Even if theoretically from Equations (4.44), (4.45) and (3.22) it is possible to evaluate the correct Doppler spectrum for the platform system, it was already stated that the trend of the spectrum is not relevant in evaluating the performance of the channel. For this reason, it is simpler to model the channel with a Jakes' Doppler Spectrum having a bandwidth equal to the support of the correct platform Doppler spectrum.
4.5 Coherence Bandwidth and Coherence Time of the Platform Channel

Once that the Power delay pro le and the Doppler Spectrum of a platform based system are obtained, it is possible to evaluate the coherence bandwidth and the coherence time of the channel. As it is shown in Chapter 3, those parameters allow to predict if the fading that will a ect the transmission over the channel will be respectively selective or at and fast or slow. From the power delay pro le an rms delay spread = 21 ns has been obtained. Using Equation (3.13) it yields to a coherence bandwidth Bc equal to: Bc = 501 = 952:38 KHz (4.53) Assuming the speed of the platform vp = 150 km/h and the speed of the receiver vm = 50 km/h, the maximum Doppler Spread fm (see Table 4.3) is: fm = fd p + fd m = vp + vm ] fc0 = 222:16 Hz (4.54) where f0 = 1:2 GHz is the carrier frequency and c = 3 108 m/s is light speed. Using Equation (3.26) this value of fm leads to a coherence time Tc of: (4.55) Tc = 16 9f = 0:806 ms m In Figure 4.20 the condition of fading to which undergoes a transmitted signal having a bandwidth Bs and a symbol duration Ts obtained with (4.53) and (4.55) are shown. Note that the platform channel, having a low delay spread and thus a negligible dispersion in time, is selective only in the case
75
Bs (KHz)
Slow Fading Selective Fading

Bc = 952
Fast Fading Selective Fading
Slow Fading Flat Fading
Fast Fading Flat Fading
T c = 0.806
T s (ms)
Figure 4.20. A diagram representing the channel fading properties for various symbol duration Ts and signal bandwidth Bs .
of wide band signals. On the other hand, the dispersion in frequency is more severe than in usual transmission channel, because both the movement of the platform and of the mobile contribute to the Doppler spread.
76
Chapter 5 The Simulation Program

In Chapter 4 we have found an expression for the power delay pro le in a platform based system and evaluated the Doppler spread introduced by the movements of the platform and of the receiver. Using the Power delay pro le and the Doppler spectrum that characterize the mobile radio channel, it is possible to develop simulation programs that allow to evaluate the performance of di erent transmission systems operating over the channel. In this Chapter it is described the simulation model that we have developed using the theoretical functions previously evaluated. The model has been realized as a BLOCK for TOPSIM. TOPSIM 49] is a simulation tool for the analysis and design of communication systems developed by the Telecommunication Group of Electronic Department of Politecnico di Torino with the support of the European Space Agency (ESA/ESTEC). The usual description of a communication system is based on block diagrams, and in TOPSIM the system under study can be modeled as a set of blocks connected by input and output signals. TOPSIM has been written in standard FORTRAN 77 and C language. The TOPSIM library, composed by more than 400 models called BLOCKs, provides the user with most of the models needed to design communication systems, however a block to simulate the stratospheric channel was not available yet. In the rst part of the Chapter we will present di erent simulation models that are used to simulate di erent type of mobile radio channels. The second
77
5 { The Simulation Program
part will be focused on the model used for the development of the TOPSIM simulation block. Finally, we will report some simulation results that describe the behaviour of the block.
5.1 Descriptions of Simulation Models for Different Mobile Radio Channels

The simplest model for a mobile radio channel is the one used when the transmitted signal is a ected by at and slow fading. In this case the bandwidth of the received signal is not su ciently wide to resolve the multipath component and, as a consequence, the dispersion in time can be neglected. Moreover the channel varies slowly if compared to the transmission duration and can be considered constant for the whole transmission. If there is no direct path between the transmitter and the receiver, the received signal will be composed of di erent replicas of the transmitted signal, each replica having a di erent random attenuation level, phase shift and Doppler shift. As shown in Chapter 3, in this condition the received signal envelope is described by a random Rayleigh distributed variable. The simulation model consists simply of a multiplier for a constant r that is randomly generated 2 following a Rayleigh distribution, as shown in Figure 5.1. The variance r of the random variable is given by the total received power. White gaussian noise n(t) can then be added through an adder. ~
r ~ x(t) ~ n(t) ~ y(t)
Figure 5.1. Diagram of the simulation model used for a slow and at fading channel, in the absence of the direct signal. x(t) is the complex ~ envelope of the input signal, r is a Rayleigh distributed random variable and n(t) represents white gaussian noise. ~
If a direct path can be found between the transmitter and the receiver, so that line of sight transmission is possible, the received signal will be the sum
78
of the Rayleigh attenuated signal (generated by the replicas of the direct signal) and the direct signal itself. The simulation model is depicted in Figure 5.2.
k ~ n(t)
~ x(t)
~ y(t)
Figure 5.2. Diagram of the simulation model used for a slow and at fading channel, in the presence of the direct signal. x(t) is the complex ~ envelope of the input signal, r is a Rayleigh distributed random variable, k is a multiplicative constant that allows to vary the ratio between the line of sight and the di used signal, n(t) is white gaussian noise. ~
The direct ray is split in two branches. The rst one simply leads to a gain block, controlled by a parameter k, and it is used to simulate the direct component of the received signal. The second branch lead to a multiplier for a Rayleigh distributed variable r. Usually, the variance of the Rayleigh variable r is set to 1, so that the parameter k in the direct ray branch allow to regulate the importance of the direct ray with respect to the multipath component. These two signals are added and generate the received signal that follows a Ricean distribution as shown in Chapter 3. White gaussian noise can then be added to the received signal. Let us suppose that the channel is no longer slow fading, that is, the channel varies during the transmission. However, suppose that the e ect of dispersion in time can still be neglected. The channel is subject to at but fast fading. If no direct path exists the simulation model is the one of Figure 5.3. The time variant nature of the model is simulated by the fading process
79

~ r(t) ~ x(t)
~ n(t)
~ y(t)
Figure 5.3. Diagram of the simulation model used for a fast and at fading channel, in the absence of the direct signal. x(t) is the complex envelope ~ of the input signal, r(t) is the power fading process, n(t) represents noise ~ ~
r(t), whose power spectrum is given by the Doppler spectrum of the channel. ~ As already stated (see Chapter 3), the correct shape of the Doppler spectrum is not relevant, being the attributes of Level Crossing Rate and Average Fade Duration of the channel dependent on the support width of the Doppler Spectrum only. As a consequence, the spectrum of the process r(t) is usually ~ assumed to be the Jakes' Doppler Spectrum given in Equation (3.22). If a direct ray can be received, the correct model for the channel is shown in Figure 5.4. Once again the transmitted signal is split into two branches.
k ~ n(t)
~ x(t)
~ y(t)
~ r(t)
Figure 5.4. Diagram of the simulation model used for a fast and at fading channel, in the presence of the direct signal. x(t) is the complex envelope ~ of the input signal, k is a multiplicative constant that allows to vary the ratio between the line of sight and di used signal, r(t) is the unitary power ~ fading process, n(t) represents noise ~
The rst refers to the direct component of the received signal, and allows to control its power through a gain block of parameter k, while the second
80
produces the multipath component through a multiplier for the process r(t). ~ As for the case with no direct ray, r(t) has a power spectrum given by the ~ Doppler spectrum of the channel and its power is usually unitary. By means of k it is possible to control the power level of the direct ray with respect to the multipath component. The simulation models previously presented do not take into account the time dispersive nature of a multipath channel. As shown in Chapter 3, when the bandwidth of the signal is greater than the coherence bandwidth of the channel, time dispersion cannot be neglected and the channel is selective in frequency. In order to simulate a channel that is both dispersive in frequency (i.e. subject to fast fading) and in time (i.e. subject to selective fading), two di erent approaches can be followed. The rst method try to reproduce the physics of the channel, and holds on the mathematical model of a multipath channel presented by Bello 10] and known as the Gaussian Wide Sense Stationary Uncorrelated Scattering Channel (GWSSUS). The basic formula used for the computation of the output signal y(t) is:
y(t) = Re v(t)ej2
= Re
(
f0 t
N X i=1
i u(t ; i ) exp j 2
t(f0 ; fi ) ; j 2 f0 i ; j i] (5.1)
where v(t) represents the complex envelope of y(t), u(t) the complex envelope of the input signal s(t):
s(t) = Re u(t)ej2
f0 t
(5.2)
In the previous relationships f0 is the central frequency of the pass band signal and N the number of discrete scattering points that should generate the received signal. Each point is characterized by an amplitude i, an excess delay i , a Doppler shift fi and phase i . In order to have a GWSSUS channel, the following assumptions are made:
i
and
are statistically independent
81

