1 To 3 Frequency Reuse - Trial Experiences and Cell Planning Aspects

Limited Internal REPORT
Uppgjord (ven faktaansvarig om annan) - Prepared (also subject responsible if other) Nr - No.
1 (13)
Rev File
LVR/DT Fredric Kronestedt, Erik Edgren

Dokansv/Godk - Doc respons/Approved Kontr - Checked
LVR/D-98:0398
Datum - Date
LVR/DTC
1998-12-22
1/3 Frequency Reuse - Trial Experiences and Cell Planning Aspects
Contents
1 2 3 4 5 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 6 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 7 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 8 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................2 FRACTIONAL LOADING NETWORKS.......................................2 TRIAL NETWORK CHARACTERISTICS....................................3 FEATURES ......................................................................................3 TEST CASES....................................................................................4 BASELINE............................................................................................4 NETWORK 1 ........................................................................................5 NETWORK 2 ........................................................................................5 MRP...................................................................................................5 TRIAL RESULTS ............................................................................5 STS PERFORMANCE ............................................................................5 TEMS PERFORMANCE .........................................................................6 EFFECTS OF UNEVEN TRX DISTRIBUTION ...........................................7 EFFECTS OF BCCH/TCH ADJACENCIES ................................................8 NONHOPPING BCCH VERSUS HOPPING TCH.........................................8 DISCUSSION ON THE RESULTS..................................................9 1/3 LOADING .......................................................................................9 TWO CHANNEL GROUPS .....................................................................11 BCCH/TCH ADJACENCIES ................................................................11 1/3 VERSUS MRP...............................................................................12 CONCLUSIONS.............................................................................12
C:\temp\1_3_telstra_B.doc

2 (13)
Rev File

LVR/D-98:0398
Datum - Date
LVR/DTC
1998-12-22
Introduction
This document summarises the 1/3 trials in a major CBD capital macrocell network within Telstras GSM network, which were performed in September and October of 1998. The objective with the trials was to investigate and obtain practical experience about 1/3 frequency reuse. Also, to learn about differences and potential advantageous to the MRP methodology. For example, find out when MRP should be used, and vice versa when 1/3 is preferred. In addition to trial results, the report includes thoughts and findings about 1/3 and MRP. The trials in short, the interference load of a network with 1/3 TCH frequency reuse was increased by reducing the number of hopping frequencies. In addition, an MRP frequency plan was also implemented and tested for comparison reasons.
Fractional Loading Networks

A network with 1/3 or 1/1 frequency reuse is characterised by that random synthesizer hopping is used in combination with fractional loading. This means that the number of transceivers per cell is smaller than the number of hopping frequencies. A lot of hopping frequencies per cell is possible if a tight frequency reuse is applied, for example 1/31. In addition, the interference variation becomes larger since the interfering cells are closer now. These two effects increase the gain from frequency hopping. The network can cope with this very tight reuse since each frequency is only used a fraction of the time. Severe interference hits occur sufficiently seldom due to the hopping and the channel coding and interleaving schemes can thereby limit the bit errors in the received frames. It is vital to limit the traffic load and just fractionally load the frequencies, i.e. keep the number of TRXs smaller than the number of hopping frequencies otherwise the network quality will degrade. For this reason, a frequency load measure is used in order to measure the interference level of 1/3 networks. The frequency load is defined as the average traffic load per cell divided by the number of hopping traffic channels per cell (i.e. the number of hopping frequencies multiplied with the number of time slots). This measure can be written as:
FRQLoad =
Erlang cell 8 * (# FRQcell )
The frequency load reflects how much time a frequency is being transmitted. Sometimes, the frequency load is referred to as the fractional load.
Note that 1/3 and 1/1 can only applied on the TCH frequencies. The BCCH frequencies must still use a sparse reuse for satisfactory control channel performance.

