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: [Channelization plan for 802.15.4j MBAN] Date Submitted: [14 September 2011] Source: [Dave Evans1, Dong Wang2] Company [Philips] Address [(1) 101 Cambridge Science Park, Cambridge, UK, (2) 345 Scarborough Road, Briarcliff, NY] Voice:[+44 (0) 1293 886490], FAX: [Add FAX number], E-Mail:[david.evans@philips.com] Re: [If this is a proposed revision, cite the original document.] [If this is a response to a Call for Contributions, cite the name and date of the Call for Contributions to which this document responds, as well as the relevant item number in the Call for Contributions.] [Note: Contributions that are not responsive to this section of the template, and contributions which do not address the topic under which they are submitted, may be refused or consigned to the “General Contributions” area.] Abstract: [Compares two proposed channelization plans for 15.4j operation in the MBAN band] Purpose: [For information and consideration by TG15.4j] 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. Dave Evans, Philips

2. Channelization Plan Proposal to TG 15.4j Dave Evans, Philips

3. Introduction • This presentation compares the two options for the 15.4j channelization plan • Both options use two set of seven non-overlapping channels • One option has a 1 MHz offset between the two sets of seven channels, in the other option the offset is 2 MHz • The comparison evaluates the number of available channels for MBANS devices when coexisting with AMT operation Dave Evans, Philips

4. Option 1 • Define two channel pages, each has 7 non-overlapping channels • One channel page is the shifted version of the other with an offset of 3 MHz • All MBANS devices in a same hospital use the same channel page. • Channels in the used channel page are enabled/disabled by E-key info • Pros: • Simple: worst case, 14 channels to scan/manage • Cons: • Fewer channels available in some cases • Only two overlapping channels available in the 2390-2400 MHz band 2399.5 2360.5 2 (2368) 7 (2381) 3 (2371) 10(2388) 11 (2391) 6 (2378) 4 (2373) 0 (2363) 13 (2396) 8 (2383) 1 (2366) 5 (2376) 9 (2386) 12 (2393) 2390 MHz 2360 MHz Amateur radio spectrum AMT spectrum Guard band 15.4j channels Dave Evans, Philips

5. Option 2 2360.5 2360 MHz 2400 2399.5 MHz • 15 overlapping channels defined in PHY • For in-hospital deployment • “Floating” non-overlapping channels to promote coexistence • Select non-overlapping channels for operation based on E-key • For out-of-hospital deployment • 3 overlapping channels offering flexibility to avoid interference • Low deployment density & low duty cycle would assist MBANS coexistence 2360 MHz 2390 MHz 2400 MHz 7 (2382) 3 (2372) 11(2392) 5 (2377) 1 (2367) 14 (2397) 9 (2387) 10 (2388) 2 (2368) 6 (2378) 8 (2383) 4 (2373) 12 (2393) 13 (2395) 0 (2363) 15.4j channels Amateur radio spectrum AMT spectrum Guard bands Dave Evans, Philips

6. Channel Availability Evaluation • Assume only one AMT channel to protect • Different AMT bandwidths and centre frequencies are considered • Channel resolution: 500 KHz • Number of available non-overlapping channels for 15.4j operation is evaluated Dave Evans, Philips

7. AMT Bandwidth = 2 MHz • Option 1 (x) has one less channel in 27 out of 57 cases • Lots of those cases happen when AMT uses the “core” spectrum (2370 – 2380 MHz)

8. AMT Bandwidth = 5 MHz • Option 1 (x) has one less channel in 30 out 51 cases. • Lots of those cases happen when AMT uses the “core” spectrum (2370 – 2380 MHz)

9. AMT Bandwidth = 8 MHz • Option 1 (x) has one less channel in 17 out 45 cases • Lots of those cases happen when AMT uses the “core” spectrum (2370 – 2380 MHz)

10. AMT Bandwidth = 10 MHz • Option 1 (x) has one less channel in 23 out 41 cases. • Most of those cases happen when AMT uses the “core” spectrum (2370 – 2380 MHz)

11. AMT Bandwidth = 15 MHz • Option 1 (x) has one less channel in 16 out 31 cases. • Most of those cases happen when AMT uses the “core” spectrum(2370 – 2380 MHz)

12. AMT Bandwidth = 20 MHz • Option 1 (x) has one less channel in 9 out 21 cases. • Most of those cases happen when AMT uses the “core” spectrum (2370 – 2380 MHz)

13. Performance Evaluation Dave Evans, Philips

14. Observations • In lots of cases, Option 1 (2 MHz offset) provides one less 15.4j channel • E.g. for the AMT BW = 5MHz case, prob. > 50% • Most of those cases happen when the AMT operation uses its “core” spectrum from 2370 – 2380 MHz Dave Evans, Philips

15. Conclusion The Option 2 channelization scheme having a 1 MHz offset is preferred • Reasonable complexity • Worst case 15 channels to scan/manage • Good flexibility for coexistence • Based on assumption only one AMT channel to protect • 3 channels defined in the 2390-2400 MHz band for home applications • Aligned with 15.6 channels Dave Evans, Philips