KPI

Target Level

No. users to reach the target 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 5 6

Traffic Density Level

Blocking prob Iub DL DL power Dropped prob CE UL

1% 1070 Kbps 38.7 dBm 1% 64

4.1627 5.0550 6.7843 8.1450 9.83 11.1251 14.2658 30.363 34.234

throughput 100 kbps DL code tree UL Load CE DL 60% 60% 256

Table 36: Ordered KPI's, FTP-only service As in the Web Service, the capacity is Downlink-limited for the FTP service. After blocking probability, Iub DL utilization and DL power are the main limiting factors. Uplink load has definitely not the significance that it has in the case of circuit switched services (e.g. voice), as it can be also concluded from the previous table. And the CE DL in the last place indicates that with the current provisioning of hardware in Downlink Direction (Channel Elements) there are no hardware-related capacity problems. However Uplink CE occupies an intermediate position and given that in the voice service turns out to be one of the main limiting factors, special attention shall be given to the number of channel elements in uplink. Simulations testing Node Bs with more than 64 CE in UL are proposed for further studies.

129

Beneficiario COLFUTURO 2003

A.F. COSME. UMTS CAPACITY SIMULATION STUDY

7.1.4 Video-call Service

Next section presents the analysis of the experiments performed with the video call service (Circuit Switched service). 7.1.4.1 Blocking and Dropping probability

Blocking probability, target: y =0.01 (1%) Linear Fit: y=a+bx Coefficient Data: a= b= Value at Y=0.01 Number of users per cell -0.0031 0.0004 32.19 6 Erl/Km^2

Table 37: Estimation of the users per cell according to the simulation output, video call service, blocking probability target=0.01 The average number of users per cell obtained was around 6 users per cell which is higher than the expected theoretical value of 4 assuming again Uplink load factor of 0.6 and applying the analytical approach. About the dropping probability, some inconsistencies were found in the outcomes so no analysis was performed with this data. 7.1.4.2 Channel Elements usage In order to reach the target thresholds by interpolation results, a high variation was found in Downlink (8 to 27 users per cell to use the full capacity in Downlink, 256 channel elements) whereas in Uplink the number of required users is around 3, which can be an indicator that the number of channel elements can become a very important capacity limiting factor in Uplink for the video call service. 7.1.4.3 Downlink Iub usage The best fit that was found suggest an average number of users to reach the Downlink Iub target of 6 users/cell, which was more or less the level found to reach the target blocking in the air interface, then it seems to be a strong relationship between the target for blocking and the target to produce congestion in the Iub.

130

7.1.4.4 Uplink Load

UL Load [%] 60,0000% 50,0000% UL Load [%] 40,0000% 30,0000% 20,0000% 10,0000% 0,0000% 0,9700 1,9500 3,9000 7,7900 15,5800 Traffic Density [Erl/Km^2] UL Load [%]

Figure 52: Uplink Load, video-call only service

UL Load threshold = 0.60 = 60% Linear Fit: y=a+bx a= b= Value when Y=0.60 Number of users per cell Quadratic Fit: y=a+bx+cx^2 a= b= c= Value when Y=0.60 Number of users per cell -0.0094 0.0362 -0.0001 17.83 3 Erl/Km^2 -0.0051 0.0343 17.46 3 Erl/Km^2

Table 38: Estimation of the users per cell according to the simulation output, video call service, Uplink load target = 0.6 (60%)

131

Beneficiario COLFUTURO 2003

A.F. COSME. UMTS CAPACITY SIMULATION STUDY

According to the Figure and table shown above, Uplink Load is again, as in the case of speech, the most important capacity limiting factor, this can be observed because it is the factor that according to the number of users, reaches the target value first. The extrapolation results give very close results to each other because the highest traffic density used was quite close to produce the 60% uplink load target. 7.1.4.5 Downlink Transmitted Power

Target threshold = 90% (43 dBm) = 38.7 dBm Linear Fit: y=a+bx a= b= Value when Y = 38.7 Number of users per cell Exponential Fit: y=ae^(bx) Coefficient Data: a= b= Value when Y = 38.7 Number of users per cell 36.4057 0.0031 19.4338 3 Erl/Km^2 36,398187 0.11769338 19.55 3 Erl/Km^2