i i i
is a random variable uniformly distributed in the range 0-2 and

j
are statistically independent
is a random variable Rayleigh distributed
By means of Equation (5.1) it is possible to compute the system function, obtained as the response of the channel to an input complex envelope
u(t) = ej2
0
ft
(5.3)
corresponding to the real function cos 2 (f0 + f )t]. By omitting the factor ej2 f t we obtain the system function for the complex envelopes in the form:
T (t f ) =
N X i=1
ie
;j 2 f i +fi t] e;j 2 f0 i + i
i
(5.4)
By means of the independence between
and j , we obtain:
0 0
E T (t f )T
X (t0 f 0)] = E
i=1
i i ]e
;j 2 (f ;f ) i +fi (t;t )]
(5.5)
where E ] stands for the ensamble average operator. Equation (5.5) can be written as:
E T (t f )T (t ; f + )] =
D Fi XX i=1 j =1
e;j2
i +j 2 fj E
j ij j2]
(5.6)
where = t ; t0, = f 0 ; f and the scattering points are combined in D groups each having the same delay i and Fi di erent values of the Doppler shift. Considering a continuous distribution of delays and Doppler shifts, Equation (5.6) can be transformed in the following way:
E T (t f )T (t ; f + )] =
Z Z
DF
(fd r )e;j2
r ej 2 fd
d r dfd
(5.7)
where r is the continuous variable representing the delays, fd is the continuous variable representing the Doppler shifts, and DF is the domain in the (fd r ) plane where the function (fd r ) is not vanishing. Note that
82
E T (t f )T (t ; f + )] = R ( ) represents the time frequency correlation function of the channel, and it is related to the function (fd r ) by a two dimensional Fourier transform. The function (fd r ) can thus be interpreted as the power density of the scattering points, and it is strictly related to the power delay pro le and the Doppler Spectrum of the channel. In fact it can be shown that: P ( r) = S (fd ) =
Z
(fd r ) dfd (f d r ) d
(5.8)
is the power delay pro le of the channel, while

Z
(5.9)
is the Doppler spectrum of the channel. As a result (fd r ) dfd d r represents the incremental value of average power due to echoes having Doppler shift between fd and fd + dfd and delay between r and r + d r . As proposed by Falciasecca, Frullone and Riva in 22], the simulation of the channel can be done by implementing Equation (5.1). When generating the random variable for Equation (5.1), it is possible to consider the (fd r ) function, suitable normalized, as the probability density function for a distribution of echoes having equal amplitude. In such a way (fd r ) dfd d r represents the probability of an echo occurring with Doppler shift between fd and fd + dfd and delay between r + d r . With this assumption the values of fd and r carrying out a great amount of power will be represented with a major number of echoes. The generation of the random variable fi and i for Equation (5.1) can be done with the following assumption: (fd r ) = P ( r )S (fd) (5.10)
P ( r ) and S (fd) can be separately normalized, and P ( r ) can be taken as the distribution of the i , while S (fd) can be taken as the distribution of fd . In order to approximate in a suitable way the continuous function (fd r ), it is necessary to use a great number of points N to implement Equation (5.1). As a consequence, even if the model correctly reproduce the behaviour of a mobile radio channel, its computational cost is too large.
83
A second approach to reproduce a fast and selective fading channel is the simulation model presented by Rappaport in 38]. The transmitted signal is split into several branches, each branch representing a cluster of echoes arriving at the receiver in an interval around an excess delay i. Each branch carries an amount of power given by the power delay pro le. If the echoes in the cluster are separated by a delay that is much lower than the duration of a transmitted symbol, each branch will undergo to a at (but potentially fast) fading. Dispersion in time is therefore introduced only by the presence of several branches. The simulation model is shown in Figure 5.5.
~ n(t)
~ x(t)
~ y(t)
0
~ (t) r0 P0
i
~ (t) ri P i
N
~ (t) rN P N
Figure 5.5. Diagram of the simulation model used for a fast and at fading channel, in the presence of the direct signal. x(t) is the complex envelope ~ of the input signal, i and Pi are the excess delays and power attenuations given by the power delay pro le, ri (t) are unitary power fading processes ~ and n(t) represents noise. ~
A nite number N of replicas of the input signal x(t) is produced, each ~
84
replica is delayed of i by a delay block, then the fast fading e ect is introduced by multiplying for a unitary power fading process ri(t). Finally, the ~ p signal is attenuated of Pi accordingly to the power delay pro le. The replicas are added to the direct component through an adder. White gaussian noise n(t) can be added to the received signal through another adder. ~ This model requires to discretize the power delay pro le, so that a discrete number N of delays i and gain factors Pi are produced. As already mentioned in Chapter 3, a discrete version of the power delay pro le can be used as long as the bandwidth of the transmitted signal is not greater than 1=(2 ), being the time step between i and i+1. Values of Pi, as suggested in the recommendation CEPT/GSM 05.05, should be chosen in order to maintain the time dispersive properties of the channel, in particular the mean excess delay introduced and the rms delay spread .
5.2 Description of the TOPSIM Simulation Block MUPATP

In Chapter 4 we have shown that the coherence bandwidth of the platform channel is Bc = 952 KHz, so that in most transmission systems the channel is expected to be at. In this case, a simulation model that takes into account at fading is enough for the platform channel. In particular, as explained in Chapter 2, line-of-sight transmission can be usually achieved from the platform, so that reliable simulation results can be obtained by using the model for fast and at fading with direct ray of Figure 5.4. However, in order to simulate the platform radio channel, we have used the model presented in Figure 5.5. As already stated this model is used to simulate channels that undergo to fast and selective fading. When dealing with stratospheric platform transmissions, this model is usually more accurate than what is really necessary, however it allows to fully comprehend the behaviour of the channel and to obtain a simulation program that is valid for every kind of transmission. The routine code is presented in appendix A. In a TOPSIM simulation program this block is called as follows:
85

