Presentation on theme: "FCS 1 Specialist user expectations. FCS 2 Present two way radio technologies."— Presentation transcript:
FCS 1 Specialist user expectations
FCS 2 Present two way radio technologies
FCS 3 European VHF Two way radio and TV allocations
FCS 4 European UHF Two way radio and TV allocations
FCS 5 US UHF Two way radio and TV allocations
FCS 6 Global Cellular Band3GPPAllocationUplinkDownlinkRegion I21002x60 MHz Present UMTS II19002x60 MHz US PCS x75 MHz GSM Europe, Asia, Brazil IV1700/21002x45 MHz New US V8502x25 MHz US and Asia VI8002X10 MHz Japan VII26002x70 MHz New VIII9002X35 MHz Europe and Asia IX17002x35 MHZ Japan Over 800 MHz of cellular bandwidth - the Deci band Handset
FCS 7 Quin Band Device duplex bands 900 MHz 1800 MHz 1900 MHz (US) UMTS E-GSM 35 MHz Base Rx E-GSM 35 MHz Base Tx MHz Base Rx MHz Base Tx MHz MHz MHz MHz MHz Guard Band 20 MHz Guard Band 20 MHz Guard Band 30 MHz Guard Band GSM-R GSM-R 45 MHz Duplex Spacing 190 MHz Duplex Spacing 80 MHz Duplex Spacing 95 MHz Duplex Spacing IMT2000TC ( presently used for DECT) IMT200TC 800 MHz AMPS/CDMA /TDMA 25 MHz Base Rx AMPS/CDMA /TDMA 25 MHz Base Tx SMR/ PMR 45 MHz Duplex Spacing
FCS 8 Broadcast Long wave to L band Radio bandFrequencyOperational bandwidthDigital broadcast system options Long wave3 kHz-300 kHz<300 kHzDRM (digital AM) Medium wave300 KHz-3000kHz<3000kHzDRM Short wave3 MHz-30 MHz<30 MHzDRM VHF Band I47-68 MHz21 MHzDRM+ VHF OIRT (Russia) MHz10 MHzDRM+ VHF Japan76-90 MHz14 MHzDRM+ VHF Band II MHz20 MHzDRM+ VHF Band III MHz12 MHzDAB ( MHz) UHF Band IV MHz320 MHzDVB/DVB H/Media FLO/ATSC/ISDBT UHF Band V MHz70 MHz L band MHz40 MHzDAB/DMB World space MHz MHz5 MHzDVB-H
FCS 9 Duplex spacing and the duplex gap Duplex spacing TX/RX separation within the handset Duplex gap – separation between different mobiles or between a mobile and a DVB or ATSC portable receiver Other users Guard band Operational bandwidth lower duplex Duplex gap Operational bandwidth upper duplex Guard band Other users Duplex spacing
FCS 10 Issues with UHF in Europe No coordinated approach to band allocations by country and by region in the UHF band. Differences in present and future digital TV channel allocations which taken globally can be anywhere in the UHF band between 470 and 862 MHz. Role of TV and public broadcasting in Public Safety and Disaster Recovery – present ITU initiatives Nee for integration with other radio systems including cellular
FCS 11 TV channels TV channels are transmitted at relatively high power. This potentially creates interference into proposed LTE receive bands TV tuners need to tune across the whole UHF band. Present radio tuner architectures deliver poor sensitivity and the devices are vulnerable to interference from other transmissions including mobile cellular handsets.
FCS 12 UHF band plan for countries with AMPS/LTE850 allocations
FCS 13 Extended band plan to allow LTE handsets to receive and demodulate terrestrial broadcast channels anywhere in the UHF band Spain is still out in the cold as digital TV is implemented in Channels 67 to 69.
FCS 14 Extended band plan to allow LTE handsets to be used throughout Europe and ROW with simultaneous terrestrial broadcast receive functionality
FCS 15 The Deci filter Universal UHF LTE handset?