Table 39: Estimation of the users per cell according to the simulation output, video call service, Downlink Transmitted Power target = 38.7 dBm Downlink transmitted power was another reason found for blocking attempts, although the number of users to reach the target threshold is still higher than in the case of Uplink Load. This is a very specific characteristic in CS services, as for PS services according to the simulation results the Downlink Transmitted power is the main capacity limitation. 7.1.4.6 Downlink Code Tree Usage The code tree utilization with the proposed traffic densities is still very low (around 17% with the highest considered traffic density) compared with the target of 60%, therefore again it seems not to be a very big problem. No blockings were registered because of Downlink Codes shortage.

132

7.1.4.7 Summary of video-call service In the next table, a summary with the KPIs ordered by the number of users that reaches first the target level is provided. In the case of KPIs with the same number of users, the order has been set according to the corresponding traffic density levels (without truncation).

KPI

Target Level 60% 64 38.7 dBm 60% 1070 Kbps 1% 256

No. users to reach the target 3

Traffic density level

17,46

UL Load CE UL DL power DL code tree Iub Blocking prob. CE DL

17.74

3
19.55

3
27.1968

5
32

6
32.19

6
49.7967

Table 40: Ordered KPI's, Video call--only service Comparing this table with the table for Voice only service, we can appreciate that in both Video call and Voice service, UL Load is the main capacity limiting factor and then both circuit switched services are mainly uplink limited. DL channel elements are again at the bottom of the list, indicating that in both services the main limitation is not the hard resources but the interference limited resources (soft resources). There were some inconsistencies however with the dropping probability results and therefore it is proposed to verify them with new simulations.

133

Beneficiario COLFUTURO 2003

A.F. COSME. UMTS CAPACITY SIMULATION STUDY

7.1.5 Summary single-service experiments

According to the analysis performed over the results, the capacity limiting factors for the different services are ordered according to the traffic density level that reaches first the target threshold, as follows: 7.1.5.1 Circuit-Switched Services:

Voice service CE UL UL Load DL power Iub DL code tree Blocking prob. CE DL Dropped prob.

Video call UL Load CE UL DL power DL code tree Iub Blocking prob. CE DL Dropped prob.

Table 41: Comparison Limiting factors, CS services, single-service experiments, homogeneous scenarios Besides the clear fact that the capacity is uplink limited for both services, DL Power must be also considered a critical resource for circuit switched services (is in the 3rd place for both Voice and Video call). The critical factors with middle importance are Iub Downlink utilization and DL code Tree utilization. The less critical factors according to the results are DL Channel Elements (therefore the capacity is soft limited rather than hard limited for CS services) and Dropped Probability, although for video-call service more experiments are required to verify this.

134

7.1.5.2 Packet-Switched Services:

FTP Service

Web Service

Blocking prob. DL Iub DL power Dropping prob. CE UL throughput DL code tree UL Load CE DL

Blocking prob. DL Iub DL power CE UL DL throughput (outdoor) UL Load DL code tree CE DL Dropping prob.

Table 42: Comparison Limiting factors, PS services, single-service experiments, homogeneous scenarios Apart from the clear difference regarding CS services about the main capacity limitation factors in Downlink instead of Uplink direction (something that was expected because of the higher data rates in Downlink for the PS services, which indeed consume more radio resources than their corresponding resources in Uplink Direction), we can notice additionally that for both kinds of services (CS, PS) the limitation is not mainly the hard but the soft resources , with exception of the Uplink Channel Elements usage which is an important limiting factor for both type of services. Between the two simulated PS services, the main difference is the place of the Dropping Probability, in the Web Service no dropping probability was found with the simulated traffic loads (and therefore no estimation was possible for the load that reaches the 1% threshold); however, as it was mentioned before, this is in line with the RRM channel switching algorithms (switching from DCH to FACH), when the Web users can still keep the connection with data rates of 32 Kbps without been dropped by the system, as it happens with the FTP users that keep using mostly the DCH channels. However, in order to get more realistic results, new simulations have to be performed when the simulator includes the slow start mechanism which has a direct impact in the blocking and dropping probabilities.

