Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
1
Date Submitted: [ 25 August, 2008]
Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [Comparison of 8-star QAM and other 8-point constellations] Date Submitted: [ 25 August, 2008] Source: [Michael McLaughlin] Company [DecaWave] Contact: Michael McLaughlin Voice:[ ], FAX: [N/A], Re: [n/a] Abstract:[Why 8-star QAM is the best 8 point constellation for the SC-PHY] Purpose: [To resolve LB43 letter ballot comments] 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 Michael Mc Laughlin, DecaWave
![Date Submitted: [ 25 August, 2008]](http://slideplayer.com/slide/14635190/90/images/1/Date+Submitted%3A+%5B+25+August%2C+2008%5D.jpg "Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [Comparison of 8-star QAM and other 8-point constellations] Date Submitted: [ 25 August, 2008] Source: [Michael McLaughlin] Company [DecaWave] Contact: Michael McLaughlin. Voice:[ ], FAX: [N/A], Re: [n/a] Abstract:[Why 8-star QAM is the best 8 point constellation for the SC-PHY] Purpose: [To resolve LB43 letter ballot comments] 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 Michael Mc Laughlin, DecaWave.")
2
Introduction An 8 point constellation allows >4Mbps in low complexity, single carrier mode There are many possible choices Star 8QAM (Current draft) 8PSK (CID 156) NS 8QAM (CID 589) One comment even suggests substituting 16QAM (CID 448) This contribution compares these possibilities Michael Mc Laughlin, DecaWave
3
Proakis Digital Communications – 4th edition*
<month year> doc.: IEEE <doc#> Proakis Digital Communications – 4th edition* * pp 279 Michael Mc Laughlin, DecaWave <author>, <company>
4
8-PSK Constellation d=2 Constellation power = 6.83 45o
Michael Mc Laughlin, DecaWave
5
8-QAM Constellation d=2 Constellation power = 4.73 90o 60o
Michael Mc Laughlin, DecaWave
6
Expect Star 8-QAM ~1.5dB better than 8-PSK
AWGN Comparison 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 -4 -3 -2 -1 EbNo berr AWGN performance Star 8 QAM 8-PSK 16-QAM Expect Star 8-QAM ~1.5dB better than 8-PSK Michael Mc Laughlin, DecaWave
7
Star 8QAM vs 8PSK: Impaired AWGN
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 -4 -3 -2 -1 EbNo Ber/Per AWGN with ADC, PA and PN impairments Star 8 QAM BER 8-PSK BER Star 8 QAM PER 8-PSK PER > 4dB difference Impaired AWGN 3 bit ADC, 5dB OBO, PN = -87dBc/Hz Michael Mc Laughlin, DecaWave
8
Star 8QAM vs. 16QAM: Impaired AWGN
5 10 15 20 25 30 -4 -3 -2 -1 EbNo Ber/Per AWGN with ADC, PA and PN performance Star 8 QAM BER Star 8 QAM PER 16 QAM BER 16 QAM PER Error floor Impaired AWGN 3 bit ADC, 5dB OBO, PN = -87dBc/Hz Michael Mc Laughlin, DecaWave
9
Star 8QAM vs 8PSK: LOS CM1.3 CM3.1 with PA, PN, ADC
CM1.3 with ADC, PA and PN impairments 10 10 -1 10 -2 Ber/Per Star 8 QAM BER 8-PSK BER Star 8 QAM PER 8-PSK PER 10 -3 10 -4 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 EbNo > 4dB difference CM3.1 with PA, PN, ADC 3 bit ADC, 5dB OBO, PN = -87dBc/Hz Michael Mc Laughlin, DecaWave
10
Star 8QAM vs 8PSK: NLOS CM2.3 CM2.3 with PA, PN, ADC
5 10 15 20 25 30 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 EbNo Ber/Per CM2.3 with ADC, PA and PN impairments 8-PSK BER 8-PSK PER Star 8 QAM BER Star 8 QAM PER CM2.3 with PA, PN, ADC 3 bit ADC, 5dB OBO, PN = -87dBc/Hz Michael Mc Laughlin, DecaWave
11
Summary Reject all 3 comments (CID 156, 589, 448)
Star 8 QAM best theoretical 8 point constellation 16QAM unusable with Power Amp, Phase Noise Performs significantly better than 8PSK in AWGN Impaired AWGN LOS with PA,PN NLOS with PA,PN Can achieve >4Mbps at EbNo of 17dB with PA+PN Distance ~10 meters Reject all 3 comments (CID 156, 589, 448) Best impaired or unimpaired performance Michael Mc Laughlin, DecaWave
Similar presentations
![Submission Title: [Add name of submission]](/83/13598968/big_thumb.jpg "Submission Title: [Add name of submission]>")
![March 2008 Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [Toumaz response to 802.15 TG6 Call for Applications]](/91/14999517/big_thumb.jpg "March 2008 Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [Toumaz response to 802.15 TG6 Call for Applications]>")
![January 2007 Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [TG3c Technical Requirement sub-group report]](/91/15093185/big_thumb.jpg "January 2007 Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [TG3c Technical Requirement sub-group report]>")
![November 2007 Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [TG3c Schedule] Date Submitted: [18 July,](/91/15133510/big_thumb.jpg "November 2007 Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [TG3c Schedule] Date Submitted: [18 July,>")
![Submission Title: [Rate one over four code for TG4a]](/91/15138370/big_thumb.jpg "Submission Title: [Rate one over four code for TG4a]>")
