doc.: xxxx A Sub-Committee Report September 2004 Martin et alSlide 1 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: Recommendations of the Range Issue Subcommittee Date Submitted: September 2004 Source: Frederick Martin, Motorola, Inc., Colin Lanzl, Aware, Inc., Paul Gorday, Motorola, Inc., Rick Roberts, Harris Corporation. Contact: F. Martin, Motorola, Inc., 8000 W. Sunrise Blvd. Plantation, FL Voice: , FAX: , Re: Range Issue Sub-Committee Abstract:A model and basis of comparison is proposed for comparing range performance of the baseline PHY layer with proposals for a. Purpose:Tutorial information on capabilities of current 15.4 hardware. Notice:This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein. Release:The contributor acknowledges and accepts that this contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may be made publicly available by P

doc.: xxxx A Sub-Committee Report September 2004 Martin et alSlide 2 Sub-Committee Charter “In response to the a PAR, clause 12, Scope of Proposed Project (document a), this subcommittee's scope is to study the range implications of devices and how we might ask the a proposers to show at least an enhanced range mode.”

doc.: xxxx A Sub-Committee Report September 2004 Martin et alSlide 3 The issue bands: MHz (worldwide) MHz (North America) MHz (Europe) Power: typical 0 dBm maximum: Regulatory max (100 mW Europe, 1 W US Antenna: not specified Receiver sensitivity: not specified Result: typical indoor range may be 10 to 30 m maximum outdoor range may be several km !!!

doc.: xxxx A Sub-Committee Report September 2004 Martin et alSlide 4 The Search for Guidance PAR -- Purpose [To provide a standard for ultra low complexity, ultra low cost, ultra low power consumption and low data rate wireless connectivity among inexpensive devices. The raw data rate will be high enough (maximum of 200kbs) to satisfy a set of simple needs such as interactive toys, but scaleable down to the needs of sensor and automation needs (10kbps or below) for wireless communications PAR -- Purpose [This project will define the PHY and MAC specifications for low data rate wireless connectivity with fixed, portable and moving devices with no battery or very limited battery consumption requirements typically operating in the Personal Operating Space (POS) of 10 meters … a PAR -- Scope [This project will define an alternative PHY clause for a data communication standard with precision ranging, extended range, enhanced robustness and mobility amendment to standard (18a).]

doc.: xxxx A Sub-Committee Report September 2004 Martin et alSlide 5 The Philosophy behind the Proposed Solution In the spirit of the PAR, compare 4A proposals with typical low cost, low power a implementations Transmit Power: +6 dBm (900 MHz), 0 dBm (2400 MHz) Receive Sensitivity: -95 dBm (900 MHz), -90 dBm (2400 MHz) isotropic antenna See specs for Freescale MC13192 CompXs – CX1540 Atmel – AT86RF210

doc.: xxxx A Sub-Committee Report September 2004 Martin et alSlide 6 Propagation Model Colin – Add slides here

doc.: xxxx A Sub-Committee Report September 2004 Martin et alSlide 7 Flat Fading Margin for Assume that both PHY’s undergo flat Rayleigh fading –Chip pulse length is relatively long compared to RMS delay spread: (pulse length = 1  s at 2.4 GHz, 3.3  s at 900 MHz, 6.7  s at 868 MHz) –Simple 2.4 GHz PHY implementation (no equalizer or rake) shows multipath performance similar to flat fading for RMS delay spreads up to ns (doc. 337r0). 868/915 MHz PHY would tolerate more. –Diversity methods (antenna, rake, mesh network, etc.) would improve performance relative to flat Rayleigh fading, but are not considered here. Rayleigh fading margin vs. desired reliability –10 dB margin gives 90% probability of exceeding desired level –13 dB margin gives 95% probability of exceeding desired level PHY sensitivity spec. (1% PER, 20-byte PSDU) –2.4 GHz PHY: -85 dBm –868/915 MHz PHY: -92 dBm –Typical performance is ~5 dB better than spec.

doc.: xxxx A Sub-Committee Report September 2004 Martin et alSlide 8 Baseline performance of Add slide showing propagation model to

doc.: xxxx A Sub-Committee Report September 2004 Martin et alSlide 9 Sub-Committee Recommendation 1.Compare proposals with typical low-cost, low-power implementations of Specific recommendations are contained in this presentation. 2.Use the XXX model 1.Adopt 10 dB as the flat fading margin for the baseline. 2.Proposers are responsible for justifying fading margin and receiver performance assumptions for their proposals

doc.: xxxx A Sub-Committee Report September 2004 Martin et alSlide 10 Motion ???