1 / 16

EC workshop cable TV receivers affected by new radio services in the 800 MHz band

EC workshop cable TV receivers affected by new radio services in the 800 MHz band. René Tschannen, OFCOM Brussels, 25th January 2010. Background. Measurements. Theoretical Studies. Conclusions. Interference immunity level for CATV-networks and –equipment.

PamelaLan
Télécharger la présentation

EC workshop cable TV receivers affected by new radio services in the 800 MHz band

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. EC workshopcable TV receivers affected by new radio services in the 800 MHz band René Tschannen, OFCOMBrussels, 25th January 2010

  2. Background Measurements Theoretical Studies Conclusions Interference immunity level for CATV-networks and –equipment • EN 50083-8“Cabled distribution systems for television and sound signals. Electromagnetic compatibility for networks” • EN 50083-2“Cable networks for television signals, sound signals and interactive services. Electromagnetic compatibility for equipment” Relevant immunity standards CATV-networks and –equipment have a regulatory need to work up to an interference immunity level of 106 dBμV/m(= 0.2V/m)

  3. Background Measurements Theoretical Studies Conclusions typical power distribution of mobile handsetsdata measured in an IMT rural cell in Australia 1) In this typical example90% of the active mobile handsets have an output power of≤14 dBmEIRP Accordingly10% of the active mobile handsets have an output power of>14 dBmEIRP Radiated power of mobile handsets user device uplink emission (e.i.r.p.) levels according to 3GPP specifications: The maximum radiated power of a UMTS handset is 24 dBmEIRP (as handsets have isotropic antennas the values given are in EIRP- and not in ERP) EIRP=ERP+2.15dBmERP=EIRP–2.15dBm 2 dBmEIRP= 1.6 mW 14 dBmEIRP= 25 mW 23 dBmEIRP=200 mW 24 dBmEIRP=250 mW 25 dBmEIRP=316 mW 1) ITU-R JTG 5-6 Doc. 5-6/88-E (Annex 14), published 3rd June 2009

  4. Background Measurements Theoretical Studies Conclusions Remember:24 dBmEIRP = max. radiation power of a UMTS handset14 dBmEIRP => 90% of all active handsets radiate a power ≤14 dBmEIRP = regulatory interference immunity level interferer Interference radius PTx Field strength as a function of the separation distance between a LTE handset (interferer) and a CATV-receiver (victim) at a given radiation power PTx separation distance immunityfield strength = interference radius victim In case a CATV-receiver complies with the immunity level of 106 dBμV/m then the interference radius is for 90% of the active LTE handsets ≤4.3m If the immunity level of a device is better than 106 dBμV/m then the interference radius is reduced accordingly

  5. Background Measurements Theoretical Studies Conclusions analogue TV orTV set with integrated STB Viewer coaxial cable CATV distribution network A RFin Viewer TV set DVB-C STB SCART or HDMI RFin D B coaxial cable PTx level increased until interferenceobserved Viewer TV set DVB-C STB coaxial cable coaxial cable C RFin RFout RFin PC Cable Modem ETHERNET coaxial cable Measurement setups Interferer UMTS signal with abandwith of 3.84 MHz(focus on UpLink 832-862 MHz) Measurements have been conducted at two locations:- at a CATV-headend - in a private apartment Analogue and digital reception has been studied Separation distance between interferer and vitctim: 1.6m (to compare with studies from other organisations)

  6. Background Measurements Theoretical Studies Conclusions very good device lousy device Interpretation:less than 10% of active handsets have an interference radius >1.6m Measurement results • Setups A & B:The immunity of the configurations under test was ≥10dB better than the regulatory immunity field strength limit of 106dBµV/m. The immunity could be further improved with better cables. • Setup C:When the signal was looped through the RFin/RFout connectorstwo devices did behave quite badly (due to built-in broadband amplifiers that pick-up interference) • Setup D: The device under test (cable modem) was a very poor one

  7. Background Measurements Theoretical Studies Conclusions TV set CATV distribution network DVB-C STB coaxial cable coaxial cable RFin RFout RFin Warning:Daisy-chaining the signal through the RFin/RFout connectors of domestic equipment can cause a signal qualitydegradation up to 30dB !! broadband amplifier RFin RFout Interference cases Interferer Interference cases and the results of our measurements: • insufficient shielding of the cable distribution network  Is not an issue, if the network is properly implemented • isufficient shielding of the cables between the wall socket and the receiver equipment  Critical as cable qualities differ substantially. Measured shielding effectiveness varied between 30-105dB ! => use good shielded cables only ! • insufficient shielding of the receiver equipment  If a „loop-through“ of the signal via built-in broadband amplifiers was avoided: The immunity of the devices was better than the current regulatoryrequirement of 106dBμV/m(exception: cable modem) There are some CATV-devices on the market that show quite a good immunity ! => request to industry to improve the immunity of all CATV-products If interferenceoccurs itis mainly localised within a short distance to the victim and it is co-channel only !Interference is thus under the control of the user of a mobile LTE handset.

