doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0229r0 Submission Summary The current proposal proposes a modified spectral mask for TGad The modified mask achieves a better power efficiency by as much as 3 to 4dB relative to the current mask The proposed spectral mask does not violate any regulatory requirement The proposed spectral mask gives a good solution for dense deployment of TGad devices Date: Feb 2012 Slide 2
doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0229r0 Submission Current mask conflict From , SC QPSK at saturated output power (Psat) produces EVM of 12-22db (model dependent – see figure). Other sources & real life data show EVM of ~16-18db at saturated output power. These values are sufficient for QPSK modulation !! From , meeting the defined spectral mask requires BO ~5dB (from the Psat). Although it is not the TGad mask, similar values (~3-4dB) are required for the TGad mask. Slide 3  – A Maltsev et al, “Comparison of Power Amplifier Non-linearity Impact on 60GHz Single Carrier and OFDM systems”, IEEE CCNC conference, 2010 Date: Feb 2012
doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0229r0 SubmissionSlide 4 Current mask in TGad The current TGad mask is: Date: Feb 2012
doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0229r0 Submission Guide lines for modified spectral mask We can clearly observe 3 regions in the signal spectrum: Recalling the TGad channelization: Desired channel 3 rd Order intermod products region 5th Order (& above) intermod products region Fc Fc + 1.2GHzFc + 2.7GHzFc - 1.2GHzFc – 2.7GHz 3 rd Order intermod products region 5th Order (& above) intermod products region Slide 5 Desired ChannelAdjacent Channel Fc Fc + 0.9 Fc + 2.16 Fc + 1.26Fc + 3.06 Date: Feb 2012
doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0229r0 Submission Proposed mask Slide 6 Desired channel 3 rd Order intermod products region 5th Order (& above) intermod products region Fc Fc + 1.2GHzFc + 2.7GHz Desired Channel Fc - 1.2GHzFc – 2.7GHz 3 rd Order intermod products region 5th Order (& above) intermod products region Adjacent Channel Fc Fc + 0.9 Fc + 2.16 Fc + 1.26Fc + 3.06 -17dbr -30dbr -22dbr Date: Feb 2012
doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0229r0 Submission Regulatory requirements: Looking at various regulatory requirements, one can see that the proposed mask is far from the band edge requirements. Slide 7 Regulatory domain Bend Edge frequency Band edge requirement Document FCC (USA & Canada) 57GHz (fc – 1.32), 64GHz (fc + 0.64) -10dBm/MHz EIRP FCC 47 CFR Part 15, Aug 2006 ETSI (Europe & Russia) fc-3.2GHz, fc+3.2GHz -30dBm/MHz Conducted CEPT/ERC 74- 01 Version E Japanfc-1.25GHz, fc+1.25Ghz -10dBm/MHZ conducted MIC (article 2 paragraph 1) Date: Feb 2012
doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0229r0 Submission Dense deployment case #1 One valid question that should be asked about the proposed mask is its ability to handle dense deployment (enterprise) environments. We know that 60GHz would behave much better in these environments compared to 2GHz / 5GHz due to the following reasons: –Antenna directivity: in 60GHz in dense environment typically beam forming directional antennas will be used. These antennas have very high directivity with typical side lob rejection of about 15dB vs. practically no directivity in lower bands. –Penetration loss: 60GHz signal are highly attenuated by typical building materials. –Diffraction: Due to the higher frequency of the 60GHz band (5mm wave length), the signal can’t diffract over typical in-room objects. Assaf Kasher, Intel Date: Feb 2012
doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0229r0 Submission Dense deployment case #2 Based on  we’ll try to quantify the adjacent channel rejection in dense enterprise environment. In his work Park simulated the number of active links in 9 cubicle office environments. In the work Park assumes various antenna configurations – we’ll refer to the more popular 16 elements beam forming array. From the work we can find the following availability (over locations in the cube), assuming 1 freq reuse factor, and 5.5db required SINR. One can learn that in the worst case event that all the neighboring cubicles use the same adjacent channel, and adhering to the proposed mask -> the combined adjacent channel power in the desired channel would be 5.5+15=20dB below the desired signal (or better). Based on this number, we can see that good coverage can be obtained. Slide 9  - Minyoung Park et al, “Analysis on Spatial Reuse and Interference in 60-GHz Wireless Networks”, JSAC VOL. 27, NO. 8, OCTOBER 2009 1-6 links7 th link8 th link9 th link 100%>95%>80%~50% Date: Feb 2012
doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0229r0 Submission Proposed Text and Mask The transmitted spectrum shall adhere to the transmit spectrum mask shown in the Figure 144. The transmit spectrum shall have a 0dBr (dB relative to the maximum spectral density of the signal) bandwidth not exceeding 1.88GHz, a slope between -17dBr at an 1.2GHz offset and -22dBr at 2.7GHz offset and -30dBr at an 3.06GHz offset and above, inside the channels allowed for the regulatory domain in which the device is transmitting. The resolution bandwidth shall be set to 1MHz. Slide 10 Date: Feb 2012
doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0229r0 Submission February 2012 Assaf Kasher, IntelSlide 11 References 1.A Maltsev et al, “Comparison of Power Amplifier Non-linearity Impact on 60GHz Single Carrier and OFDM systems”, IEEE CCNC conference, 2010. 2.Minyoung Park et al, “Analysis on Spatial Reuse and Interference in 60-GHz Wireless Networks”, JSAC VOL. 27, NO. 8, OCTOBER 2009.
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.