Y < MUPATP(F0,D0,CVEL,MVEL,PVEL,G0,NTAP) < X
where X is the input analytic signal, while Y is the output analytic signal produced by the block. F0 is the frequency of the carrier, D0 is the distance between the receiver and the projection over the ground of the platform, CVEL, MVEL, PVEL are respectively light speed, the mobile receiver speed, and the platform speed. G0 is the ratio in dB between the power carried by the signal and the power carried by multipath waves, and NTAP is the number of tap used to simulate the power delay pro le of the channel (i.e, equals N in the diagram of Figure 5.5). Note that D0 must be expressed in kilometers, while CVEL, MVEL and PVEL must be expressed as kilometers over a time dimension that is taken accordingly to the normalization used to express simulation time (that is, if simulation time is given in microseconds, speed parameters must be expressed as km/us, if simulation time is in milliseconds, speeds parameters must be in km/ms, and so on). In the rst part of the program the arrays that will be used are dimensioned: ATAU and APOT are vectors of dimension NTAP that will contain the values of delay and power attenuation used to discretize the power delay pro le (i.e. they contain respectively the values of i and Pi of Figure 5.5), XRITIN, XRIT, X1 are used in order to produce the delayed versions of the input signal, Z1 is the unitary power fading process ri(t), and W1 is the ~ delayed echo that must be added to the input signal to obtain the output. The array dimensioning is followed by the allocation of the HISTORY. The HISTORY is a memory area used in TOPSIM to contain the value of those variables that are characteristic of one instance of the block, so that, at every simulation step, it is possible to keep memory of the value taken in the previous step by one speci c variable in one speci c call of the block. The HISTORY is composed of two arrays, the rst, HIST, is used for real variables, while the second, IST, is used for integer variables the function LOCH and LOCI allocate respectively a portion of the array HIST and IST, and return the index that must be used in order to access the memory area thus allocated. In the MUPATP block the HISTORY is organized in the following way: HIST(L)...HIST(L+NTAP-1), array of amplitude attenuations APOT1=2
86
IST(LTIN)...IST(LTIN+NTAP-1), array of delays expressed as number of samples HIST(LTPAR)...HIST(LTPAR+NTAP-1), array of the remaining part of the delays HIST(LXR1)...HIST(LXR1+NTAP-1), previous value of the in-phase part of the input signal X delayed of HIST(LTIN)..(LTIN+NTAP-1) HIST(LXR2)...HIST(LXR2+NTAP-1), previous value of the in-quadrature part of the input signal X delayed of HIST(LTIN)..(LTIN+NTAP-1) HIST(LF), doppler spread FD HIST(LAND), normalization coe cient for the direct ray HIST(LANM), normalization coe cient for the multipath waves IST(LNSIN), parameter for FADJAK After the HISTORY is allocated, the block verify if the simulation is already started, i.e. if the simulation time is greater than 0 if the simulation is not started, then a procedure of initialization is executed: the block calls the Fortran Subroutine POWDEL (see appendix B) with the statement
CALL POWDEL(F0,CVEL,DO,APOT,ATAU,NTAP)
that is used to calculate the power delay pro le that characterizes the geometry de ned by D0, and returns in APOT and ATAU the NTAP values of Pi and i used to discretize the power delay pro le. The arrays Pi and i are computed by POWDEL on the basis of Equations (4.26), (4.33) and (4.25). POWDEL evaluates the power delay pro le in one thousand instant of time , and then discretize it, by subdividing the time axis in NTAP intervals and by calculating the average power of each intervals. After the call to the subroutine POWDEL, a loop is executed. The loop memorizes in the HISTORY the amplitude attenuations APOT1=2 , and expresses the excess delays as number of simulation time steps, given by b i =DELT c (where DELT is the simulation time step), plus the remaining part of excess delay, that is a fraction of DELT, given by i ; b i =DELT c.
87
The excess delay must be divided in this way, because TOPSIM with the block DELAY allows to delay a signal only by a quantity that is a multiple of the simulation time step DELT. In order to introduce the correct excess delay i , the block DELAY will be used rst, in order to delay the signal of b i =DELT c time steps, and then the resulting signal will be interpolated in order to introduce the remaining delay fraction of DELT. Eventually, the initialization procedure evaluates the maximum Doppler spread using Equation (4.54) and stores it in the HISTORY, and then evaluates and stores the normalization coe cients for the direct and re ected rays. The normalization factors for the direct ray and the re ected waves are evaluated by calculating the total power carried by the multipath waves. SupP posing that the echoes are not correlated, this is given by PROV= NTAP Pi. i=1 In order to have the ratio between the power carried by the direct signal and the power carried by the multipath waves equal to G0, the multipath power is multiplied by GMULT = 10;G0=10 =PROV , and, in order to have an output signal with unitary power, both the direct ray and the multipath waves are attenuated by 1 + 10;G0=10. In this way the the normalization coe cient for the direct ray is 1 HIST (LAND) = 1 + 10;G0=10 while the normalization coe cient for the multipath waves is
r
HIST (LANM ) = 1 GMULT10 + 10;G0= The initialization procedure is followed by the core of the block code rst of all, the LOS component in the output signal Y is calculated by multiplying the input signal for the normalization factor ANORD = HIST (LAND). Then, the multipath components are introduced with a loop that calculates each NTAP taps representing the multipath contribute. In particular, in the loop the input signal X is delayed of a multiple of the simulation time step DELT with the block DELAY, thus obtaining XRITIN, and then XRITIN is delayed of the remaining part of the delay i, that is a fraction of the simulation time step. Note that the last part of the delay has been introduced by
88
delaying the in-phase and in-quadrature parts of XRITIN and then by introducing a phase shift. In fact, starting from the in-phase and in-quadrature representation of a signal
x(t) = xp(t) cos(2 f0t) ; xq (t) sin(2 f0t)

the delayed signal x(t ; i ) can be expressed as:
(5.11)
x(t ; i) = xp(t ; i) cos 2 f0 (t ; i )] ; xq (t ; i ) sin 2 f0(t ; i )] (5.12)

that leads to
x(t ; i) = fxp(t ; i) cos(2 f0 i) + xq (t ; i) sin(2 f0 i)g cos(2 fxq (t ; i ) cos(2 f0 i ) ; xp(t ; i ) sin(2 f0 i )g sin(2
f0t) ; f0t) (5.13)
x(t)
x(t n - i ) x(t n ) xd x(t n-1 ) x(t) t n-1 tn - i tn t
i
DELT
Figure 5.6. Method of interpolation used to introduce a delay that is a fraction of the simulation time step DELT.
The in-phase and in-quadrature delayed part of XRITIN are obtained by means of an interpolation. In fact, as shown in Figure 5.6, if the values of a
89
function x(t) are known in tn = n DELT and in tn;1 = (n ; 1) DELT , it is possible to approximate the delayed function x(tn ; i ) with that can be written as
; x( x(tn ; i) ' xd = x(tn;1 ) + x(tn)DELTtn;1 ) (DELT ; i)
(5.14)
i i x(tn ; i ) ' 1 ; DELT x(tn ) + DELT x(tn;1 ) (5.15) The global delayed signal X1 is then multiplied for the unitary power fading process Z1 generated by the FADJAK block, and afterwards it is normalized by multiplying for the factor ANORM. Finally, this echo is added to the output signal with the block BPSUM.
5.3 MUPATP Block Validation