135

Beneficiario COLFUTURO 2003

A.F. COSME. UMTS CAPACITY SIMULATION STUDY

7.2 Figures using the defined traffic mix percentages

To be able to perform this analysis, a consistent traffic unit has to be found, we cannot add directly the Erl/Km2 for each service because the resource utilization inter-arrival and service times are different for each service, therefore, we have to perform a conversion to a single unit. That unit was defined based on [umts-forum6] and it is called Offered Data Volume. The Offered Data Volume (ODV) is given in [Mbit/(busy) hour/Km2] and theoretically is defined as: ODV = BHCA * service penetration * potential users / Km2 * Service Throughput [Mbps] * effective call duration [sec] (7-8) Where: BHCA = Busy Hour call attempts, which represents the number of calls per user (offered traffic per user) in the busy hour. This quantity, as defined in [Ericsson-tutorial] is equivalent to: BHCA = 3600 * Where is the call arrival rate [calls / second]. On the other hand, the Offered Poisson Traffic can be defined as: A [Erlangs] = / (7-10) (7-9)

Where = service rate = 1/ E[s], where E[s] is the mean expected service time. Therefore: A = * E [s] ( 7-11)

Putting in terms of A and E[s] and replacing in the definition of BHCA, we have: BHCA = 3600 A / E [s] (7-12)

In this case, A would represent the offered traffic by each user. Putting everything together:

ODV = 3600 A / E[s] * service penetration/Km2 * potential users / Km2 * service throughput * effective call duration (7-13) But: Effective call duration = * E [s], where is the service activity factor, therefore:

136

ODV (offered traffic density) in Erlangs/Km2 = A * service penetration/Km2 * potential users / Km2 = active users/ Km2 (7-14) Finally, ODV = 3600 * Offered Traffic Density * Service throughput * (7-15) was defined as 0.5 in the case of voice and 1 for all other services, and the Service throughput was defined averaging the throughput of the indoor and outdoor users obtained in the simulation results. The next table shows the calculations performed and the summary of ODV Figures to be analyzed (Xaxis of the graphs of KPI vs. ODV).

137

Beneficiario COLFUTURO 2003

A.F. COSME. UMTS CAPACITY SIMULATION STUDY

Experiment

Service

Traffic density [Erl/Km^2]

Service Bandwidth (DL) [Mbit] = BW [Kbps]/1000

Activity Factor

Offered Data Volume [Mbit/busy hour/Km^2]

1 1 1 1
total ODV Experiment 1

Speech Videocall FTP Web

10 0.97 0.39 1.62

0.0122 0.064 0.25 0.31

0.5 1 1 1

219.6 223.488 347.3916069 1827.212255 2617.691861

2 2 2 2
total ODV Experiment 2

Speech Videocall FTP Web

20 1.95 0.78 3.25

0.0122 0.064 0.22 0.24

0.5 1 1 1

439.2 449.28 605.020308 2826.786672 4320.28698

3 3 3 3 total ODV Experiment 3

Speech Videocall FTP Web

40 3.9 1.56 6.49

0.0122 0.064 0.17 0.19

0.5 1 1 1

878.4 898.56 933.4731671 4485.439296 7195.872463

138

4 4 4 4 total ODV Experiment 4 5 5 5 5 total ODV Experiment 5

Speech Videocall FTP Web

80 7.79 3.12 12.99

0.0122 0.064 0.12 0.11

0.5 1 1 1

1756.8 1794.816 1330.948855 4998.538791 9881.103646

Speech Videocall FTP Web

160 15.58 6.23 25.97

0.0122 0.064 0.06 0.04

0.5 1 1 1

3513.6 3589.632 1317.665429 3355.780886 11776.67832

Table 43: Calculation of the ODV for the Service Mix, non-homogeneous scenario

139

Beneficiario COLFUTURO 2003

Experiment 1 2 3 4 5

ODV [Mbit/busy hour / Km^2] 2617.691861 4320.28698 7195.872463 9881.103646 11776.67832

Table 44: Summary table with the ODV Figures to be used for the analysis After having defined the common measurement unit, we proceed to analyze each KPI in order to find which of them is the limiting factor for the given traffic mix, i.e. which is the one that happens first in terms of the required offered load to reach the target KPI. The following section presents the results for each KPI.