3 (13)
Rev File

LVR/D-98:0398
Datum - Date
LVR/DTC
1998-12-22
Another commonly used measure is the hardware load defined as the average number of TRXs per cell divided by the number of hopping frequencies per cell. This measure is similar to the frequency load and the hardware load can be expressed as:
HWLoad =
TRX cell # FRQcell
However, the hardware load does not take the trunking efficiency into account. The same hardware load results in different served traffic loads depending on the number of frequencies and thereby different frequency loads. 1/3 frequency reuse can be compared to MRP networks, which usually use baseband-hopping resulting in that the number of transceivers is equal to the number of hopping frequencies per cell. Thus, increased frequency hopping gain (interference and frequency diversity) due to the large number of frequencies in the hopping sequence is a potential advantage with 1/3. However, this might be compensated by the sparser reuse of the TCH frequencies (e.g. 8/6/4) with MRP.
Trial Network Characteristics

Telstra have today 40 frequencies for GSM 900, but they will start to employ GSM1800 during the beginning of 1999. In general, they use dedicated frequency bands for the BCCH frequencies and microcells. In the trials, 30 frequencies were allocated to the macrocells. The Australian CBD is like a typical US or Asian city CBD, it has a large number of high-rise buildings. 41 macrocells and a lot of microcells cover the CBD area. The microcells serve mostly traffic on street level, while the macrocells often carry traffic located in the highrise buildings. The macrocell site-to-site distances are irregular (~400m in average) and a lot of different antenna heights are used. However, the antenna directions of the cells are kept strict regular. The Telstra network is characterised by low congestion and good radio performance. Typically, there is about 100-120 Erlang minutes per drop. Further, the traffic in the CBD required a transceiver distribution of between 1-3 TRX per cell. 7 cells had 1 TRX, while 21 and 13 cells were equipped with 2 and 3 TRXs respectively. Thus, there were 2.2 TRX per cell in average.
Features
The following features were applied in the test area: Random synthesizer hopping The key characteristic of a network with fractional loading.

4 (13)
Rev File

LVR/D-98:0398
Datum - Date
LVR/DTC
1998-12-22 Discontinuous Transmission (DTX) Utilised in both up- and downlink.
Power control (PC) Utilised in both up- and downlink. In the downlink a careful down regulation was applied, only a maximum of 8dB was allowed. Overlaid/underlaid (OL/UL) A special OL/UL configuration was used in two of the trial cases. The OL was made to have the same size as the UL. All TCH frequencies were put to the OL subcells, while the UL subcells contained the BCCH frequencies only. The main reason for this set up was to be able to direct all traffic to OL in order to increase the load on the TCH frequencies during the tests. In addition, it also made it possible to have different QLIM urgency handover settings in OL and UL. Further, all macrocells were set to co-sited (CS=1), allowing handover and assignment to macrocell OL directly. However, only a handover from a microcell to UL in macro could be performed since the microcell were not set to co-sited. Cell load sharing Used in all cells. RHYST=75.
Test Cases
The BCCH frequencies were planned in a 12-reuse pattern using a staggered allocation. This plan was kept unchanged throughout the entire trial. For the 1/3 TCH frequency planning, Telstra uses strict group planning, i.e. all cells pointing in the same direction use the same hopping frequencies. In addition, a large number of cells (all but 3) were configured with one or two TCH frequencies adjacent to own BCCH frequency. The CBD network was in a very good shape; the handover borders had been optimised for the 1/3 plan since July-98. During the trials, extra transceivers were added to the macrocell in the CBD area, this to make sure that all traffic could be carried on the TCH frequencies only, see below for more details. Thus, the average no of TCH TRX was 2.2 per cell.
5.1
Baseline
This case was used as the reference case and it was run from 14/9 to 27/9. 6 frequencies were used as hopping TCH frequencies in each cell (i.e. totally 18 TCH frequencies). Carrier-zero filling was applied for the BCCH frequencies, which means that the synthesizer hopping was performed over 7 frequencies. The BCCH frequency was included in the hopping set. QLIMUL/DL were set to 45.

