Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [STDS-802-16] Power variation due to burst boosting.

Hello Lepidus,
 
Regarding the ADC number of bits - although individual subchannel can be boosted (or weakened) in a range of 28 dB, a reasonable policy is to keep the aggregate transmit power of the base station within much tighter brackets (say within a range of 10 dB). This means that the receive power will also will not fluctuate much, and the number of additional bits needed in the ADC is much less than 5 - probably 1 or 2 at most, if at all.
 
Regards,
 
Naftali

From: Chao_Ming Chang [mailto:Lepidus_Chang@MTK.COM.TW]
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 12:23 PM
To: STDS-802-16@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-16] Power variation due to burst boosting.


Hello Will,

   Thanks a lot for the reply.

Nevertheless, when considering the non-first permutation zone which could not apply zone
boosting, the problems on either power variation between OFDM symbols within a down-link sub-frame or the power
variation between samples within an OFDM symbol raised by Crosis remain.

To Crosis:
   When we could use 5 extra ADC bits to allow the 28 dB dynammic range introduced by the burst boosting, I believe
that the sub-channel based problem is solved simultaneously, although I do not think base station (BS) would arrange
such kind of data region to add its burden on power amplifiers. This is why I am seeking the answers from BS manufacturers.
Thanks.

Best regards,
  Lepidus.




"Will Lee" <will.lee@cosmobic.com>

2006/09/05 05:06 PM

       
        收件人：      "crosis savoir" <80216p@GMAIL.COM>, <STDS-802-16@listserv.ieee.org>, <Lepidus_Chang@MTK.COM.TW>
               
        副本抄送：  
        主旨：          Re: [STDS-802-16] Power variation due to burst boosting.



Pls see 16e:
 
8.4.9.6 Zone boosting
 
----- Original Message -----
From: crosis savoir
To: STDS-802-16@listserv.ieee.org
Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 2:01 PM
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-16] Power variation due to burst boosting.

 greetings, I would like to potentially offer you another difficulty. the power boosting is Sub-Channel based, meaning that for example in DL PUSC {physical} adjacent Sub-Carriers from different Sub-Channels may have different boosting as well resulting in apparent extreme power differences not only in the same Sub-Frame but also at the same Symbol.

I would be glad to hear your comments about this as well.

On 9/4/06, Chao_Ming Chang <Lepidus_Chang@mtk.com.tw > wrote:

Hello all,


On Table 275 (page 371) of IEEE 802.16e-2005, it specifies that boosting
with range -12 dB to +9 dB is allowable for bursts. However, this would introduce
a huge value on power variable. For example,  when N_FFT = 1024, a non-first PUSC zone
only uses one major group (i.e. 6 subchannels) with -12 dB burst boosting on every burst within the zone,
its power would be -12 - 10log10(6/10) = -14.22 dB smaller than a non-first PUSC zone
employing 1/3 total data carriers. On the other hand, for FUSC with +9 dB burst boosting on every burst
within the zone, its power is around 9 + 4.77 dB larger than the non-first PUSC zone employing 1/3 total
data carriers. When this kind of PUSC zone using only one major group and with -12 dB burst boosting
coexists with the FUSC zone with +9 dB burst boosting in the same down-link subframe, a total dynamic
range around 28 dB would happen between these two zones.

My questions are:
1. For base station (BS) manufacturers, would they really allocate these two zones with extreme power
variations within the same downlink sub-frame such that +28 dB power variation happens in the same sub-frame?
2. For base station (BS) manufacturers, provided the answer to the first question is positive, would they
transmit bursts to a mobile station (MS) within a sub-frame such that the MS has to accommodate this 28 dB dynamic range?

Any comments or suggestions are highly appreciated on this power variation issue. Thanks.

Best regards,
 Lepidus.


************* Email Confidentiality Notice ********************

The information contained in this e-mail message (including any attachments) may be confidential, proprietary, privileged, or otherwise exempt from disclosure under applicable laws. It is intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). Any use, dissemination, distribution, printing, retaining or copying of this e-mail (including its attachments) by unintended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, or believe that you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately (by replying to this e-mail), delete any and all copies of this e-mail (including any attachments) from your system, and do not disclose the content of this e-mail to any other person. Thank you!




************* Email Confidentiality Notice ********************

The information contained in this e-mail message (including any attachments) may be confidential, proprietary, privileged, or otherwise exempt from disclosure under applicable laws. It is intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). Any use, dissemination, distribution, printing, retaining or copying of this e-mail (including its attachments) by unintended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, or believe that you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately (by replying to this e-mail), delete any and all copies of this e-mail (including any attachments) from your system, and do not disclose the content of this e-mail to any other person. Thank you!




************************************************************************************
This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses(191).
************************************************************************************






************************************************************************************
This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses(43).
************************************************************************************






************************************************************************************
This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses(43).
************************************************************************************