[STDS-802-16] LE Ad-hoc - 2.4GHz BS-BS Interference
Hi All,
Here are the results for 2.4GHz needed separation between
Base Stations (no co-ordination):
1. Adjacent channel interferer:
- For omni antennae, 3.2km;
- For directional antennae: 15.8km.
These results are almost 4 time worse than for 5.8GHz, due to
Tx power increase by 5dB (max. 25dBm instead of 20dBm) and
propagation loss decrease by 7.7dB.
2. Co-channel interferer:
- More than 120km (due to earth curvature more than 60km
is below the horizon).
3. The interference level for co-located BSs, adjacent channel,
is -62dBm.
Kind Regards,
Marianna
-----Original Message-----
From: yig-all@zahav.net.il [mailto:yig-all@zahav.net.il]
Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 12:42 AM
To: Marianna Goldhammer
Subject: RE: [STDS-802-16] LE Ad-hoc - 2.4GHz inclusion
Hi Marianna,
You are right. We should use 25dBm for the DL.
Regards,
Yigal
-----Original Message-----
From: Marianna Goldhammer
[mailto:marianna.goldhammer@alvarion.com]
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 7:44 PM
To: yigall@runcom.co.il
Subject: RE: [STDS-802-16] LE Ad-hoc - 2.4GHz inclusion
Igal,
I checked the regulations, limiting the power at 30dBm with
the following :
quote
Total power must be reduced by 1 dB for each 3 dB of directional
gain of the antenna/array device, as defined in paragraph (iv)
below.
end quote
I do not really understand how can you have in the same time
30dBm and 17dBi. With omni antenna, still you should keep the
36dB eirp.
If we keep the 17dBi, the max. power will be 25dBm.
Please comment,
Marianna
-----Original Message-----
From: Yigal Leiba [mailto:yigall@runcom.co.il]
Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2004 7:58 AM
To: STDS-802-16@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-16] LE Ad-hoc - 2.4GHz inclusion
Hi Marianna,
I would use 20dBm for the SS, and 30dBm for the BS. Antennas
can be the same
as these for 5.8GHz.
Regards,
Yigal
-----Original Message-----
From: Marianna Goldhammer
[mailto:marianna.goldhammer@alvarion.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 3:24 PM
To: yigall@runcom.co.il; STDS-802-16@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: RE: [STDS-802-16] LE Ad-hoc - 2.4GHz inclusion
Igal,
If people agree, no problem to include 2.4GHz.
For this band we should consider powers according to the
FCC NPRM (FCC-03-223). Can you input the "System parameters"?
Regards,
Marianna
-----Original Message-----
From: Yigal Leiba [mailto:yigall@runcom.co.il]
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 1:08 PM
To: STDS-802-16@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-16] LE Ad-hoc - First working document
and questions
Hi Marianna,
I would propose to include 2.4GHz in the study, because
although it is a noisy band, it has very good propagation and
better mobility than 5.8GHz.
Best Regards,
Yigal
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-stds-802-16@listserv.ieee.org
[mailto:owner-stds-802-16@listserv.ieee.org]On Behalf Of
Marianna Goldhammer
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 8:56 PM
To: STDS-802-16@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: [STDS-802-16] LE Ad-hoc - First working document and
questions
Hi All,
I started the work by looking at System Parameters:
- for Tx power and antenna gain, I used data sheets of
existing products, from some 5 companies; took the
most used ones
- for SCa, OFDM,OFDMA, I used D3 to get
performance parameters.
In the attached document you will find a proposal for
system parameters, some questions, a list of main
interference scenarios to look at, and in the Annex
relevant extracts from D3.
Please:
- comment on proposed parameters
- address the "yellow text" and provide OFDM and OFDMA
parameters for lowest rate ACI
- comment on scenarios
- propose how to evaluate "service disruption" cases.
Regards,
Marianna
IEEE 802.16 LE Ad-Hoc Chair
P.S. Feel free to insert comments in text
<<C802.16-04_NNr0.doc>>
This mail was sent via mail.alvarion.com
****************************************************************************
********
This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code,
vandals & computer
viruses.
****************************************************************************
********
This mail passed through mail.alvarion.com
****************************************************************************
********
This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code,
vandals & computer
viruses.
****************************************************************************
********
This mail was sent via mail.alvarion.com
****************************************************************************
********
This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code,
vandals & computer
viruses.
****************************************************************************
********
This mail passed through mail.alvarion.com
****************************************************************************
********
This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code,
vandals & computer
viruses.
****************************************************************************
********
This mail was sent via mail.alvarion.com
****************************************************************************
********
This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code,
vandals & computer viruses.
****************************************************************************
********
This mail passed through mail.alvarion.com
****************************************************************************
********
This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer
viruses.
****************************************************************************
********
This mail was sent via mail.alvarion.com
************************************************************************************
This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses.
************************************************************************************