5 (13)
Rev File

LVR/D-98:0398
Datum - Date
LVR/DTC
1998-12-22
5.2
Network 1
The second case was tested from 28/9 to 7/10 and it was configured in a two-channel group structure using the special OL/UL. The 4/12 BCCH frequency plan was nonhopping and placed in the UL, while the 1/3 TCH was synthesizer hopping over 6 frequencies in OL, (i.e. still 18 TCH frequencies were utilised). This implies increased frequency load and reduced hopping gain compared to the baseline due to less hopping frequencies. The macrocells were configured to carry all traffic on the OL. QLIMUL/DL was 45 in UL and 55 in OL.
5.3
Network 2
The third case was run from 8/10 to 20/10 and it was also configured in a two-channel group structure using the OL/UL. As before, the 4/12 BCCH frequency plan was nonhopping and placed in the UL, while the 1/3 TCH was now synthesizer hopping over 5 frequencies in OL, (i.e. only 15 TCH frequencies were utilised). One frequency per sector was removed. This implies an even higher frequency load and reduced hopping gain compared to network 1. Still, QLIMUL/DL was 45 in UL and 55 in OL.
5.4
MRP
A 12/6/6/6 fractional load MRP configuration using one channel group was also tested during 21/10-5/11. The MRP used the 4/12 BCCH plan and 3 TCH layers, each with a reuse of 6. Carrier-zero filling was applied; i.e. synthesizer hopping was performed over totally 4 frequencies. Thus, the BCCH frequency was included in the hopping sequence. The TCH frequency planning was quite rough, done in 2 days. This resulted in that 15 cells had TCH frequencies adjacent to own BCCH frequencies. Further, QLIMUL/DL was set to 45 in all cells. The MRP was configured so it could be directly compared to the baseline case since both cases utilise the same number of frequencies (both BCCH and TCH) and they utilise carrier-zero filling. The method of distributing the TCH frequencies (i.e. the 1/3 or MRP methodology) was the only difference.
6
6.1
Trial Results
STS Performance
STS statistics were collected every hour from 0700 to 1900 every weekday during the trial. The shown STS figures represent average values over all CBD macrocells and all weekdays for each trial. Table 1 gives an overview of the STS performance. The STS statistics show a slight performance degradation for network 2. However, there is not a large drop in performance, just a gradual degradation. The other cases have similar performance. The network performance was acceptable for all cases according to Telstra.

6 (13)
Rev File

LVR/D-98:0398
Datum - Date
LVR/DTC
1998-12-22
Baseline Traffic load SDCCH drop SDCCH drop bad qual TCH drop TCH drop - bad qual HO in drop HO out drop TCH Erlang min per drop Table 1 STS performance 4.6 Erl/cell 0.30% 18% 1.55% 22% 0.51% 0.47% 114
Network 1 4.4 Erl/cell 0.31% 19% 1.55% 18% 0.45% 0.43% 118
Network 2 4.9 Erl/cell 0.34% 19% 1.59% 22% 0.47% 0.48% 109
MRP 5.2 Erl/cell 0.38% 12% 1.52% 16% 0.50% 0.46% 114
Observe also that the traffic successively increased for network 2 and the MRP. This perhaps also had an influence on the performance.
6.2
TEMS Performance
A further investigation of the downlink network performance was also done using TEMS measurements. TEMS routes were defined for some selected streets and buildings. Drive tests were performed for the street routes and walk tests were performed in the buildings. The same routes at the same time of the day were investigated 1-3 times for each trial case. Samples from the microcells and the nonhopping BCCH frequencies were excluded in the analysis. Table 2 includes a summary of the TEMS results and the amount of data for the hopping TCH in terms of hours. For comparison reasons, it is here assumed that SQI>15dB reflects acceptable speech quality. The results indicate approximately the same performance for the street drives. However, in the high-rise buildings, network 2 and MRP have somewhat worse results. In the streets, users have most probably favourable shadowing to the surrounding base stations and the increase in interference will not be severe. On the contrary, high up in the buildings, users more likely have unfavourable shadowing (line-of-sight in the worst case) to the surrounding base stations which results in increased interference. This problem is difficult to avoid unless the high-rise buildings are covered by dedicated indoor systems. The performance in the highrise buildings had always been rough said the Telstra people.

7 (13)
Rev File

LVR/D-98:0398
Datum - Date
LVR/DTC
1998-12-22
Street drives SQI>15 dB RXQUAL>5 Data length In building walks SQI>15 dB RXQUAL>5 Data length Table 2
Baseline 90% 4% 5h
Network 1 88% 4% 7h
Network 2 90% 5% 11h
MRP 88% 4% 6h
79% 10% 1.4h
81% 10% 0.8h
73% 13% 1.5h
71% 15% 1.0h
TEMS Performance for measurements in the streets and in the high-rise buildings
6.3
Effects of uneven TRX distribution

The drop performance on cell level, i.e. the drop rate versus traffic load per cell, is shown in Figure 1 for network 2. The performance of cells with different load is approximately the same, but a small tendency that the drop rate decreases with traffic load can perhaps be seen. One could expect that high load cells would severely disturb low load cells. A further analysis of some of the cells with the highest traffic load was also done. The drop rate of co-channels cells located in the close vicinity to these hot-spot cells were studied. In some cases, a closely located co-channel cell had a somewhat higher drop rate (~2%). It seems to be a correlation between the performance in cells with different loads, but as found from Figure 1, the performance difference is very small.
Figure 1
Drop rate versus cell load in network 2

