1 / 77

Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)

Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [STMicroelectronics proposal for IEEE 802.15.3a Alt PHY ] Date Submitted: [05 May, 2003] Source: [ Philippe Rouzet (Primary) Didier Helal (Secondary) ] Company [ STMicroelectronics ]

neena
Télécharger la présentation

Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)

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. Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [STMicroelectronics proposal for IEEE 802.15.3a Alt PHY] Date Submitted: [05 May, 2003] Source: [Philippe Rouzet (Primary) Didier Helal (Secondary)] Company [STMicroelectronics] Address [STMicroelectronics, 39 Chemin du Champ des Filles 1228 Geneve Plan-les-Ouates, Switzerland] Voice [+41 22 929 58 66 or +41 22 929 58 72], Fax [+41 22 929 29 70], E-Mail:[philippe rouzet@st.com , didier.helal@st.com] Re: [This is a response to IEEE P802.15 Alternate PHY Call For Proposals dated 17 January 2003 under number IEEE P802.15-02/372r8 ] Abstract: [This document contents the proposal submitted by ST for an IEEE P802.15 Alternate PHY based on UWB technique.] Purpose: [Presentation to be made during March IEEE TG3a session in Dallas, Texas] Notice: This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P802.15. 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 P802.15. Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  2. STMicroelectronics Proposal forIEEE 802.15.3a Alternate PHY May 2003, Dallas, Texas Philippe Rouzet D. Hélal, R. Cattenoz, C. Cattaneo, L. Rouault, N. Rinaldi, L. Blazevic, C. Devaucelle, L. Smaïni, S. Chaillou, M. Frigerio Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  3. Contents • UWB PHY Proposal • Proposed Modulation • Proposed MAC Enhancements • Proposed other criteria definition • Performances at 110Mb/s, 200Mb/s, 480Mb/s • PHY protocol Criteria • MAC protocol Enhancement Criteria • General Solution Criteria Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  4. Contents • UWB PHY Proposal • Proposed Modulation • Proposed MAC Enhancements • Other criteria definition • Performances at 110Mb/s, 200Mb/s, 480Mb/s • PHY protocol Criteria • MAC protocol Enhancement Criteria • General Solution Criteria Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  5. Proposed Modulation Pulse Position + Polarity Modulation Number of bits per pulse = 1, 2, or 3 Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  6. 1 bit / pulse 2 bits / pulse 3 bits / pulse Equally spaced Positions 1 2 3 4 t Tp = 300ps Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  7. MODULATION Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  8. Channel coding options • Turbo codes PCCC (Parallel Concatenation of Convolutional Codes) • Code rate 1/3. With puncturing:1/2, 2/3,7/8. • RSC (recursive systematic convolutional) 13,15(octal def.). • Block size: 512. • Low latency : 5 s • Convolutional codes for lower complexity • Code rate 1/2. With puncturing:2/3,7/8 • Constraint length: 7 -> [133,171] Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  9. Pulse shape • Pulse shape should be adapted to any regulation, provided the pulse power spectral density fits FCC’s emission mask. • Flexibility on pulse shape enables compatibility with more stringent regulations worldwide. Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  10. Example of a full band pulse shape P1 Average TX power = 0.3 mW Peak emission power in 50MHz = -10 dBm BW-10dB = 7.26 GHz Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  11. Contents • UWB PHY Proposal • Proposed Modulation • Proposed MAC Enhancements • Other criteria definition • Performances at 110Mb/s, 200Mb/s, 480Mb/s • PHY protocol Criteria • MAC protocol Enhancement Criteria • General Solution Criteria Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  12. Proposed MAC Compliant with existing MACIEEE 802.15.3 Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  13. FRAME:Known Training Sequencefor Frame Synchronization and Channel Estimation Frame Example of a simplified emitted pulse train Pulse shape not shown (use rectangle for clarity) Preamble Modulated user data Frame Preamble PRP Time Hopping +Polarity 2-PPM +Polarity (Time Hopping optional) Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  14. BEACON is a regular frame with appended preamble for Coarse Synchronization Beacon Beacon Preamble Frame Sync.