In order to fully understand and verify the behaviour of the block, in the following the results of some simulations executed with the block MUPATP and with a modi ed version of this block, called MUPNOF are presented. MUPNOF omits the generation of the unitary power fading process Z1, that is used to introduce phenomena related with dispersion in frequency. As a consequence, the block MUPNOF can be used to highlight solely the e ects of dispersion in time in the behaviour of the stratospheric channel. Let us take into account a discretized power delay pro le having six echoes. The value of Pi and i generated in this case by the subroutine POWDEL are reported in Table 5.1, and are presented in Figure 5.7. The theoretical impulse response of the channel should consists of six p echoes, having amplitude given by Pi, delayed and shifted in phase accordingly to i. The in-phase and in-quadrature parts of the theoretical baseband impulse response are reported in Figure 5.8 and 5.9. Figures from 5.10 to 5.13 shown the in-phase part of the baseband impulse responses obtained with the MUPNOF block for di erent values of the simulation time step DELT. In particular, DELT is taken equal to 250 ns, 62.5 ns, 15.625 ns and 3.90625 ns, that correspond to the time steps used in the case of a transmission with a modulation that carries 2 bit per symbol,
90
Delay i us] 0.012905 0.035654 0.058403 0.081152 0.103901 0.126650
Pi=PLOS Pi=PLOS dB] 0.06949 -11.5 0.00554 -22.5 0.00280 -25.5 0.00186 -27.3 0.00138 -28.5 0.00110 -29.5
Ai=ALOS 0.26362 0.07442 0.05293 0.04308 0.03717 0.03314
Table 5.1. Values of Pi and i for the discretized power delay pro le with 6 taps, produced by the POWDEL block.
Discretized Power Delay Profile of the Stratospheric Channel -10 -12 -14 -16 Pi/PLOS [dB] -18 -20 -22 -24 -26 -28 -30 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 Excess Delay [s]
Figure 5.7. Discretized Power Delay Pro le with 6 echoes, normalized to the line of sight (LOS) received power.
with 32 samples for each symbol, and with a bit rate of 0.25, 1, 4 and 16 Mb/s. Note that TOPSIM approximates an impulse with the triangular shape of Figure 5.14. When the impulse is delayed by a quantity i that is not an integer multiple of DELT, the interpolation used in order to produce the
91
Theoretical Impulse Response of the Stratospheric Channel 1 0.8 0.6 In-phase Part 0.4 0.2 0 -0.2 -0.4 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 Excess Delay [s] 0.12 0.14
Figure 5.8. In phase part of the theoretical baseband impulse response of the stratospheric channel.
Theoretical Impulse Response of the Stratospheric Channel 0.07 0.06 0.05 In-quadrature Part 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 -0.01 -0.02 -0.03 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 Excess Delay [s] 0.12 0.14
Figure 5.9. In quadrature part of the theoretical baseband impulse response of the stratospheric channel.
92
Impulse Response generated by TOPSIM 0.8 0.7 Rb= 0.25 Mb/s 0.6 In-phase Part 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0.1 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Excess Delay [s] 14 16
Figure 5.10. In phase part of the simulated baseband impulse response of the stratospheric channel, for a simulation time step DELT=250 ns.
Impulse Response generated by TOPSIM 0.8 0.7 Rb= 1 Mb/s 0.6 In-phase Part 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0.1 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 Excess Delay [s] 3.5 4
Figure 5.11. In phase part of the simulated baseband impulse response of the stratospheric channel, for a simulation time step DELT=62.5 ns.
93
Impulse Response generated by TOPSIM 1 0.8 Rb= 4 Mb/s 0.6 In-phase Part 0.4 0.2 0 -0.2 -0.4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 Excess Delay [s] 0.8 1
Impulse Response generated by TOPSIM 1
0.8
Rb= 16 Mb/s
In-phase Part
0.6
0.4
0.2
-0.2 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 Excess Delay [s] 0.2 0.25
94
delay yields to the trapezoidal shape of Figure 5.15, whose time support is 3 DELT. The simulated impulse response of the channel is thus dependent on the simulation time step. In particular, if 3 DELT is greater than the time interval = i ; i;1 between two consecutive echoes, the trapezoidal impulses overlap, as in Figures 5.10, 5.11 and 5.12, while if 3 DELT is not greater than the echoes can be resolved and each echoes is visible in the impulse response (see Figure 5.13). As a consequence, the e ects of dispersion in time are not negligible only in the case of elevated bit rates.
0 TIME DELT
Figure 5.14. Shape of an impulse simulated by TOPSIM.
(n-1)DELT
n DELT
TIME
Figure 5.15. Shape of a delayed impulse generated by MUPATP or MUPNOF.
95
The scattering diagrams obtained by simulating a system with a 4-DPSK modulation scheme and a bit rate of 0.5, 2, 6 and 10 Mb/s are reported in Figures from 5.16 to 5.19. In all this cases the channel is simulated by the MUPNOF block. Note that for low values of the bit rate, the e ects of time dispersion are largely negligible and the points of the 4-DPSK constellation are well marked. However, when the bit rate increases, i.e the duration of a transmitted symbol decreases, the e ect of dispersion in time can be observed, and intersymbolic interference (ISI) arises. In Figure 5.20 the area around a point of the constellation of Figure 5.19 is zoomed. A replica of the 4-DPSK constellation is clearly overlapped to the transmitted constellation, as it is expected when dealing with ISI phenomena.
SCATTERING DIAGRAM OF XFRX - SAMPLED AT 7 1.25
0.75
QUADRATURE - RB=5.000000E-01
0.5
0.25
-0.25
-0.5
-0.75
-1
-1.25 -1.25
-1
-0.75
-0.5
-0.25
0 0.25 IN-PHASE
0.5
0.75
1.25
Figure 5.16. Scattering diagram for a 4DPSK transmission at a bit rate of 0.5 Mb/s. The transmission channel is simulated by the MUPNOF block.
Note that when the direct component is attenuated, the e ects of ISI become more evident. In Figure from 5.21 to 5.24 the scattering diagrams in the case that the Carrier to Multipath (C/M) ratio is reduced to 6 dB, instead of the 18 dB predicted for the system in Chapter 4 (see Table 4.1), are reported.
96
0.75
QUADRATURE - RB=2.000000E+00
0.5
0.25
-0.25
-0.5
-0.75
-1
-1.25 -1.25
-1
-0.75
-0.5
-0.25
0 0.25 IN-PHASE
0.5
0.75
1.25
Figure 5.17. Scattering diagram for a 4DPSK transmission at a bit rate of 2 Mb/s. The transmission channel is simulated by the MUPNOF block.
0.75
0.5
0.25
-0.25
-0.5
-0.75
-1
-1.25 -1.25
-1
-0.75
-0.5
-0.25
0 0.25 IN-PHASE
0.5
0.75
1.25
97
0.75
0.5
0.25
-0.25
-0.5
-0.75
-1
-1.25 -1.25
-1
-0.75
-0.5
-0.25
0 0.25 IN-PHASE
0.5
0.75
1.25
Figures 5.25 and 5.27 show the curve of BER (Bit Error Rate) for a 4DPSK modulation scheme operating over the MUPNOF simulated channel, for a C/M ratio of respectively 18 and 6 dB. Note that for a C/M ratio of 18 dB the e ect of dispersion in time is highly negligible (see Figure 5.26), while it becomes visible for a C/M ratio of 6 dB, even if only for high bit rates. However, it should be noted that in these plots the phase of interfering echoes is xed and depend on the delays i . In a realistic multipath channel, the phase of the echoes vary widely in time and the phenomena of destructive interference may arise, thus causing a great worsening in the performance of the system. In this respect, the curves of Figures 5.25 and 5.27 represents the e ect of one of the possible interfering echoes con guration, and cannot be interpreted as a measure of the worsening caused by multipath. In order to have a realistic estimation of the multipath e ect, the time varying nature of the multipath channel by using the MUPATP block must be reproduced.
98
SCATTERING DIAGRAM OF XFRX - SAMPLED AT 7
0.875
0.85
0.825 QUADRATURE - RB=1.000000E+01
0.8
0.775
0.75
0.725
0.7
0.675 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 IN-PHASE 0 0.05
Figure 5.20. Particular of the scattering diagram for a 4DPSK transmission at a bit rate of 10 Mb/s. The transmission channel is simulated by the MUPNOF block.
0.6
0.4 QUADRATURE - RB=5.000000E-01
0.2
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8 -0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0 IN-PHASE
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Figure 5.21. Scattering diagram for a 4DPSK transmission at a bit rate of 0.5 Mb/s. The transmission channel is simulated by the MUPNOF block and the C/M ratio is set to 6 dB.
99
0.6
0.4 QUADRATURE - RB=2.000000E+00
0.2
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8 -0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0 IN-PHASE
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Figure 5.22. Scattering diagram for a 4DPSK transmission at a bit rate of 2 Mb/s. The transmission channel is simulated by the MUPNOF block and the C/M ratio is set to 6 dB.
0.6
0.4 QUADRATURE - RB=6.000000E+00
0.2
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8 -0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0 IN-PHASE
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
100
0.4
0.2
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6 -0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0 IN-PHASE
0.2
0.4
0.6
BER for a 4-DPSK Modulation, with C/M=18 dB -1 -2 -3 -4 Log(BER) -5 -6 -7 -8 -9 -10 8 10 12 14 Eb/N0 [dB] 16 18 AWGN Channel Mupnof, 0.25 Mb/s Mupnof, 1 Mb/s Mupnof, 4 Mb/s Mupnof, 8 Mb/s
Figure 5.25. BER for a 4-DPSK transmission scheme with a bit rate from 0.25 to 8 Mb/s, using the MUPNOF block with C/M ratio of 18 dB.
101
BER for a 4-DPSK Modulation, with C/M=18 dB -9.3 AWGN Channel Mupnof, 0.25 Mb/s -9.31 Mupnof, 1 Mb/s Mupnof, 4 Mb/s -9.32 Mupnof, 8 Mb/s -9.33 Log(BER) -9.34 -9.35 -9.36 -9.37 -9.38 -9.39 -9.4 15.5 15.51 15.52 15.53 15.54 Eb/N0 [dB] 15.55 15.56
Figure 5.26. A particular of the curve of BER for a 4-DPSK transmission scheme with a bit rate from 0.25 to 8 Mb/s, using the MUPNOF block with C/M ratio of 18 dB.
BER for a 4-DPSK Modulation, with C/M=6 dB -1 -2 -3 -4 Log(BER) -5 -6 -7 -8 -9 -10 8 10 12 14 Eb/N0 [dB] 16 18 AWGN Channel Mupnof, 0.25 Mb/s Mupnof, 1 Mb/s Mupnof, 4 Mb/s Mupnof, 8 Mb/s
Figure 5.27. BER for a 4-DPSK transmission scheme with a bit rate from 0.25 to 8 Mb/s, using the MUPNOF block with C/M ratio of 6 dB.
102
5.4 Simulation Results Using the MUPATP Block