FCS 16 Benefits to the broadcast community Present terrestrial broadcast receivers have poor sensitivity, of the order of between -92 and -98 dBm, and are vulnerable to front end compression and inter modulation. Sub banding will result in a terrestrial broadcast receiver that has the same or similar sensitivity and dynamic range as an LTE transceiver of an equivalent bandwidth. Note that 5 MHz UMTS transceivers presently have sensitivities that can exceed -120 dBm. This means that users will be able to receive terrestrial broadcasts on portable receivers provided received signal strengths are similar to UHF LTE. This potentially includes HDTV transmissions.
FCS 17 Radio planning implications Significant implications for future terrestrial broadcast and LTE radio planning and consolidates the present thinking that re broadcasting terrestrial broadcast signals from cellular sites may be sensible for all parties concerned.
FCS 18 Scale economy issues The scale economies achievable from such a device combined with the incremental user value realisable from an LTE transceiver with integrated terrestrial broadcast receive capabilities would justify substantial engineering optimisation effort.
FCS 19 Cost and complexity It could be expected that a Universal UHF LTE transceiver would work at least as well and have similar component costs to an LTE 900, 1800, 1900, 2100 device. Component commonalities between a UHF LTE handset and LTE850 may deliver additional benefits.
FCS 20 The US and Mobile ATSC? Broadcasters have indicated they would like the opportunity to announce new ATSC-based mobile and handheld broadcast services before the close of analog services in February The planned work schedule for a mobile/handheld solution, therefore, is based on this premise. The target dates for completion of the standards documentation are intended to take into account the time needed for professional and consumer manufacturers to develop equipment for implementation before such services can be introduced. This emphasizes the need for the standards work to be completed as soon as possible.
FCS 21 Mobile ATSC? The ATSC-M/H system will enable modes of operation that allow mobile reception by devices permanently mounted in cars, buses, and trains, at speeds up to at least 75 mph. The system will support modes of operation that allow reception by handheld devices that are stationary or moving at walking speeds of about 3 mph (5 km/h).
FCS 22 US example
FCS 23 US Upper band UHF Note second harmonic effect at MHz potentially compromises GPS receive at 1575 MHz
FCS 24 Enabling technologies RF MEMS Tuneable capacitors – tuneable antennas Complex low insertion loss switch matrices Tuneable resonators Tuneable low noise high Q oscillators These multiple functions need to be inter matched across a wide (widening) range of operational conditions Need to be manufactured and packaged to meet aggressive production requirements
FCS 25 Murata SAW diplexer and SAW duplexer for the 1.7 GHz UMTS Band in Japan Adding filters to a handset design and/or increasing handset performance in terms of out of band rejection and in band signal handling capabilities adds cost, occupies board real estate, may add height ( critical in ultra thin handsets) and may have availability (time to market and product choice) implications.
FCS 26 Film Bulk Acoustic Resonator Acoustic isolation by air
FCS 27 Solidly mounted resonator
FCS 28 GPS example
FCS 29 UHF handset design Summary UHF design challenge for duplex spaced cellular has to be considered in the context of already complex and ambitious multi band requirements UHF has special design requirements – high power TV in all markets, high power TV and high power public safety radio in some markets Vulnerable portable TV receivers Other vulnerable users for example Programme Making and Special Events in the UK in Channel 69 Disconnects of the spectral auction and allocation process can be papered over by brute force technology solutions in the handset This adds cost and complexity Complexity adds to NRE costs and availability issues (time to market delay and product choice)
FCS 30 TDD as an option? TDD as an alternative option GSM half duplex proven and cost effective Small additional step to move to full TDD With TDD you trade network time domain complexity and density against simpler handset design. To resolve the TDD network timing issues you would probably need to implement a UHF TDD network at a 2 GHz network density for example using existing 2 GHz cell sites This would (probably) achieve higher data rates and the data rates could be maintained to the edge of each cell. Handsets would be lower cost and simpler – 30 dollar rather than 300 dollar BOM for specialist radio equipment. Basis for the TDD LTE UHF proposition. This has not been taken fully into account in the LTE standards process. TDD shifts frequency domain complexity in the handset into time domain complexity in the network - a frequency to time domain transform.