+ Ch. Est Piconet Information Coarse Sync. PRP Time Hopping +Polarity Time Hopping +Polarity 2-PPM +Polarity (Time Hopping optional) Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  15. Frame sent to DEV-A by DEV-B Preamble Body Header Scenario Cell synchronisation Cell synch Cell synch Frame synch • COARSE SYNCHRONISATION Superframe N Superframe N+1 Contention Free Period Beacon Contention Access Period MCTA 1 preamble CTA m header body CTA 2 CTA x preamble MCTA n CTA 1 preamble … … … … • Preamble Detection (search one sequence among 20) • Alignement (find end of beacon preamble) Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  16. Frame sent to DEV-A by DEV-B Preamble Body Header Scenario Cell synchronisation Cell synch Cell synch Frame synch • FINE SYNCHRONISATION Superframe N Superframe N+1 Contention Free Period Beacon Contention Access Period MCTA 1 preamble CTA m header body CTA 2 CTA x preamble MCTA n CTA 1 preamble … … … … Frame Synchronisation Fine Synchronisationonly (made jointly with ch.est.) DEV-A and DEV-B are synchronized to PNC’s clock DEV-A’s clock is synchronized to DEV-B’s clock, and can start to demodulate the data contained in the frame sent by DEV-B. DEV-A wakes up, and needs to synchronize to DEV-B’s clock. Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  17. Frame sent to DEV-A by DEV-B Preamble Body Header Scenario Cell synchronisation Cell synch Cell synch Frame synch • CLOCK SYNCHRONISATION Superframe N Superframe N+1 Contention Free Period Beacon preamble Contention Access Period MCTA 1 preamble CTA m header body … CTA 2 CTA x preamble MCTA n CTA 1 preamble … … … Cell Synchronization =Coarse+Fine + Clock Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  18. Coarse Sync: Beacon Preamble Construction • Quadratic-Congruence Hadamard (QCH) sequence. • Length of QCH sequence for coarse sync.: LC = 79. • TH code: • Polarity code: derived from row of a Hadamard matrix of size 80 x 80. • PRP = 5.4 ns. TH offset resolution: 50ps. • Sequence is repeated R = 120 + 3 times. • Duration of coarse sync beacon preamble: DC = R*LC *PRP = 52.5 s. • Append after this beacon preamble, the regular frame preamble. • 20 different sequences to distinguish between piconets are enough. • i = 1,2,…,20: sequence number • n = 0,1,…,78: TH offset index One sequence: LC*PRP End of Beacon Preamble (EOBP) signature ….. + + + - - 120 repetitions Beacon preamble duration: DC = 52.5 s Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  19. Compliant with existing MAC IEEE 802.15.3 Introduction of minor adaptations to optimize receiver power consumption and complexity • MCTAs and Slotted Aloha used instead of CAP (CCA difficult with UWB-PHY) • Approximate frames Times Of Arrival (TOAs) • Announced by source DEV at the begining of CTA • Used for channel estimation & synchronization Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  20. TOA 4 TOA 3 TOA 2 TOA 5 TOA 1 TOA 6 Frame synchronization only during Frame Preamble • Joint Channel Estimation and Frame Synchronization • Estimation valid during channel stationarity (1ms) • Frame preamble built from repetition of QCH sequences (same family as coarse sequences) : duration = 3.4 s • Use of approximate frame TOAs to manage different lengths of frames MIFS MIFS MIFS MIFS MIFS Frame 4 Frame 5 3 6 MIFS MIFS Frame 1 Frame 2 CTA slot in superframe TOA 1 TOA 2 TOA 3 TOA 4 TOA 5 TOA 6 CTA Header announcing TOAs Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  21. PHY-SAP Data Throughput close toPayload Bit Rate Optimized Packet Overhead Times PHY Header, MAC Header (802.15.3 format), HCS use 61.5Mb/s mode Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  22. Contents • UWB PHY Proposal • Proposed Modulation • Proposed MAC Enhancements • Other criteria definition • Performances at 110Mb/s, 200Mb/s, 480Mb/s • PHY protocol Criteria • MAC protocol Enhancement Criteria • General Solution Criteria Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  23. Out-of-band rejection filter Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  24. Contents • UWB PHY Proposal • Proposed Modulation • Proposed MAC Enhancements • Proposed other criteria definition • Performances at 110Mb/s, 200Mb/s, 480Mb/s • PHY protocol Criteria • MAC protocol Enhancement Criteria • General Solution Criteria Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  25. Proposal forIEEE 802.15.3a Alternate PHY Performances at 110Mb/s, 200Mb/s and 480Mb/s Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  26. Proposed Alternate PHY enablesSingle Chip FULL CMOS solution Through DIRECT SAMPLING on 1 BIT and DIGITAL MATCHED FILTERING Learn pulse signature after channel propagation Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  27. Demodulation is performed by Match-Filtering Demodulation Rx signal Match-filtering The match-filter is the estimate of the pulse signature through channel propagation No pulse shape is assumed by receiver ! Take advantage of multi-path (complete immunity) Tx signal Channel Estimation Average Compound Channel Response Channel+ Noise Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  28. Matched filter easy to implement • Each point of the channel estimation can be seen as one finger of a rake receiver 64 ns = 1280 fingers of 50 ps width • Channel estimation consists in coherent integration of received pulses. One bit ADC makes the operation a simple