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: [TG4a Frequency Band Proposal] Date Submitted: [April 2004] Source: [Matt Welborn] Company [Freescale Semiconductor, Inc] Address [8133 Leesburg Pike, Vienna VA 22182] Voice:[703-269-3000], FAX: [], E-Mail:[matt.welborn @ freescale.com] Re: [Response to Call for Proposals] Abstract: [This document describes a frequency band proposal for the TG4a baseline draft standard.] Purpose: [Proposal Presentation for the IEEE802.15.4a standard.] 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. Welborn (Freescale)

2. Objectives • Propose a frequency band plan in accordance with the TG4a baseline draft standard merger document • Summary of requirements for band plan, omitting N/A bullets • Sub-banding: • Center of three bands is mandatory, Other two optional • Wider bandwidth (1.5 GHz+) concentric with center band is optional • CDMA within frequency bands • Harmonic chip rate – integer relationship between center frequency and chip rate • Mandatory • ~500 center band (AM of 3.1-4.9 is 3.975, GM of 3.1-4.9 is 3.877) • Center band frequency is TBD, but must be in [3.85 to 4.05] • Optional • 2 additional 500 MHz bands for FDM – center frequencies TBD • Wideband concentric with center specified above • Sub-GHz band • … • Add specific optional band > 6 GHz with guaranteed >1.5GHz BW • Support mode for higher data rates (few to 10 Mbps) • Other issues • … • Multiple (2-few) PRF in band Welborn (Freescale)

3. Proposed Frequency Plan Band No. 4 1 2 3 3 4 5 GHz 3.25 3.5 3.75 4.25 4.5 4.75 Welborn (Freescale)

4. Advantages • Meets requirements of TG4a baseline draft • Uses non-uniform bandwidths for mandatory and two optional narrow bands • Allows same pass-band pulse shape to be used in each band (simplifies pulse generation) • Provides more uniform performance for each of three narrow bands • PRF would also scale with changing center frequency to allow fixed (integer) relationship between center frequency, BW and chip rate • All frequencies (chip rates, pulse burst rates, center frequencies) can be integer multiple of a 13 MHz reference Welborn (Freescale)

5. -35 0.2 -40 0.1 -45 0 -50 -0.1 -55 -0.2 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 -60 0.2 dBm/MHz -65 0.1 -70 0 -75 -0.1 -80 -0.2 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 -85 0.2 -90 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 0.1 Frequency 9 x 10 0 -0.1 -0.2 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Pulse-width Options to Control Bandwidth 1 2 1 • Signal bandwidth can be varied by simply changing pulse duration • Same underlying PRF and center frequency, but different pulse widths • Three progressively wider pulses give three different signal bandwidths • Narrow and wide band devices can interoperate with each if PRF is matched 2 3 3 Welborn (Freescale)

6. Pulse-width Options to Control Bandwidth • All devices default to share single mandatory band with BW  500 MHz – see previous slide • Can modify pulse shape (optional) to use wider band (BW  1 GHz or BW  1500 MHz shown on previous slide) • Narrower BW option allows avoidance of frequencies for emission restrictions or to avoid RFI • Narrow BW device can still communicate with wide BW device • Greater than minimum 500 MHz BW at 10 dB down measurement for FCC compliance • Bester performance with wider BW when few devices are present (so there are no near-far issues from other piconets) • Higher transmit power  longer range • Bester ranging performance • Also, additional option is to use full FDM when additional isolation is needed from other piconets (see next slide) • Additional hardware required to support second or third Fc • Additional filter may be required to achieve greatest isolation (optional) • Overall result: • Default is simplest implementation with all devices sharing one wide band • Additional BW and center frequency options available for devices that need additional BW or DM options at the expense of greater complexity Welborn (Freescale)

7. Uniform Fractional bandwidth signals using same “Pulse Shape” for each 0.2 -40 1 0.1 -45 0 -0.1 -50 -0.2 1 2 3 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 -55 0.2 2 0.1 -60 0 -65 -0.1 -0.2 -70 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 0.2 -75 3 0.1 0 -80 -0.1 -85 -0.2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Time (ns) 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 9 x 10 • “Unequal” bands – have equal fractional bandwidths & have more uniform performance across different bands Welborn (Freescale)

8. Pulse/Bandwidth FDM based on uniform bandwidth -40 -45 -50 dBm/MHz -55 -60 -65 -70 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 Frequency 9 x 10 • “Equal” bands – have unequal fractional bandwidths • Different performance in different bands (effective antenna aerture is different, ~20log10(Fc) • Very different if constant bandwidth is maintained at higher frequencies (6-10 GHz)  here as much as 9-10 dB performance difference Welborn (Freescale)