8 (13)
Rev File

LVR/D-98:0398
Datum - Date
LVR/DTC
1998-12-22
Consequently, 1/3 reuse seems to be very robust; it can handle networks with uneven transceiver distributions without problems. It thus easy to add more transceivers to the network when needed. This can be done until the average load reaches the acceptable limit.
6.4
Effects of BCCH/TCH adjacencies

It was common to have TCH frequencies adjacent to the BCCH frequencies within in the cells. 19 cells had one and 17 cells had two TCH adjacencies to own BCCH frequency in network 2. However, the overall network performance was acceptable for all trials and it can be concluded that BCCH/TCH adjacencies can be managed. The reason is that the interference hits are quite seldom since fractional loading, DTX and PC were applied. Power control is only beneficial for reducing (own cell) adjacent channel interference in the uplink since the dynamic difference is reduced. For the downlink, it increases the problem, which is why a restricted downlink power control setting was used (maximum 8dB).
6.5
Nonhopping BCCH versus hopping TCH

The SQI when operated on a nonhopping TCH (mapped on the BCCH frequencies) was calculated from the TEMS street drives of network 2. It appeared that the SQI was larger than 15dB for 71% of the samples. This can be compared with the hopping TCHs where the same figure was 90%. Thus, a nonhopping TCH mapped on a BCCH frequency has worse speech quality. However, one should remember that the BCCH samples are taken from a much smaller part of the CBD area than the TCH samples. The BCCH samples correspond to a ~1h run while 11h data was used for the hopping TCH. A user could only be served on a nonhopping BCCH frequency after a handover from a microcell. The microcells were not set to co-sited to the macrocell; therefore handovers were made to UL and shortly later directed from UL to OL. This means that the BCCH performance is a measure of the cell border, which of course is much worse than the cell in general. This result indicates that a 12 reuse might not provide sufficient quality for a nonhopping speech channel. A sparser reuse (13, 14 or even sparser depending on the cell plan and environment) is probably needed in order to serve speech users on nonhopping BCCH frequencies. It is also important to note that there were no problems with the BSIC decoding with the 4/12 BCCH plan used in the tests. Speech quality seems to be the problem and not handover performance. It should be noted that conventional MRP networks do not experience this problem since the BCCH frequency is included in the hopping sequence.

9 (13)
Rev File

LVR/D-98:0398
Datum - Date
LVR/DTC
1998-12-22
7
7.1
Discussion on the Results

1/3 loading
The trials showed a small performance degradation when going from 7 to 5 hopping frequencies per cell. The degradation occurred mostly in the high-rise buildings. However, the toughest case with 5 hopping TCH frequencies/cell had acceptable performance according to the statistics and subjective judgements by Telstra. It is important to note that all the traffic was more or less carried on the hopping TCH frequencies only. In the trials, the average number of TCH transceivers per cell was 2.2. This means 3.3 TRX/cell when including the BCCH transceivers as well. Thus, a 3/3/4 TRX configuration can be based on totally 27 frequencies with 1/3 TCH and 4/12 BCCH.
7.1.1
Frequency loading The average traffic during busy hour was about 7.36 Erlang/cell for network 2. Using this traffic load, the frequency load was about 7.36/(5*8)0.18. A frequency was used maximum 18% of the time, but in average only 9% since DTX was applied (assuming 50% voice activity). This frequency load value represents a practical limit and it can be used for planning other networks. A network using 1/3 should be dimensioned so that the frequency load is maximum 18%. It is possible to add transceivers until the frequency load reaches 18%. The allowed average peak traffic load per cell can in general be calculated as:
Erlang cell = FRQLoad 8 (# FRQcell ) = 0.18 * 8 * (# FRQcell )

This formula is only valid for 1/3 reuse with DTX. Figure 2 shows the results of this calculation. A network with 10 TCH frequencies per cell (i.e. total 30 TCH frequencies) can have 14.6 Erlang/cell in average during busy hour with the same frequency load. Thus, this fictitious network has the same interference load as network 2. Note that the frequency load values of Figure 2 do not take the increased hopping gain into consideration, only the interference load. The frequency load can most probably be increased for networks with a lot of hopping frequencies. It is best to use the peak traffic load per cell during busy hour when calculating the frequency load since networks usually are dimensioned for the busy hour traffic.