In Figures 5.28 and 5.29 the scattering diagram of the received signal obtained using respectively the Ricean model and the MUPATP block, for a 4-DPSK transmission scheme at a bit rate of 0.25 Mb/s are shown. The time varying process are generated by the block FADJAK that introduces the e ects of dispersion in frequency. This process can produce deep fading, corresponding to the case in which the interfering rays are destructive and in phase with each others. Both the diagrams show that the points of the received constellation move in a wide area, thus strongly worsening the performance of the transmission system.
SCATTERING DIAGRAM OF XFRXR - SAMPLED AT 7 2
1.5
0.5 QUADRATURE
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 IN-PHASE 0.5 1 1.5 2
Figure 5.28. Scattering diagram of the received signal, using a Ricean channel with a C/M ratio of 18 dB.
In Figure 5.30, the BER estimated for the 4-DPSK scheme using the Ricean model and the MUPATP block for a C/M ratio of 18 dB at a bit rate of 0.25, 1 and 4 Mb/s is reported and compared with the BER obtained over a AWGN channel. It is shown that for a bit rate of 0.25 and 1 Mb/s the curves obtained with the MUPATP block substantially overlap with the curves obtained with the Ricean model, while for a bit rate of 4 Mb/s the
103
SCATTERING DIAGRAM OF XFRXM - SAMPLED AT 7 2
1.5
0.5 QUADRATURE
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 IN-PHASE 0.5 1 1.5 2
Figure 5.29. Scattering diagram of the received signal, using the MUPATP channel with a C/M ratio of 18 dB with bit rate 0.25 Mb/s .
MUPATP curve shifts to the right. This value of bit rate corresponds to a bandwidth of about 2MHz, that is greater than the coherence bandwidth of the platform Bc = 952:38 KHz, found in Equation 4.53. In this case the channel becomes selective in frequency and the performance of the system are worse. However, being the C/M ratio very high, the worsening is quite negligible. Obviously, the use of the simple white gaussian noisy channel leads to estimate a better performance than the fading channel. The e ects of multipath become more evident when the C/M ratio is set to 6 dB, as in the case of Figure 5.31. Also in such a case, the curve of BER obtained using a white gaussian noisy channel are compared with the Ricean results and with those obtained with the MUPATP block at a bit rate of 0.25, 1 and 4 Mb/s. Being the contribute of multiple echoes higher than in the case of Figure 5.30, the performance estimated by the MUPATP block are highly worse than that provided by the simple Ricean channel. Also in such a case a signi cant worsening can be seen when the bandwidth of the transmitted signal exceeds the coherence bandwidth, i.e. for a bit rate of 4 Mb/s. However, the e ect of the frequency selective channel begins to be visible even at a bit rate of 1 Mb/s.
104
BER for a 4-DPSK Modulation, with C/M=18 dB -1 -2 -3 -4 Log(BER) -5 -6 -7 -8 -9 -10 8 10 12 14 Eb/N0 [dB] 16 18 20 AWGN Channel Ricean Channel Mupatp, 0.25 Mb/s Mupatp, 1 Mb/s Mupatp, 4 Mb/s
Figure 5.30. BER for a 4-DPSK transmission scheme using a white gaussian noisy channel, a Ricean channel, and the MUPATP block with a C/M ratio of 18 dB, at a bit rate of 0.25, 1, 4 Mb/s.
Gaussian channel C/M=18 dB 10.78 dB C/M=6 dB 10.78 dB
Eb =N0 for a BER=10;4 Ricean MUPATP block at: channel 0.25 Mb/s 1 Mb/s 4 Mb/s 11.14 dB 11.09 dB 11.28 dB 11.49 dB 14.62 dB 14.85 dB 15.14 dB 20.21 dB
Table 5.2. Estimated values of the signal to noise ratio necessary to achieve a bit error rate of 10;4 , using the simple White gaussian noisy channel, the Ricean channel, and the MUPATP block at a bit rate of 0.25, 1 and 4Mb/s
In Table 5.2 the values of signal to noise ratio (Eb=N0) necessary to achieve a Bit Error Rate of 10;4 are reported. Note that, in this case, the Ricean model is not dependent on the bit rate because the coherence time Tc of the channel is always largely greater than the symbol duration (Tc = 0:806 ms), while for a bit rate of 0.25, 1 and 4 Mb/s, the symbol duration with a 4-DPSK modulation is respectively 8 s, 2 s and 0.5 s. The study has been limited
105
BER for a 4-DPSK Modulation, with C/M=6 dB -1 -2 -3 -4 Log(BER) -5 -6 -7 -8 -9 -10 10 15 20 Eb/N0 [dB] 25 30 AWGN Channel Ricean Channel Mupatp, 0.25 Mb/s Mupatp, 1 Mb/s Mupatp, 4 Mb/s
Figure 5.31. BER for a 4-DPSK transmission scheme using a white gaussian noisy channel, a Ricean channel, and the MUPATP block with a C/M ratio of 6 dB, at a bit rate of 0.25, 1, 4 Mb/s.
to these values of bit rate because the duration of a simulation increases linearly with the bit rate. As a consequence, the simulation of higher bit rates is too long. In fact, in order to observe the complete behaviour of the fading process, the behaviour of the system in a period of time greater than the coherence time Tc of the fading process must be observed. Otherwise, the results would be obtained observing symbols that undergoes to similar level of attenuation, being Tc de ned as the time duration over which two received signal have a strong potential for amplitude correlation. Consider as an example, a simulated time of nTc, then the number of symbols simulated is nTc=Ts, where Ts is the symbol duration. However, in a 4-DPSK scheme, Ts is related to the bit rate Rb by Ts = 2=Rb , thus the number of symbol simulated is RbnTc=2. The greater Rb, the greater the number of symbols that must be simulated (i.e. the computational duration of the simulation). In the simulation n = 50 has been taken into account: the entire trend of the fading process is thus observed, as can be seen by the scattering diagram corresponding to a bit rate of 0.25 Mb/s (see Figure 5.29).
106
Conclusions
Flying at an altitude of 17 km a stratospheric platform can cover a wide area, having a radius on the order of one hundred kilometers. In the previous chapters we have studied how the propagation is a ected by the high position of the platform, and a simulation model for the stratospheric channel has been presented, together with the simulation results obtained in the case of a transmission system that uses a 4-DPSK simulation scheme. As it was pointed out, the distance between a transmitter TX placed as payload to the platform and a receiver RX at ground level is always greater than the distance TX-RX in the case that TX is at ground level. As a consequence, the transmission from a stratospheric platform undergoes to a greater free space attenuation. However, the high position of the platform grants some major advantages. In this work it has been proved that some of the most important e ects that are detriment to propagation (ground re ection, di raction, and scattering from rain) can be greatly decreased thanks to the high altitude of the platform. As a consequence, when the receiver is at a ground distance greater than a few kilometers, the total attenuation experienced in a PS based system is lower than in a GS based system. In Chapters 3 and 4 we have studied the e ects due to small scale fading, and in particular we have evaluated the Doppler Spectrum and the Power Delay Pro le for the stratospheric channel. The analysis of these functions allows to predict the e ects of dispersion in frequency and time. In the PS case the dispersion in frequency is greater than in the GS case, because also the movement of the platform must be taken into account. On the other hand, dispersion in time is greatly reduced. In fact in a platform based
107
system the elements of scattering that generate the interfering echoes can be found only in a layer at ground level and thus only around the receiver. As a consequence the number of echoes in a PS based system is lower than in a GS based system. Moreover, the presence of a direct ray from the transmitter to the receiver makes the ratio between the power of the transmitted signal and the power of the interfering rays very high. It follows that the time support and rms delay spread of the power delay pro le are smaller in the case of the stratospheric channel than in traditional terrestrial systems. As a consequence, in the stratospheric case fading can be considered at even at large bandwidth, on the order of 1 MHz, and the stratospheric channel can be represented by a Ricean model, having a Carrier to Multipath (C/M) ratio of 18 dB. Those conditions grant to the system better performance than the traditional terrestrial mobile radio channel, where time dispersion cannot be neglected for a signal bandwidth greater than 20 kHz1 , and that is usually represented by a Rayleigh channel model, because frequently the direct ray cannot be distinguished by the interfering echoes. In conclusion, a system based on a stratospheric platform is capable of a wide coverage, in most part of its coverage area undergoes to a weaker attenuation level than a terrestrial system, and is a ected by less severe fading e ects, so that it can be used also for wideband applications.
This is the coherence bandwidth for a channel having an rms delay spread as can be found using Equation (3.13).
1
of 1 us,
108
Appendix A The Simulation Block MUPATP