7.2.1 Blocking and Dropping probability

Blocking probability [%] 60.0000% 50.0000% 40.0000% 30.0000% 20.0000% 10.0000% 0.0000% 2617.6919 4320.2870 7195.8725 9881.1036 11776.6783 Blocked services [%]

Offered Data Volum e [Mbit/busy hour/Km ^2]

Figure 53: Blocking probability service mix, target =0.01 (1%)

Target threshold = 1% Harris Model: y=1/(a+bx^c) a= b= c= Standard Error: 0.01022 0.9994 2568.9699 -1608.3547 0.0500

Correlation Coefficient:

141

Beneficiario COLFUTURO 2003

A.F. COSME. UMTS CAPACITY SIMULATION STUDY

Value at Y=0.01

5279.6000

Mbit/hour/Km^2 Mbit/hour/cel l Mbit/sec/cell

ODV per cell per hour ODV per cell per second

926.2456 0.2572 257.2904

ODV Kbps/cell

Kbps/cell

Table 45: Blocking probability service mix, target =0.01 (1%) As the target of 1% was reached within the interpolation range, only the best fit in terms of the correlation coefficient is presented. Then, we obtain the 1% blocking with the offered data volume of 5279.600 Mbit/hour/Km2. To be able to analyze the performance per cell, we have to convert this Figure, and the way to do it was to take into account that the cell area is 0.1755 Km2, so in 1 Km2 there are approximately 5.7 cells. Applying this conversion factor we obtained the ODV per cell per hour, and dividing it by 3600 seconds/hour and multiplying by 1000 we finally got the Offered Data Volume in Kbps/cell. Dividing this value with the mean value of the RLC layer performance DL Transmission Data Rate [kbps] for each service, we could have a rough estimate of the number of users supported by the cell per each service:

Service

RLC DL Transmission Data Rate [kbps]

Average Number of Users 2 1 2 1 22 4

Web indoor FTP indoor Web outdoor FTP outdoor Voice Video-call

163,759 237,7139 156,9783 241,8718 11,97 63,65

Table 46: Estimation of the supported number of users per service This IS in line with the simulation results obtained by Vodafone Germany in [Schneider-1] and it represents a big change in the supported number of Voice Users obtained in the Voice-only service, where the theoretical value (and the obtained value) was around 42 users per cell, now the Figure is about a half of it, but we have to take into account that the Figures presented in the table 34 are just an estimation because the offered traffic was a traffic mix and not a single-service offered traffic.

142

pgina anterior

siguiente pgina

dropped services [%] 10.000000% 8.000000% 6.000000% 4.000000% 2.000000% 0.000000% 2617.6919 4320.2870 7195.8725 9881.1036 11776.6783

dropped services [%]

Offered Data Volume [Mbit/busy hour/Km^2]

Figure 54: Dropping probability service mix, target =0.01 (1%)

Dropping probability, target threshold = 0.01 (1%) Reciprocal Logarithm Fit: y=1/(a+b*ln(x)) Coefficient Data: a= b= Standard Error: 0.0007945 0.9998536 10660 1870.1754 0.5194 519.4931 Mbit/hour/Km^2 Mbit/hour/cell Mbit/sec/cell Kbps/cell 10.937.20 -1.168.57

Correlation Coefficient: Value at Y=0.01 ODV per cell per hour ODV per cell per second ODV Kbps/cell

Table 47: Dropping probability service mix, target =0.01 (1%) For the dropped services, we can see that the Load required to reach the target is higher (almost twice as much) than in the case of blocking probabilities. This goes in line with the behavior defined in the Ericsson RRM Algorithms were dropping calls is the last option at all while soft blocking of non-guaranteed connections (i.e. data connections) is the first option to free radio resources in case of congestion.

143

Beneficiario COLFUTURO 2003