10 (13)
Rev File

LVR/D-98:0398
Datum - Date
LVR/DTC
1998-12-22
Figure 2
Average peak traffic load per cell versus total number of hopping TCH frequencies for a frequency load of 0.18 Hardware loading The hardware load was ~40% (2 TRX / 5 TCH freq.) on the TCH frequencies for network 2. This hardware load corresponds to 4 TRX/cell with 10 TCH frequencies per cell. This might not work because of too high fractional load (interference). The frequency load is not the same due to the trunking efficiency. Figure 3 illustrates the hardware load for different number of TCH frequencies assuming the same frequency load as given by a 40% hardware load with 5 hopping frequencies per cell and 2% GoS. Approximately 34% hardware load will be the corresponding value in a network hopping over 10 frequencies per cell. Thus, this must be considered when using the hardware load as a loading measure for 1/3 reuse networks. However, the decrease in hardware load will most likely be slightly compensated by the increased hopping gain.
7.1.2
Figure 3
The hardware load versus total number of hopping TCH frequencies for a constant frequency load

11 (13)
Rev File

LVR/D-98:0398
Datum - Date
LVR/DTC
1998-12-22
7.2
Two channel groups

There are some advantages and drawbacks by applying two channel groups with 1/3. Advantages: Leading to cheaper base station configurations. Carrier-zero filling is not required with this solution. Potentially more spectrum efficient (depending on the required BCCH frequency reuse). It is possible to fully load the BCCH frequencies, use all available traffic channels on the BCCH frequencies. This can not be done with one channel group and zero filling since fractional loading must be applied. Only a fraction of the channels can then be utilised. Supports aggressive base station power control. Some mobile types might behave badly if the BCCH is included in the hopping sequence when power control is applied in the downlink. This due to that there will be a large power difference between the BCCH and TCH frequencies in the downlink. Provides bad quality management. It is possible to have different quality properties of the two channels groups and move users with bad quality to the other channel group using intra-cell handover.
Drawbacks: Requires probably a reuse sparser than 12 for the nonhopping BCCH frequencies otherwise the speech quality will be too bad. Somewhat reduced hopping gain since the BCCH frequency is not included in hopping sequence (depending on the number of hopping TCHs).
Thus, using two channel groups is a good solution in many cases. However, carrierzero filling might be the best option for operators with very little spectrum (when the hopping gain is critical). Typically, when only 4 TCH frequencies per cell are available.
7.3
BCCH/TCH adjacencies
The trials showed that it was possible to run the network even though a lot of BCCH/TCH adjacencies were present (see Section 6.4). This means probably that the performance would be even better, the 1/3 can be pushed even further, if these adjacencies are removed. In addition, a more aggressive downlink power control strategy can then be used. One must however keep in mind that this might lead to a trade off between performance and frequency planning complexity.

12 (13)
Rev File

LVR/D-98:0398
Datum - Date
LVR/DTC
1998-12-22
Removing the BCCH/TCH adjacencies implies increased number of constraints for the frequency planner.
7.4
1/3 versus MRP