SUBROUTINE MUPATP(F0,D0,CVEL,MVEL,PVEL,G0,NTAP,X,Y) SAVE C C******************************************************************* C PROGRAMMER ROBERTO FANTINI C------------------------------------------------------------------C LATEST REVISION 30-01-2001 C------------------------------------------------------------------C SUBROUTINE CODE ???? C------------------------------------------------------------------C PURPOSES (Q)Diffuse Multipath scattering channel C C Simulate a diffuse multipath scattering channel from a C stratospheric platform C C A tapped delay-line model is used C C------------------------------------------------------------------C PARAMETERS C
109
A { The Simulation Block MUPATP

C F0 C D0 C CVEL C MVEL C PVEL C G0 C C NTAP = center frequency - real variable = receiver ground distance in KM - real variable = speed of light in KM/?? - real variable = receiver speed in KM/?? - real variable = platform speed in KM/?? - real variable = C/M carrier to multipath power ratio in dB - real variable = number of reflected rays - integer variable
C------------------------------------------------------------------C INPUT SIGNALS C C X = input analytic signal C------------------------------------------------------------------C OUTPUT SIGNALS C C Y = output analytic signal C------------------------------------------------------------------C SIGNAL TYPE C C X C Y = A = A
C------------------------------------------------------------------C TOPSIM CALLING MODE C C Y < MUPATP(F0,D0,CVEL,MVEL,PVEL,G0,NTAP) < X C******************************************************************* C COMMON BLOCKS C (if applicable) C C (*) ZZCTRL C (*) ZZHIST C (*) ZZIST C C ...... KEEP,NCOUNT,TIME,DELT,FINTIM HIST(20000) IST(20000) ......
110

C (*) ARE STANDARD TOPSIM COMMON BLOCKS C------------------------------------------------------------------C SUBPROGRAMS USED C C C C C C C COMMON/ZZCTRL/KEEP,NCOUNT,TIME,DELT,FINTIM COMMON/ZZHIST/HIST(20000) COMMON/ZZIST/IST(20000) C------------------------------------------------------------------C C DIMENSION ATAU(NTAP) DIMENSION APOT(NTAP) DIMENSION X(3) DIMENSION Y(3) DIMENSION XRITIN(3) DIMENSION Z1(3) DIMENSION XRIT(2) DIMENSION X1(3) DIMENSION W1(3) C-----------------------------------------------------------------C C L=LOCH(NTAP) LTIN=LOCI(NTAP) LTPAR=LOCH(NTAP) LXR1=LOCH(NTAP) LXR2=LOCH(NTAP) HISTORY REQUIREMENTS DIMENSIONING ARRAYS TSEDET HIMULT BPSUM FADJAK SUBROUTINE BLOCK BLOCK BLOCK (TOPSIM SERVICE LIBRARY) (TOPSIM LIBRARY) (TOPSIM LIBRARY) (TOPSIM LIBRARY) (FORTRAN SUBROUTINE)
POWDEL SUBROUTINE COMMON BLOCKS
C*******************************************************************
111

LF=LOCH(1) LAND=LOCH(1) LANM=LOCH(1) LNSIN= LOCI(1) IF(TIME.GT.0.)GOTO 22222 C C HISTORY ORGANIZATION C C HIST(L)...HIST(L+NTAP-1) C C C C C C C C HIST(LF) C HIST(LAND) C HIST(LANM) C IST(LNSIN) C C CALL POWDEL(F0,CVEL,D0,APOT,ATAU,NTAP) PROV=0. DO 10 I=1,NTAP J=L+I-1 HIST(J)=SQRT(APOT(I)) K=LTIN+I-1 IST(K)=INT(ATAU(I)/DELT) array of amplitude attenuations APOT^(1/2) array of delays expressed as number of samples of the delays part of the input signal X delayed of HIST(LTIN)..(LTIN+NTAP-1) part of the input signal X delayed of HIST(LTIN)..(LTIN+NTAP-1) doppler spread FD normalization coefficient normalization coefficient parameter for fadjak for the direct ray for the multipath waves
C IST(LTIN)...IST(LTIN+NTAP-1)
C HIST(LTPAR)...HIST(LTPAR+NTAP-1) array of the remaining part C HIST(LXR1)...HIST(LXR1+NTAP-1) previous value of the in-phase
C HIST(LXR2)...HIST(LXR2+NTAP-1) previous value of the in-quadrature
C------------------------------------------------------------------INITIALIZATION PROCEDURE
112

KK=LTPAR+I-1 HIST(KK)=ATAU(I)-DELT*INT(ATAU(I)/DELT) JJ=LXR1+I-1 HIST(JJ)=0 JK=LXR2+I-1 HIST(JK)=0 PROV=PROV+APOT(I) 10 CONTINUE FD=(PVEL+MVEL)*F0/CVEL HIST(LF)=FD GMULT=10.**(-G0/10)/PROV HIST(LAND)=SQRT( IST(LNSIN)=77 PI=4.*ATAN(1.) C------------------------------------------------------------------22222 C C CALL ANSCK(29023,X) C------------------------------------------------------------------C C FDTOT=HIST(LF) ANORD=HIST(LAND) ANORM=HIST(LANM) NSIN=IST(LNSIN) C------------------------------------------------------------------C C Y(1)=ANORD*X(1) Y(2)=ANORD*X(2) Y(3)=F0 LINE OF SIGHT TAP PROGRAM STATEMENTS CONTINUE CHECK ON INPUT SIGNALS C------------------------------------------------------------------1./(1.+10.**(-G0/10)) ) HIST(LANM)=SQRT( GMULT/(1.+10.**(-G0/10)) )
113

C------------------------------------------------------------------C C DO 30 I=1,NTAP CALL DELAY(IST(LTIN+I-1),X,XRITIN) XRIT(1)=(1-HIST(LTPAR+I-1)/DELT)*XRITIN(1) + 1 2 3 4 X1(3)= F0 HIST(LXR1+I-1)=XRITIN(1) HIST(LXR2+I-1)=XRITIN(2) CALL FADJAK(NSIN,F0,FDTOT,Z1) NSIN=NSIN+2 CALL HIMULT(X1,Z1,W1) W1(1)=ANORM*HIST(L+I-1)*W1(1) W1(2)=ANORM*HIST(L+I-1)*W1(2) W1(3)=F0 CALL BPSUM(F0,Y,W1,Y) 30 C C RETURN C------------------------------------------------------------------C ERROR MESSAGES C C 29023 MUPATP Input signal not analytic C------------------------------------------------------------------END CONTINUE RETURN TO THE CALLING PROGRAM C------------------------------------------------------------------HIST(LTPAR+I-1)/DELT*HIST(LXR1+I-1) XRIT(2)=(1-HIST(LTPAR+I-1)/DELT)*XRITIN(2) + HIST(LTPAR+I-1)/DELT*HIST(LXR2+I-1) X1(1)= XRIT(1)*COS(2*PI*F0*HIST(LTPAR+I-1)) + XRIT(2)*SIN(2*PI*F0*HIST(LTPAR+I-1)) X1(2)= XRIT(2)*COS(2*PI*F0*HIST(LTPAR+I-1)) XRIT(1)*SIN(2*PI*F0*HIST(LTPAR+I-1)) REFLECTED PATHS
114
Appendix B The Fortran Subroutine POWDEL

SUBROUTINE POWDEL(F0,C,X0,POTI,TI,NTAP) SAVE C C****************************************** C C F0 = center frequency - real variable C C = light speed C X0 = user position in km C NTAP = number of taps returned C POTI = power associated to i-th tap - array C TI C C*************************************************************** C SUBPROGRAMS USED C C ATAN C INT =FORTRAN intrinsic function =FORTRAN intrinsic function = delay associated to i-th tap - array
C ALOG10 =FORTRAN intrinsic function C************************************************************* C DIMENSIONING ARRAYS
115
B { The Fortran Subroutine POWDEL