increment/decrement No multiplication or complex operator ! • Estimated gate count of the whole channel estimation block bit slice number of gates * number of bit of the counter * number of channel point (20*8*1280 = 204800 gates) • Power consumption Parallel hardware implementation of all fingers Frequency of operations is low (1/PRP) Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  29. Optional Antenna Pulse Generator ABR BP Filter ABR TDD PTC Clock Synthesizer Switch 1-bit ADC LNA RF block UWB System-on-Chip Block Diagram TX Data Frag-mentation TX Preparation Channel Coding Modulation & coding TX Control PTC Channel estimation Synchronization RX Control Demodulation Channel Decoding Defrag- mentation RX Data MAC block (Bottom part) Baseband block PTC = Piconet Time Control ABR = Adaptive Band Rejection MAC+BB+RF on same silicon except BP filter and Antenna Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  30. ABR BP Filter ABR Link Budget Optional Antenna Noise figure for all RX chain referred at the antenna output Pulse Generator TDD Switch Clock Synthesizer 2dB loss 1dB loss G = 16dB 1-bit ADC LNA NF = 3.5dB 2dB NF = 9dB Clock Jitter : 10ps rms (maximum from 0.13m silicon measurements) Implementation loss = jitter effect <2dB(varies with pulse shape) + 2dB margin in order to enable simplest demodulation Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  31. 110Mbps @ 10m, CM4 EFFECTIVE THROUGHPUT 123 Mbps MAXIMUM RANGE 14 m Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  32. 55Mbps @ 10m, CM4 EFFECTIVE THROUGHPUT 61.5 Mbps MAXIMUM RANGE 17 m Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  33. 200Mbps @ 4m, CM2 EFFECTIVE THROUGHPUT 247 Mbps MAXIMUM RANGE 8 m Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  34. 480Mbps @ 1m , CM2 EFFECTIVE THROUGHPUT 486 Mbps MAXIMUM RANGE 2.8 m CM1 adds 1 dB to margin Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  35. -100 3-7GHz 7 sub-bands -110 -120 -130 -140 -150 -160 -170 -180 -190 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 Comparison on different pulse shapes Pulse P2 BW = 3.3-7.2GHz 110Mbps, CM4 or CM3, Margin 3.2dB BW = 3.3-4.9; 6.1-7.2GHz 110Mbps, CM4 or CM3, Margin 1.7dB Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  36. Coexistence and regulatory impact • Coexistence with in-band systems ensured by TX pulse shaping or filtering • System is independent from pulse shape • Transmit power control reduces interferences • Helped by location awareness capability (distance can be estimated with 3cm resolution) • No impact on current regulation • FCC’s Part 15 rules followed • Additional spectrum protection can be supported • 802.15.3 Power Management modes are supported (DSPS, PSPS, APS) Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  37. Simultaneously operating Piconets Single Interferer Interferer dint CM1, CM2, CM3 or CM4 multipath channel CM1, CM2, CM3 or CM4 multipath channel TX DEV Rx level = (limit PER=8%) + 6dB dref RX DEV Modulation : 2-PPM, Prp =5.4 ns, CR 1/3, 123 Mbps Continuous overlapping interferer transmission (worst condition) Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  38. Simultaneously operating PiconetsSingle piconet interferer • Dref/Dint is better than 3 (for 123 Mbps modulation) • CM3, CM4 supports interferer @ ~3 meters for a Ref source @ 10 meters • Interfering channel slightly impacts performance (better for low density channel such as CM1 and CM2, instead of CM3,CM4) -> 2.5 meters instead of 3 meters • Pulse BW impact performances Dref/Dint ~ (BW) • PRP or Datarate impact performances Dref/Dint ~ (PRP) using the same modulation scheme, just changing PRP (and along the datarate) • Gracefull degradation of performance in case of strong UWB interferer by adjusting PRP Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  39. Simultaneously operating PiconetsEffect of TH • Effect of Time hopping in modulated data on interferer immunity • Small effect, equivalent of ~0.1 dB • Effect is marginal on average but smooth some worst case • Marginal improvement for a marginal added complexity • TH may be kept as on option in standard (TBD) Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  40. Simultaneously operating Piconets Multiple Piconet interferers 3 Interferers dint Free space channel CM3 or CM4 multipath channel TX DEV Rx level = (limit PER=8%) + 6dB dref RX DEV Modulation : 2-PPM, Prp =5.4 ns, CR 1/3, 123 Mbps Continuous overlapping interferer transmission (worst condition) Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  41. Simultaneously operating PiconetsMultiple piconet interferer • Multiple Interferer use free space channel • Low width of pulse means small effect on receiver • Infinite rake architecture and 1 bit sampling gives strong performance here • Dref/Dint is better than 30 (for 123 Mbps modulation) • CM3, CM4 supports 2 interferers @ ~0.3 meters for a Ref source @ 10 meters • CM3, CM4 supports 3 interferers @ ~0.7 meters for a Ref source @ 10 meters Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  42. Interference and Susceptibility System supports low Signal-to-Interferer-Ratios : SIR > -50dB for any in-band narrow-band Interferer • Adaptive Band Rejection 802.11a OFDM interferer : SIR>-30dB (at 5.3GHz or other) Generic in-band interferer : SIR>-30dB (at any frequency) • BaseBand Filtering rejection : SIR > -20dB All out-of-band interferers supported (according to IEEE 802.15-3a proposed criteria). Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  43. Low Power Consumption • Baseband MODEM down to 220 kGates in 2PPM at f = 1/PRP • 60% gates (channel estimation) in stand-by during >90% of frame time • Plus CODEC (60k to 500 kGates depending on architecture) • RF Power consumption: RX< 70mW - TX < 40mW • 20Gsample 1-bit ADC consumes less than 30mW Full Scalability • Data throughput is adjustable (flexible modulation) • Compatibility between High and Low Data Rate devices • Simultaneously operating piconets supported • Complexity decreases along with data rate • Power consumption decreases with data rate Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  44. Gate count & Consumption calcul (1/2)Example with the Channel Estimation • Each point of the channel estimation can be seen as one finger of a rake receiver (i.e. 64 ns = 1280 fingers of 50 ps width) • The channel estimation consists in integrating coherently pulses. As the front-end is a one bit ADC, for each point of the channel, the operation is simply an increment/decrement.(i.e. 1280 Inc/Dec for each pulse in TS, 1000 pulses -> 1.2 M Inc/Dec, No multiplication nor complex operator !) • Estimated gate count : • One needs about 20 gates for each bit slice of an up-down counter : one flip-flop, increment/decrement add-sub and a few more for count gating. • So the gate count of the whole channel estimation block is : 20 * number of bit of the counter * number of point of the channel(Using parallel hardware implementation of each finger, to keep low clock rate of 1/PRP) • Increment/decrement Counter limited to 8 bits in optimized architecture. • Consumption : • As the increment/decrement operation needs to be done only at each pulse the frequency is 1/PRP. • The estimation of the consumption in 0.13 m is 6 nW/Gate/MHz • See table on the following slide Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  45. Gate count & Consumption calcul (2/2) Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  46. Current Demonstrator Platform • RF transmitter and receiver : ASIC. • First chipset already in test • Full chipset on September 2003 • Baseband : • Today : off-the-shelves board (Nallatech BenNuey) with FPGA Xilinx Virtex2 6000 • End of 2003 : ASIC 0.13 m • Current progress in demonstrator shows low risk manufacturability (Baseband in FPGA today implies easy migration to ASIC, RF already in test) Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  47. FPGA Floorplaning and Routing Current estimates on gate count and power consumption are based on real implementation Started process "Map". Using target part "2v3000bf957-5". Design Summary: Number of errors: 0 Number of warnings: 0 Number of Slices: 7,666 out of 14,336 53% Number of Slices containing unrelated logic: 0 out of 7,666 0% Number of Slice Flip Flops: 1,685 out of 28,672 5% Total Number 4 input LUTs: 13,870 out of 28,672 48% Number used as LUTs: 13,709 Number used as a route-thru: 161 Number of bonded IOBs: 101 out of 684 14% IOB Flip Flops: 4 Number of GCLKs: 1 out of 16 6% Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  48. Easy Manufacturability and attractive form factor • Full system can be built in CMOS technology • single chip • Die size estimated at less than 5mm2 in 0.13m • Antenna size : expected 3cm x 3cm • Time to Market can be less than 1.5 years ! Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  49. Monoband or adaptive band assets • More band means more performance • Theoretical capacity is linear with BW • Increases per bit energy (given datarate and spectrum limit) and so performance by better SNR • UWB interference rejection varies with BW.PRP product • Given a modulation scheme, dref/dint ~ sqrt(BW) • Synchronization (use of full band, good energy level available, short sequence possible, fine synch and channel estimation optimized joint process) • Better channel time resolution (allows good localization ability) • More bandwidth means less fading issues, almost perfect energy capture (using infinite rake architecture) • Flexibility • BW to use (pulse shape) is not hard coded in standard (self adjusted performance from technology available : forward and backward compatibility between generations) • PRP is easily changed (data rate flexibility) Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

  50. Didier Helal and Philippe Rouzet, STM

More Related