  8. Background Measurements Theoretical Studies Conclusions  How likely is co-channel interference? Findings from the measurements • The wanted signal level in a CATV-network should besufficient (e.g. >55 dBμV for a 256QAM modulated OFDM-signal) to get a reasonable C/I-ratio • For use in sharing studies a realistic working level for the interfering LTE-signal is 14dBm(90th percentile value) • Avoid daisy-chaining the signal through the RFin/RFout connectors of domestic equipment • Use only connection cables with a good shielding effectiveness • It was observed that a) interference occurs in co-channel onlyb) the interference radius is small (a few meters) => interference ishome-made and thus under the control of the userc) the likelihood that mobile handsets radiate with high PTx levels is relatively low what reduces the risk of interference (power distribution of LTE UE) • Criticism:In the view of OFCOM the measurements currently availablefrom other parties arebased on theoretical absolute worst case conditions (use of extreme PTx levels for the interferer, assumption of permanent co-channel constellations and a too low wanted signal level in the cable distribution network)

  9. Background Measurements Theoretical Studies Conclusions Probability of co-channel interference from IMT handsets (uplink) into CATV-receivers (statistical approach) High cable penetration in Switzerland > 85% Assumptions for the theoretical modelling for Switzerland: • Active IMT handsets (UE) per km2 and per 5 MHz: . . . . . 2.16 1) = D • Typical call duration: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 min • Total number of CATV-receivers in SUI: . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2‘800‘000 • CATV-receivers in use during busy hour: . . . . . . . . . . . . 30% (840’000) • Number of channels on the cable: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 • Daily usage of the CATV-receivers: .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 h • Interference distance between UE and CATV-receiver. . <5 m = r 1) This density is conservative (i.e. is high). A large percentage of indoor mobile traffic will be operated by femto-cells in future. Femto-cells will hardly being operated in the UHF-band.Furthermore, the 3.4-GHz-band was not considered by the calculations.

  10. Background Measurements Theoretical Studies Conclusions The probability that at least one IMT handset causes co-channel interference into a particular CATV-receiver is = 1.97 * 10-5~0.002% Calculating the probability of co-channel interference(statistical approach) A certain CATV-receiver is interfered, when: • thisCATV-receiver is in use (active) • and an active IMT handset is located within a distance of <5 m • and the channel on the cable and the IMT channel collide ch66 is interfered from 1 IMT channel ch67, ch68, and ch69 are interfered from 2 IMT channels each

  11. Background Measurements Theoretical Studies Conclusions During main traffic hours there will be about 17 interferences on average all over Switzerland Number of interfered CATV-receivers(statistical approach) Distribution (CDF) of the interferences throughout Switzerland at a given point of time. Interference distance ≤ 5 m For Switzerland:With a probability of 90% less than 23 interference cases are in place at a given point of time (of a total of 2‘800‘000 devices whereas 840‘000 are in use during busy hours)

  12. Background Measurements Theoretical Studies Conclusions With a probability of nearly 90% a particular Swiss CATV-receiver will be interfered throughout one year once at most !! ! Number of annual interferences for an individual CATV-Receiver (statistical approach) Distribution (CDF) of the number of the annually interferences perCATV-receiver and year. Interference distance ≤ 5 m

  13. Background Measurements Theoretical Studies Conclusions the probability of co-channel interference is calculated Another approach to cross-check the reliability of the statistical results („Monte Carlo“-simulation) A single “shot”: • A certain CATV-Receiver is placed randomly in the centre cell • The active IMT handsets are with a given density equally positioned over all 7 cells (on the same channel) • Is there an active IMT User Equipment within a distance of <5m? • The interference from the closest UE to the chosen CATV-Receiver is calculated Such “shots” are repeated 5 million times 7 LTE cells with randomly distributed UE and CATV-Receivers The supplementary „Monte Carlo“-simulation fully confirmed the results that we have previously obtained with a pure statistical investigation !=> the 90th percentile of the mobile handset output powerwas identified as 13.8 dBmEIRP and the probability of co-channel interference is in the same order of magnitude !

  14. Background Measurements Theoretical Studies Conclusions Conclusions (1) Outcome from Measurements • Interference is limited to co-channel only • The likelihood that mobile handsets radiate high PTx levels is low what reduces the risk of interference • The interference radius is in a range of a few meters, therefore „home-made“ and under the control of the user Outcome from Theoretical Studies • Two independent theoretical approaches (statistical model & MC-simulation) have shown that the probability of co-channel interference between LTE UE and CATV-Receivers is very low Conclusion • The probability of co-channel interference is a very important factor that has to be taken into account in discussions about „IMT  CATV“-interference

  15. Background Measurements Theoretical Studies Conclusions Conclusions (2) OFCOMs view • It is politically justifiable to introduce IMT in the 800 MHzband without risking many customer complaints about interferences in CATV-networks/-devices

  16. Background Measurements Theoretical Studies Conclusions … are there any questions? Thank you for your attention…

More Related