C DIMENSION T(1000) DIMENSION V(1000) DIMENSION PRX(1000) DIMENSION PS(1000) DIMENSION TS(1000) DIMENSION POTI(NTAP) DIMENSION TI(NTAP) N=1000 M=50 C C************************************************************* C PI = 4*ATAN(1.) Z0 = 17 H=0.018 RHO=10**6 SIGMA=20E-6 RDIR=SQRT(X0**2 + Z0**2) T0=RDIR/C TMAX=T0/400. C C************************************************************* C T(1) V(1) DT = 0 = 0 = TMAX/N
PRX(1) = 1 DO 101 I=2,N T(I) = TMAX*(I-1)/N V(I) = -PI*(RDIR+C*T(I))*(C**2*T(I)**2+2*RDIR*C*T(I))* 1 2 (4/3*H**3-2*Z0*H**2-(C**2*T(I)**2+2*RDIR*C*T(I))*H)/ (4*SQRT((Z0**2+C**2*T(I)**2 + 2*RDIR*C*T(I))**3)) DV=V(I)-V(I-1)
116

ECHI=RHO*DV RK=RDIR+C*T(I) B=(RK**2-RDIR**2)/(2*SQRT(RK**2-X0**2)) Y=0 DY=B/M RTFIX=B**2*(RK**2+X0**2)/(RK**2-X0**2) 1 1 - X0**2/(RK**2-X0**2)*Y**2 RTVAR=2*B**2*X0*RK/(RK**2-X0**2)* SQRT(1-Y**2/B**2) RTPOS=SQRT(RTFIX+RTVAR) RTNEG=SQRT(RTFIX-RTVAR) OLDPRP=(RDIR**2*SIGMA/(4*PI))/ 1 1 ((RK-RTPOS)**2*RTPOS**2) OLDPRN=(RDIR**2*SIGMA/(4*PI))/ ((RK-RTNEG)**2*RTNEG**2) PROVP=0 PROVN=0 DO 100 J=2,M Y=Y+DY RTFIX=B**2*(RK**2+X0**2)/(RK**2-X0**2) 1 1 - X0**2/(RK**2-X0**2)*Y**2 RTVAR=2*B**2*X0*RK/(RK**2-X0**2)* SQRT(1-Y**2/B**2) RTPOS=SQRT(RTFIX+RTVAR) RTNEG=SQRT(RTFIX-RTVAR) PRNPOS=(RDIR**2/(4*PI))/ 1 1 ((RK-RTPOS)**2*RTPOS**2)*SIGMA PRNNEG=(RDIR**2/(4*PI))/ ((RK-RTNEG)**2*RTNEG**2)*SIGMA PROVP=PROVP + (PRNPOS+OLDPRP)/(2*M) PROVN=PROVN + (PRNNEG+OLDPRN)/(2*M) OLDPRP=PRNPOS OLDPRN=PRNNEG 100 CONTINUE
117

PRXECO=0.5*PROVP+0.5*PROVN PRX(I)=PRXECO*ECHI 101 CONTINUE FLAGC=1 DO 110 I=1,N IF ((PRX(I).LT.1).AND.(FLAGC.NE.0)) THEN IMIN=I FLAGC=0 END IF 110 CONTINUE FLAGC=1 DO 120 I=1,N IF ((10*ALOG10(PRX(I)).LE.(-30)).AND.(FLAGC.NE.0)) 1 THEN IMAX=I FLAGC=0 END IF 120 CONTINUE NUM=IMAX-IMIN+1 DO 130 I=1, NUM PS(I)=PRX(IMIN+I-1) TS(I)=T(IMIN+I-1) 130 CONTINUE NSTEP= INT(NUM/NTAP) DO 141 I=1,NTAP TI(I)=TS(INT(NSTEP/2)+(I-1)*NSTEP) PROV=0 DO 140 J=1, (NSTEP-1) PROV=PROV + (PS((I-1)*NSTEP+J) + 1 140 141 CONTINUE END POTI(I)=PROV PS((I-1)*NSTEP+J+1))/(2*NSTEP) CONTINUE
118
Bibliography
1] http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/usaf/gh fs.html 2] http:/www.angeltechnologies.com 3] http://www.dfrc.nasa,gov/index.html 4] http://www.helinet.it 5] http://www.skystation.com 6] A.S.Akki, F. Haber, \A Statistical Model of Mobile-to-Mobile Land Communication Channel", IEEE Trans. on Vehicular Technology, Vol. VT-35, No. 1, Feb 1986 7] C.A.Balanis, \Antenna Theory Analysis and Design", Harper & Row Publisher, New York, 1982 8] A. Banarroch, L.Mercader, \Signal Statistic From a LMSS Propagation Experiment in Europe", Telecommunications Symposium 1990, ITS'90 Symposium Record, SBT/IEEE International 9] A.S.Bawja, \UHF wideband statistical model and simulation of mobile radio multipath propagation e ects", IEE Proceedings, Vol. 132, Pt.F, No. 5, Aug 1985 10] P.A.Bello, \Characterization of Random Time-Variant Linear Channels", IEEE Trans. Comm. Syst., Vol. CS-11, pp. 360-393, Dec. 1963 11] A.G.Burr, \Wide-band Channel Modeling Using a Spatial Model", IEEE Proceedings of 5th International Symposium on Spread Spectrum Techniques and Applications, Vol. 1, 1998
119
BIBLIOGRAPHY
12] \COST: Urban Transmission Loss Models for Mobile Radio in the 900 and 1800 MHz Bands", Rep. COST 231 TD (91) 73,TheHague, Sept. 1991 13] M.Cowley, \Solar Challenger", Aeromodeller, pp. 281-287, June 1981 14] D.C.Cox, R.P.Leck, \Distributions of Multipath Delay Spread and Average Excess Delay for 910 MHz Urban Mobile Radio Paths", IEEE Trans. on Antennas & Propagation, Vol. AP-23, No. 5, Mar.1975 15] D.C.Cox, \Delay Doppler Characteristics of Multipath Delay Spread and Average Excess Delay for 910 MHZ Urban Mobile Radio Paths",IEEE Trans. on Antennas & Propagation, Vol. AP-20, No. 5, Sept. 1972 16] E.Damosso, L.Stola, \Simulazione al calcolatore di a evolimenti da cammini multipli per radiomobile", CSELT 17] D.J.Devarsivatham, M.J.Krain, D.A.Rappaport, \Radio Propagation Measurements at 850 MHz, 1.7 GHz and 4.0 GHz Inside Two Dissimilar O ce Building", Electronics Letters, Vol. 26, No. 7, 1990 18] G.M.Djuknic, J.Freidenfelds, Y.Okunev, \Estabilishing Wireless Communications Services via High Altitude Platforms: A Concept Whose Time has Come?", IEEE Communications Magazine, pp 128-135, Sept.1997 19] M.Dottling, A.Jahn, J.Kunisch, S.Buonomo, \A Versatile Propagation Channel Simulator for Land Mobile Satellite Applications", 1998 IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference 20] F.Dovis, F.Sellone, \Increasing the capacity of existing terrestrial outdoor radio mobile systems by means of UAV-HALE platforms", 2000 IEEE Proceedings of Vehicular Technology Conference, VCC 2000 Spring Tokyo , 51st Vol. 3, 2000 21] P.Edin,\ESA HALE General Study, Final Report", ESTEC, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, Nov. 1996
120
BIBLIOGRAPHY
22] G.Falciasecca, M.Frullone, G.Riva, \In uence of Environmental Conditions on BER for Wideband Mobile Radio Channels", Alta Frequenza, Vol. LVII, No. 2, Feb.-Mar. 1988 23] ITU Reccomendations Assembly, \Speci c Rain Attenuation", Reccomendation ITU-R PN.838-1, 1992-4 24] W.C.Jr Jakes, \Microwave Mobile Communications", WileyInterscience Publications, Toronto 1974 25] E.F.Knott, \Radar Cross Section Measurements", ed. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York 1993 26] W.C.Y. Lee, \Mobile Cellular Telecommunications System", McGraw Hill Publications, New York, 1989 27] J.C.Liberti, \Analysis of CDMA Cellular Radio System Employing Adaptative Antennas", PH.D. Dissertation, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, September,1995 28] K.Low, \A Comparison of CW-Measurements Performed in Darmstadt with the COST-231-Wal sch-Ikegami Model", Rep. COST 231 TD (91) 74, Darmstadt, Germany, Sept. 1991 29] L.R.Maciel, H.L.Bertoni, H.H.Xia, \Uni ed Approach to Prediction of Propagation over Buildings for all Ranges of Base Station Antenna Height", IEEE Trans. on Vehicular Technology, Vol. 42, No. 1, Feb. 1993 30] G.Maral, M.Bousquet, \Satellite Communications System", ed. Wiley and Sons, 1993 31] P.Mulassano, L.Lo Presti, \Object Detection on the Sea Surface, based on Texture Analysis", 6th IEEE International Conference on Electronics, Circuits and System, Paphos, Cyprus, 5-8 Sept. 1999 32] G.Olmo, E.Magli, M.A.Spirito, M.Pent, L.Lo Presti, \Study of a remote sensing and localization system on HELIPLAT", 6th International
121
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Workshop on Digital Signal Processing Techniques for Space Applications DSP '98, ESTEC, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, 23-25 Sept.1998 33] M.A.N.Parks, G.Butt, M.J.Willis and B.G.Evans, \Wideband Propagations Measurements and Results at L- and S-Bands for Personal and Mobile Satellite Communications", IEE Satellite Systems for Mobile Communications and Navigation, No. 424, May 1996 34] J.D.Parson, J.G.Gardiner, \Mobile Communication Systems", Blackie and Son, Limited, Glasgow,1989 35] M.Pent, L.Lo Presti, G.Olmo, F.Dovis, E.Magli, M.Visintin, A.Moda eri, \HELIPLAT as a GSM base station: the channel model", 6th International Workshop on Digital Signal Processing Techniques for Space Applications DSP '98 ESTEC, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, 2325 September 1998 36] D.M.Pozar, \Microwave Engineering", ed. Wiley, 2-nd ed. New York 1998 37] J.G.Proakis, M.Salehi, \Communication System Engineering", ed. Prentice Hall International, 1994 38] T.S.Rappaport, \Wireless Communication: Principles and Practice", ed. Prentice Hall International, 1996 39] T.S.Rappaport, S.Y.Seidel, R.Singh, \900 MHz Multipath Propagation Measurements for U.S. Digital Cellular Radiotelephone", IEEE Trans. on Vehicular Technology, May 1990 40] T.S.Rappaport, J.C.Liberti, \A Geometrically Based Model for Lineof-Sight Multipath Radio Channels", IEEE Proc. of 46th conference on Vehicular Technology, Atlanta USA, Apr/May 1996 41] T.S.Rappaport, J.C. Liberti, \Smart Antennas For Wireless Communications: IS-95 and Third Generation CDMA Applications", Prentice Hall PTR, 1999
122
BIBLIOGRAPHY
42] S.O.Rice, \Mathematical analysis of random noise", BSTJ, Vol. 23, Jul. 1944, pp. 282-332 and Vol. 24, Jan. 1945, pp. 46-156 43] C.A.Robinson Jr., \High Capacity Aerial Vehicles Aid Wireless Communications", Signal, pp. 16-20, Apr. 1997 44] G.Romeo, \Design proposal of High Altitude Very Long Endurance Solar Powered Platform for Earth Observation and Telecommunication Applications", 48th International Astronautical Congress, Turin, Italy, 6-10 Oct. 1997 45] A.M.M.Saleh, R.A.Venezuela, \A Statistical Model for Indoor Multipath Propagation", IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communication, Vol. JSAC-5, No. 2, Feb.1987 46] S.Y.Seidel, \The Impact of Surrounding Buildings on Propagation for Wireless Inbuilding Personal Communications System Design", 1992 IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference, Denver, May 1992 47] R.Steele, \Speech codes for personal communications", IEEE Communications Magazine, Nov. 93 48] S.Tirro, \Satellite Communication System Design", ed. Plenum Press, 1993 49] "TOPSIM user manual", Dipartimento di Elettornica, Politecnico di Torino 50] S.Tsach, A.Yaniv, H.Avni, D.Penn, \High Altitude Long Endurance (HALE) UAV for Intelligence Missions", ICAS Conference, Sorrento, Italy, 8-13 Sept. 1996 51] F.T.Ulaby, R.K.Moore, A.K.Fung, \Microwave Remote Sensing Active and Passive", ed. Artech House Inc., pp. 259-264, 1981, 52] V.B.Venkayya, V.A.Tischler, \High Altitude Long Endurance Aircraft Design Studies", Nasa Tech. Rep. 94N36322, 1 Nov. 1993
123
BIBLIOGRAPHY
53] J.Wal sch, H.L.Bertoni, \A Theoretical Model of UHF Propagation in Urban Environments", IEEE Trans. on Antennas & Propagation, Vol. 38, 1988 54] H.H.Xia, \An Analytical Model for Predicting Path Loss in Urban and Suburban Environments", Personal Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications, PIMRC'96, 7th IEEE International Symposium on, Vol. 1, 1996 55] H.H.Xia, \Multiple Knife-Edge Di raction and Radio Propagation in Urban Environments" Ph.D. Dissertation, Polytechnic University, Brooklyn, New York, Sept. 1990 56] H.H.Xia et al., \Radio Propagation Characteristics for Line-of-Sight Microcellular and Personal Communication" IEEE Trans. Ant. and Prop., vol. 41, no. 10, Oct. 1993. 57] H.H.Xia, H.L.Bertoni,\Di raction of Cylindrical and Plane Waves by an Array of Absorbing Half Screens", IEEE Trans. on Antennas & Propagation, Vol. 40, No. 2, Feb. 1992 58] H.H.Xia, H.L.Bertoni, L.R.Maciel, A.Lindsay-Stewart, R.Rowe, \Microcellular Propagation Characteristics for Personal Communications in Urban and Suburban Environments", IEEE Trans. on Vehicular Technology, special issue on Future PCS Technologies, Vol. 43, No3, Aug. 1994
124

