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

1. Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title:[Channel Model Comparison for 802.15 TG4k] Date Submitted: [24 August, 2011] Source:[Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada] Company [RIEC of Tohoku University] and [SouravDey] Company [On-Ramp Wireless] Address [2-1-1 Katahira, Aoba-ku, Sendai 980-8577, Japan; 10920 Via Frontera, Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92127, USA] Voice:[+81-22-217-5477; +1-858-592-6008], FAX: [+81-22-217-5476; +1-858-592-6009] E-mail:[{lawrence, shukato, sawahiro}@riec.tohoku.ac.jp; sourav.dey@onrampwireless.com] Re: [Final Proposals in TG4k Closing Report (15-11-0538-00) 22 July, 2011] Abstract:[This submission shows a comparison of proposed and existing channel models for TG4k. Recommended channel models are provided and their basis for selection.] Purpose:[Provide this channel modeling information to the attention of TG4k for discussion, and see the differences of proposed and existing channel models.] 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. Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada , RIEC

2. Summary • Recommended channel models for the 802.15.4k 900 MHz band • Path loss: Okumura-Hata • Power delay profile: COST 207 • Recommended channel models for the 802.15.4k 2.4 GHz band • Path loss: COST 231-Hata and Erceg • Power delay profile: ITU-R IMT-Advanced Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada , RIEC

3. Contents 1. Channel models for the 900 MHz band 1.1 Path loss models 1.2 Power delay profile models 2. Channel models for the 2.4 GHz band 2.1 Path loss models 2.2 Power delay profile models • Conclusion • References Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada , RIEC

4. 1. Channel models for the 900 MHz 1.1 Path loss models Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada , RIEC

5. Path loss model comparison for the 900 MHz band * In terms of the transmission range for 802.15.4k Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada , RIEC

6. Path loss model comparison for TG4k:Okumura-Hata, P.1546-4, and P.1812-1 Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada , RIEC

7. Path loss model comparison:P.1546-4 is selected rather than P.1812-1 • ITU-R P.1546-4 • Terrain database is optional (unneeded for detailed path loss calc.) • Includes: % time and % location variability, clutter ht. at the terminal • Unreciprocal BS and terminal designation • ITU-R P.1812-1 (≈ ITU-R P.1546-4 + terrain profile) • Requires terrain database • Includes: % time and % location variability, building entry loss • Suggested to be used for system deployment • Okumura-Hata • Straightforward calculation • Number of calculation steps: Okumura-Hata < P.1546-4 < P.1812-1 Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada , RIEC

8. Path loss comparison at 900 MHz For ITU-R P.1546-4 curves: • % loc. : path loss exceeded at % locations • 15 m clutter height at the terminal Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada , RIEC

9. Okumura-Hata is recommended for TG4k • Recommended path loss model for the 900 MHz band: Okumura-Hata • Close enough to the median path loss of P.1546-4 for the intended transmission range • Path loss is easier to obtain for TG4k system simulations • Okumura-Hata and P.1546-4 • Similar from 1 to 10 km for the 50% loc. (curves are similar) • Okumura-Hata gives conservative median path loss estimate Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada , RIEC

10. 1. Channel models for the 900 MHz 1.2 Power delay profile models Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada , RIEC

11. Environment type comparison of the PDP models for the 900 MHz band Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada , RIEC

12. Recommended PDP model for the 900 MHz band: COST 207 • COST 207 is recommended for TG4k • Representative environment types are adequate for LECIM applications • Different Doppler shifts can be assigned to each path • The 2-path Rayleigh of TG4g might be oversimplified • Inference was based on one measured environment • Transmission range considered was limited (~1 km in TG4g PAR) • The modified SCM of TGah may not be realistic • Assigning a higher Doppler to one of the paths may not be useful in TG4k since the effective Doppler shift may not only come from one source—lacks rationale • Limited to 1 km Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada , RIEC

13. 2. Channel models for the 2.4 GHz band 2.1Path loss models Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada , RIEC

14. Transmission range comparison of the path loss models for the 2.4 GHz band * In terms of the transmission range for 802.15.4k Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada , RIEC

