We think you have liked this presentation. If you wish to download it, please recommend it to your friends in any social system. Share buttons are a little bit lower. Thank you!
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byJayson Fishwick
Modified over 2 years ago
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.Cisco ConfidentialPresentation_ID 1 RLANs and weather radars in the 5 GHz band rev 3 Jan Kruys Dec 7, 2006
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.Cisco ConfidentialPresentation_ID 2 Purpose Collect and document that technical side of the issues – at a high level Get all concerned on the same line
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.Cisco ConfidentialPresentation_ID 3 Intro The ITU-R in 2003 defined sharing criteria for WLANs operating in the 5GHz range (5.25 – GHz) These criteria include detection requirements: 1 usec pulse length >> 1 pulses per sweep (depending on radar sweep rate) Canada has always insisted on special protection for its weather radars (5.6 – 5.65 GHz) They are economically important They are hard to detect due to their pulse type and scan patterns Other countries, notably Australia and Japan, are adopting Canadas stance This could lead to blocking of the 5.6 GHz subband by the ITU-R The loss of capacity is significant Airborne Wi-fi is not considered here due to its very different nature
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.Cisco ConfidentialPresentation_ID 4 The technical problem at first sight Weather radars use short pulses (necessary to get resolution): typically.5 usec Detection requires high sensitivity which potentially leads to many false positive detections Detection during PACKET RECEIVE is also a problem Weather radars use complex and sometimes fast scan patterns while analyzing cloud systems Means we see few pulses per burst and therefore we cannot separate false positive detections from real detections This leads to a high false alarm rate and therefore significant service disruption due to the 30 minute re-entry delay Means long intervals in which we see nothing: as much as 10 minutes Radar operators worry that we will be transmitting in their band while they are looking the other way and cause interference when they do look our way
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.Cisco ConfidentialPresentation_ID 5 Looking more closely The service interruption issue arises from the requirement to do in- service monitoring of the channel: Traffic interferes with detection and therefore we may not see a short burst of pulses New trends in weather radar design point towards less but longer pulses (with pulse compression) The industry does not want to vacate this band for no good reason A (false) detection means vacating the channel for at least 30 minutes Service interruption is an issue but only close to radar sites and on- channel Locally determined channel selection in the footprint of the radar can avoid interference without closing the band nation/world-wide
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.Cisco ConfidentialPresentation_ID 6 Short pulse detection Off-line detection of weather radars should not be an issue The RLAN receiver has nothing to do but listen – see also below. The channels that need extra care are known/can be known locally At the edge of the radar (horizon) footprint, the radar signal is still very strong: Approx -20 dBm for a 20KW radar with a 40 dBi antenna This is easily detected - even if the pulses are shorter than 1 usec but not while the channel is being used for WLAN traffic We need many pulses to assure no false detection Weather radars have variable scan patterns – in sweep rate and elevation. We will only see them at low to medium scan rates that deliver enough pulses to compensate for the shorter pulse widths
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.Cisco ConfidentialPresentation_ID 7 Weather radar activity and footprint These radars operate 24/365 – if you see them once you will see them always Allows RLANs to employ off-line detection to establish being in view of a weather radar or not If a radar is seen, it will always be seen If no radar is seen in the weather radar band, it will never be seen Radar footprints are limited geographically Inside that footprint, the above applies Outside that footprint, the radar is not seen or affected This example was provided by Environment Canada
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.Cisco ConfidentialPresentation_ID 8 Analysis 1.Some radars / radar scan types cannot be detected while the RLAN is using the channel (ISM) Because of short pulses or short burst length There is no issue during Channel Availability Checking (CAC) 2.All of these radars are fixed and in more or less continuous service 3.All of these radars are stationary and have fixed footprint Short pulse detection is required only within the foor print 4.A 10 minute CAC + channel blocking would meet the needs of the (fixed) radar community and the RLAN community Once per 24 hours would be enough Mark the channel as available or not available Requires that operators maintain consistent operational schedules 5.ISM assures protection of mobile radars that appear out of the blue Due to ISM, no RLAN will interfere with a weather radar for more than 5 minutes –at any time of day: one sweep at the right scan rate will silence all RLANs within range
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.Cisco ConfidentialPresentation_ID 9 Conclusion The weather radar issue stems mostly from imprecise regulatory language Does not distinguish between CAC and ISM as means to achieve the applicable protection requirements The issue can be removed by: Restricting the requirement to detect sub micro second pulses to CAC in MHz Allowing a 24 hr validity period for a CAC for fixed (weather) radars Detection means the channel must be blocked for 24 hrs No detection means use of the channel is allowed – with ISM and with normal 60 second re-entry CAC Regulatory Impact: Rule change as per above (partially already implemented in EU)
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.Cisco ConfidentialPresentation_ID 10 Another perspective Knowledge = power. By ignoring the cognitive side of the story we limit our capability to solve these problems Knowledge of channels, location, operational patterns, etc The FCC is committed to Cognitive Radio techniques to facilitate spectrum sharing TGY is riding that commitment – it develops means to share presence information between spectrum users We should leverage this FCC policy and propose off-air means to facilitate spectrum sharing with, in this case, weather radars Cognitive spectrum sharing can use geographical data to allow systems outside a given radars horizon to rely exclusively on the current DFS profile Government, the radar operators or a third party can maintain the necessary data base on the web System installers would have to check that data base – in fact it can be automated
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.Cisco ConfidentialPresentation_ID 11 Summary The weather radar issue can be solved by resorting to off-line detection and a validity period for fixed radars Assures that the radar channel is not used - but only within the radar horizon Removes the motivation to block the MHz band (Australia) Data base access to check proximity of weather radars would add resilience Regulators and radar operators have to be engaged First talk with key regulators, then involve WFA formally. Eventually we want the regulatory language to be changed to broaden the means of radar detection and avoidance
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.Cisco ConfidentialPresentation_ID 12 Questions/Comments?