Radio Channel Modeling and Simulation For A Stratospheric Platform Link

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Radio Channel Modeling and Simulation For A Stratospheric Platform Link

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

POLITECNICO DI TORINO

Corso di Laurea in Ingegneria delle Telecomunicazioni

Radio channel modeling and simulation for a stratospheric platform link

Candidato: Roberto Fantini

2 Large Scale Fading

3 Small Scale Fading and Multipath - A Theoretical Introduction 36

4 Small Scale Fading in a Platform Based System

4.5 Coherence Bandwidth and Coherence Time of the Platform Channel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

5 The Simulation Program

107 109 115 119

1.2 HeliNet and HeliPlat

Figure 1.1. Atmospheric conditions as a function of increasing altitude

Edge of the cell

Figure 1.2. Geometrical model for the estimation of cell radius.

Cell radius R as a function of altitude and elevation angle 1000

Chapter 2 Large Scale Fading

2.1 Free Space Propagation and 2-ray Propagation Model

2 { Large Scale Fading

Ground Distance -d-

Figure 2.1. Side view of a stratospheric platform operating scenario

2 { Large Scale Fading

In this situation no transmission can be done with less attenuation than

2 { Large Scale Fading

d, ground distance [km]

Figure 2.3. Two-ray ground re ection model

2 { Large Scale Fading

2 { Large Scale Fading

2 { Large Scale Fading

Thus, Equation (2.12) can be expressed as

2 { Large Scale Fading

2 ; 1)2 + E0d0 sin2 d

Using trigonometric identities, Equation (2.20) can be expressed as

jETOT (d)j = E0 d0 2 ; 2 cos d jETOT (d)j = 2 E0 d0 sin 2 d

2 { Large Scale Fading

Stratospheric Platform Link

2 { Large Scale Fading

0 ETOT (d t) = Edd0 cos !c t ; d 0 c

2 { Large Scale Fading

jETOT (d)j = E0 d0 f(d)

jETOT j2 2 G = P G G PRX (d) = Z 4 RX TX TX RX 4 0

2 { Large Scale Fading

d, ground distance [km]

Figure 2.7. Comparison between attenuation in a GS or PS based communication system

Figure 2.8. Gain of a PS based system with respect to a GS based system

2 { Large Scale Fading

2.2 Visibility and Line Of Sight

2 { Large Scale Fading

2 { Large Scale Fading

2 { Large Scale Fading

2 { Large Scale Fading

logarithmic scale as a linear function of r0

2 { Large Scale Fading

Figure 2.11. First Fresnel zone in the platform case

which leads to 4(x2 ; k2 )x2 + 0 + + +

111 000 111 000 111 011 000 100

2 { Large Scale Fading

2 { Large Scale Fading

TX -HI h b-HI TX -EQ TX -LO

2 { Large Scale Fading

2 { Large Scale Fading

Path Loss [dB]

d, ground distance [km]