15. Path loss model comparison: COST 231-Hata, Erceg, P.1546-4, and P.1812-1 (1) Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada , RIEC

16. Path loss comparison at 2.4 GHz For ITU-R P.1546-4 curves: • % loc. : path loss exceeded at % locations • 15 m clutter height at the terminal Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada , RIEC

17. Path loss model comparison: COST 231-Hata and Erceg are recommended • Recommended path loss models for 2.4 GHz band: • COST 231-Hata for 30-200 m BS antenna height • Erceg for 10-80 m BS antenna height, 8 km range • COST 231-Hata and Erceg are practically equivalent to the median path loss of ITU-R P.1546-4—both are simpler to calculate than P.1546-4 • COST 231-Hata and P.1546-4 • Similar from 1 to 8 km for the 50% loc. • 8 to 20 km: COST 231-Hata gives conservative median path loss est. • COST 231-Hata PL is much easier to get for TG4k system simulations • Erceg and P.1546-4: • Variation in Erceg covers the % locs. of P.1546-4 Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada , RIEC

18. 2. Channel models for the 2.4 GHz band 2.2 Power delay profile models Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada , RIEC

19. Environment type comparison of the PDP models for the 2.4 GHz band Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada , RIEC

20. Recommended power delay profile model for the 2.4 GHz band: ITU-R IMT-Advanced • ITU-R IMT-Advanced is recommended for TG4k • Representative environment types are good enough for LECIM applications since DEV environment may be similar to mobile surroundings • Range is up to ~5 km, and Doppler can be separately assigned to each tap • Condition: need to verify/measure the channel characteristics in real situations • The 2-path Rayleigh of TG4g might be oversimplified • Inference was based on one measured environment • Transmission range considered was limited (up to ~1km in PAR) • Modified SCM of TGah lacks rationale Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada , RIEC

21. Conclusion • Recommended models for the 900 MHz band • Path loss: Okumura-Hata • PDP: COST 207 • Recommended models for the 2.4 GHz band • Path loss: COST 231-Hata and Erceg • PDP: ITU-R IMT-Advanced • It is recommended to verify/measure the two PDPs mentioned above in real situations—(transmission range extrapolation for ~16 km may not be 100% correct) Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada , RIEC

22. References [1] L. Materum, H. Sawada, and S. Kato, “Path loss and power delay profile models for 802.15 TG4k,” IEEE 802.15-11-0507-00-004k, Jul. 2011. [2] S. Dey, “802.15.4k LECIM channel characteristics,” IEEE 802.15-11-0465-00-004k, Jul. 2011. [3] E. Monnerie, G. Flammer, S. Shearer, S. Shimada, and C. Powell, “Channel characterization for SUN,” IEEE 802.15-09-0279-01-004g, Jul. 2009. [4]R. Porat and S. K. Yong, “TGah channel model proposed text,” IEEE 802.11-11/0968r1, Jul. 2011. [5] P. Kinney, “Task Group 15.4k Minutes,” IEEE 802.15-11-0557-01-004k, Jul. 2011. [6] M. Hata, “Empirical formula for propagation loss in land mobile radio services,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 29, pp. 317–325, Aug. 1980. [7] ITU-R, “Method for point-to-area predictions for terrestrial services in the frequency range 30 MHz to 3000 MHz,” Recommendation ITU-R P.1546-4, Oct. 2009. [8] ITU-R, “A path-specific propagation prediction method for point-to-area terrestrial services in the VHF and UHF bands,” Recommendation ITU-R P. P.1812-1, Oct. 2009. [9] M. Failli, Ed., COST 207–Digital Land Mobile Radio Communications. Luxembourg: European Communities, 1989. [10] E. Damosso and L. M. Correia, Eds., COST Action 231–Digital Mobile Radio Towards Future Generation Systems. Luxembourg: European Communities, 1999. [11] V. Erceg et al., “An empirically based path loss model for wireless channels in suburban environments,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 17, pp. 1205–1211, Jul. 1999. [12] ITU-R, “Guidelines for evaluation of radio interface technologies for IMT-Advanced,” Rep. ITU-R M.2135-1, Dec. 2009. Lawrence Materum, Shuzo Kato, and Hirokazu Sawada , RIEC