Submission Page 1 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d1 Andrew Myles, Cisco Systems Report of ad hoc group relating to DFS and JPT5G proposal Andrew.
ITU/WMO Seminar on use of radio spectrum for meteorology: Weather, Water and Climate monitoring and prediction September RLAN 5 GHz interference.
1 © 2004, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Advances in License Exempt Wireless LANs ITU-R Study Group 8 Seminar, September, 2004 Jan Kruys Cisco.
Communication for the open minded Study on user identification methods in card payments, e-payments and mobile payments Summary of recommendations (WP5)
Wireless Communications UniForum Chicago October 26,2004 Bill Latura.
How other SRW affect your WLAN Performance Abdullah A. Al-Asmari Saudi Aramco/ IT Copyright © Saudi Aramco 2005.
Wi-Fi Wireless Communications Sheldon Lou
Site Survey for a Wireless Local Area Network Last Update Copyright Kenneth M. Chipps Ph.D.
2 Welcome To Defect Management Training Objective: The objective of this course is to learn about standards that emphasize a best practice approach for.
Software Development QA Best Practices May 20, 2010 Suzette Hackl, CSM Senior Project Manager Skyline Technologies, Inc.
Air Systems Division ITU-R SG8 WP8B Radar Seminar : Factors to consider for Intersystem EMC (continued) Thierry JURAND Geneva, September 24 th 2005.
Work measurement Part II of Work Study. 2 Introduction Work measurement is the application of techniques designed to establish the time for a qualified.
1 Notes content copyright © 2004 Ian Sommerville. NU-specific content © 2004 M. E. Kabay. All rights reserved. Socio-technical Systems IS301 – Software.
Factors to Consider for Intersystem EMC ITU-R Radar Seminar Geneva 24 September 2005 Frank Sanders Chief, ITS Telecommunications Theory Division, U.S.
Copyright © signal Solutions, Inc. Wi-Fi / WLAN Performance Management and Optimization Veli-Pekka Ketonen CTO, 7signal Solutions.
Quality Tools and Techniques in the School and Classroom.
1 RADAR UNWANTED EMMISSIONS A personal view J R Holloway All data in this presentation comes from public domain sources ITU WP 8B Radar Seminar September.
Cognitive Radio Communications and Networks: Principles and Practice By A. M. Wyglinski, M. Nekovee, Y. T. Hou (Elsevier, December 2009) 1 Chapter 5 Spectrum.
Submission November 2008 Bob Heile, ZigBee Alliance November 2008 Myung Lee, CUNYSlide EC Agenda Items Bob Heile Nov. 14, 2008.
Doc.: IEEE /0016r0 Submission March 2008 Rich Kennedy, OakTree WirelessSlide 1 DFS Update from the European Union Date: Authors:
RF Signal and Antenna Dr. Tahseen Al-Doori. Objectives Active and Passive Gain Active and Passive Gain Azimuth and Elevation Chart Azimuth and Elevation.
Chapter 13 Cyganski Book Monica Stoica,
Transmission Technique for PLMN (c) Manzur Ashraf 1 Transmission techniques for PLMN © Manzur Ashraf.
Copyright: Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan 1 Chapter 23: Advanced Data Types and New Applications.
The Role of Governments in Financing Water and Environmental Infrastructure Improving Management of Public Environmental Expenditure Global Forum for Sustainable.
Doc.: IEEE /0044r3 Submission June 2005 Carl R. Stevenson, WK3C Wireless LLCSlide 1 [DRAFT] FCC ex parte presentation on WRAN IEEE P Wireless.
Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology Network Systems Lab. Wireless Communications: The Future Professor Song Chong Network Systems Laboratory.
Ofcom Update on the TV White Space issues Notice: This document has been prepared to assist IEEE It is offered as a basis for discussion and is.
Wireless Systems: Where are we heading?. 2 Outline Some definitions Current situation Near Future 4G: what we really want What are the obstacles Higher.
1 Note content copyright © 2004 Ian Sommerville. NU-specific content copyright © 2004 M. E. Kabay. All rights reserved. Critical Systems Validation IS301.
© 2016 SlidePlayer.com Inc. All rights reserved.