The 12/6/6/6 fractional load MRP showed a bit worse performance in the high-rise buildings compared to the reference network planned for 1/3 and hopping over 7 frequencies. The reduced number of hopping frequencies with MRP might have degraded the network performance compared to the 1/3. However, other contributing reasons could be the somewhat increased traffic load and the fact that the MRP frequency plan was done in a hurry over 2 days only. In addition, the MRP used the same handover offsets as the 1/3, which probably also affected the performance negatively. The handover borders had been optimised for the 1/3 plan over several months. It was difficult to make a fair comparison between these two trial cases. The increased number of hopping frequencies with 1/3 over MRP is an important advantage. Simplified frequency planning with fewer constraints is another good feature of 1/3. However, 1/3 typically requires hybrid combiners, which reduces the output power if many TRXs are installed. Several hybrid combiners might have to be cascade coupled if many TRXs are used and this increases the total combiner loss. Alternatively, several antennas can be used, but this is less attractive from a site installation point of view. Therefore, 1/3 is better suited for networks with few TRXs per cell and little spectrum. In this way, the combiner loss can be minimised while a large number of hopping frequencies is available even with a few frequencies (due to the tight reuse). MRP on the other hand is better suited for networks with many transceivers and lot of bandwidth, say more than 6 MHz. A large hopping gain can be achieved with MRP if many TRXs per cell is the case. In addition, MRP usually uses baseband hopping and filter combiners, which can handle up to 16 TRXs with a smaller total combiner loss. The hopping gain will be too small if using MRP in networks with little spectrum. Earlier experiences have shown that MRP can not cope with this very tight reuse and therefore requires slightly more bandwidth than solutions based on 1/3.
Conclusions
The trails indicate that a 3/3/4 transceiver (3.3 transceivers per cell in average) configuration is possible with 1/3 reuse and fractional loading using only 27 frequencies (including 12 BCCH frequencies, which were planned in 4/12 pattern during the trials). Thus, corresponding to an average hardware load slightly higher than 40%. Further, the effect from an uneven transceiver distribution appears to small in 1/3 networks according to results where hardware loads between 20 and 60% were achieved in the trial area cells. In addition, BCCH/TCH adjacencies appear to be a minor problem. The reason is that severe interference hits are few due to the use of DTX and synthesizer

13 (13)
Rev File

LVR/D-98:0398
Datum - Date
LVR/DTC
1998-12-22
hopping. Thus, there is a potential for further increased load without these adjacencies. Moreover, the fractional load MRP showed somewhat worse performance in high-rise buildings compared to a corresponding 1/3 solution based on the same amount of spectrum. The reduced number of hopping frequencies with the MRP might be a reason for this result. However, since the MRP was not optimised, it was difficult to draw a conclusion about its performance compared to that of the 1/3. Nevertheless, MRP seems better suited for networks with many transceivers per cell and a lot of spectrum, more than about 6 MHz. 1/3 frequency reuse in combination with synthesizer hopping and fractional loading appears to be a very good solution for networks with narrow bandwidths (less than 6 MHz) and a small number of transceivers per cell. The 1/3 methodology offers: simplified frequency planning with a low grade of complexity cheap solutions larger frequency hopping gain compared to MRP, resulting in good quality high flexibility regarding adding and removing transceivers in the network

1 To 3 Frequency Reuse - Trial Experiences and Cell Planning Aspects

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

1 To 3 Frequency Reuse - Trial Experiences and Cell Planning Aspects

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Limited Internal REPORT

LVR/DT Fredric Kronestedt, Erik Edgren

1/3 Frequency Reuse - Trial Experiences and Cell Planning Aspects

Limited Internal REPORT

LVR/DT Fredric Kronestedt, Erik Edgren

Fractional Loading Networks

Erlang cell 8 * (# FRQcell )

Limited Internal REPORT

LVR/DT Fredric Kronestedt, Erik Edgren

TRX cell # FRQcell

Trial Network Characteristics

Limited Internal REPORT

LVR/DT Fredric Kronestedt, Erik Edgren

1998-12-22 Discontinuous Transmission (DTX) Utilised in both up- and downlink.

Limited Internal REPORT

LVR/DT Fredric Kronestedt, Erik Edgren

Limited Internal REPORT

LVR/DT Fredric Kronestedt, Erik Edgren

Limited Internal REPORT

LVR/DT Fredric Kronestedt, Erik Edgren

Network 2 90% 5% 11h

79% 10% 1.4h

81% 10% 0.8h

73% 13% 1.5h

71% 15% 1.0h

Effects of uneven TRX distribution

Drop rate versus cell load in network 2

Limited Internal REPORT

LVR/DT Fredric Kronestedt, Erik Edgren

Effects of BCCH/TCH adjacencies

Nonhopping BCCH versus hopping TCH

Limited Internal REPORT

LVR/DT Fredric Kronestedt, Erik Edgren

Discussion on the Results

Erlang cell = FRQLoad 8 (# FRQcell ) = 0.18 * 8 * (# FRQcell )

Limited Internal REPORT

LVR/DT Fredric Kronestedt, Erik Edgren

Limited Internal REPORT

LVR/DT Fredric Kronestedt, Erik Edgren

Two channel groups

Limited Internal REPORT

LVR/DT Fredric Kronestedt, Erik Edgren

1/3 versus MRP

Limited Internal REPORT

LVR/DT Fredric Kronestedt, Erik Edgren

You might also like