The formula reflects that in Downlink the Data Rate for each user and the Eb/No are

specific for each users location. To make it possible to have an estimation of the number of users per cell, it will be assumed that Eb/No and R is the same for all users (4.56 dBs and 384 Kbps respectively). With these assumptions, replacing the values in the formula and setting the Downlink Load Factor as the congestion threshold defined by the Ericsson parameters (90% of the Downlink Power so assumed ndl =0.9), we found that the number of users supported per cell is 3 and the corresponding traffic density would be 17.09 Erl/Km2, both far from the obtained values of 0.58 users and 3.35 Erl/Km2. For admission control settings (ndl =0.75), we obtain 2 users per cell and the corresponding traffic density of 11.39 Erl/ Km2. Taking a deeper look at the simulation results, the cause of such low traffic densities to reach the capacity threshold (and the corresponding number of users per cell) was found: There is a parameter defined by Ericsson and called sf8Adm, which controls the maximum number of connections per spreading factor. As the current implementation of the simulator tries always to get the maximum possible data rate per each service request (next release it will include the slow-start approach mentioned in [Holma]), then having the sf8Adm with the real setting in the network (sf8Adm=1) is the main blocking cause (more than 80% of the times), as it can be checked in the summary for each simulation, where the main reason for blocking found was DL SF8 usage limit exceeded in all the simulations with the 5 different traffic densities. Therefore, a new simulation series was programmed with the sf8Adm with its maximum value (8) which means no restriction due to SF 8 usage. Next Figure and table shows the new results. Intuitively, due to the simulation implementation already mentioned, it is expected that the traffic density that reaches the 1% blocking would be reached earlier than in the case of the analytical approach, as currently there is no way to simulate the slow-start mechanism.
Blocking probability [%] 14.0000% 12.0000% 10.0000% 8.0000% 6.0000% 4.0000% 2.0000% 0.0000% 1.6200 3.2500 6.4900 12.9900 25.9700 Blocked probability [%]

Traffic Density [Erl/Km^2]

Figure 35: Blocking Probability Web service, sf8Adm=8

109

Beneficiario COLFUTURO 2003

A.F. COSME. UMTS CAPACITY SIMULATION STUDY

Target threshold = 1% (Y=0.01 in linear scale) Quadratic Fit: y=a+bx+cx^2 a= b= c= Value at Y=1% (0.01) Number of users per cell 3rd degree Polynomial Fit: y=a+bx+cx^2+dx^3... a= b= c= d= Value at Y=1% (0.01) Number of users per cell 0.0023 -0.0015 0.0002 3.13E-06 11.0839 2 Erl/Km^2 0.0047 -0.0027 0.0003 11.0888 2 Erl/Km^2

Table 20: Estimation of the users per cell according to the simulation output, Web-only service, parameter sf8Adm=8, Blocking probability target = 1% As it can be seen, the number of users and traffic densities obtained are now quite close to the Figures obtained in analytical way for the admission control settings (ndl =0.75). Checking also the main blocking reason, this is in most of the cases, Downlink Transmit Power Exceeded. The errors due to timeout were discarded as it was discovered by Vodafone D2 that the timeout implementation does not work correctly and it will be replaced during the next Version of WiNeS. About the dropping probability, it was found in the simulation that when using Ericsson P3.0 RRM algorithm, there is no dropping of PS services because the UEs are normally switched to the FACH channel instead of being dropped. Vodafone D2 is currently clarifying if this handling is equal to the real handling in Ericsson hardware, because so far it is not clear if Ericsson supports data transmissions on the FACH. 7.1.2.2 Channel Elements usage The following Figures illustrate the mean and maximum channel elements usage in Uplink and Downlink (target thresholds: 256 DL, 64 UL).

110

DL Channel Elements usage [mean, max]

DL channel elements 80,0000 70,0000 60,0000 50,0000 40,0000 30,0000 20,0000 10,0000 0,0000 DL Channel Elements usage [mean] DL Channel Elements usage [max]

00

00

00

00 ,9 9 25 12

62

49

25

1,

3,

Traffic Density [Erl/Km^2]

Figure 36: DL channel elements usage, Web-only service

UL Channel Elements usage [mean, max]
UL channel elements 60,0000 50,0000 40,0000 30,0000 20,0000 10,0000 0,0000 UL Channel Elements usage [mean] UL Channel Elements usage [max]

6,

00

00 ,9 9 25 12

00

00

49

1,

Figure 37: UL channel elements usage, Web-only service

a) Downlink Linear Fit: y=a+bx a= b= Value at Y = 256 Number of users per cell Quadratic Fit: y=a+bx+cx^2 A= B= C= 17.966051 1.774063 -0.01442546 19.438376 1.3701932 173.648 30 Erl/Km^2

111

3,

Traffic Density [Erl/Km^2]

6,

,9 7

62

25

00

,9 7

00

Beneficiario COLFUTURO 2003

A.F. COSME. UMTS CAPACITY SIMULATION STUDY

Value at Y = 256 Number of users per cell b) Uplink Quadratic Fit: y=a+bx+cx^2 A= B= C= Value at Y = 64 Number of users per cell Linear Fit: y=a+bx A= B= Value at Y = 64 Number of users per cell

218.0280 38

Erl/Km^2

1.1074 1.5842 -0.0108 71.8009 13 Erl/Km^2

2.2047 1.2832 48.1573 8 Erl/Km^2

Table 21: Estimation of the users per cell according to the simulation output, Web-only service, Downlink and Uplink channel element target: 256, 64 In the Figures 36 and 37, we can appreciate a lower channel element usage, both in UL and DL regarding the same usage in the voice service. This is because a low number of users per cell is supported, although it has to be taken into account that the number of channel elements used in a 384 Kbps DL connection regarding the number of channel elements used in a speech connection has a relation 8:1 (for UL this relation is 2:1). But even with that relationship, the maximum number of users times the channel elements per user connection in UL or DL, which would be an estimation of the number of CE is given by 3 * 8 = 24 CE in DL for the web service whereas for the voice service is given by 47 * 1 = 47 CE in DL, which is greater.

112

7.1.2.3 Downlink Iub usage

Iub traffic [DL] 1200,0000 1000,0000 800,0000 600,0000 400,0000 200,0000 0,0000

Kbps

Iub traffic [DL]

00

00

00

00 ,9 9 25

62

25

49

1,

3,

6,

Traffic Density [Erl/Km^2]

Figure 38: DL Iub utilization, Web only-service

Target for Iub DL throughput = 2786 cells/sec * 48 bytes/cell * 8 bits/byte = 1.07 Mbps Linear Fit: y=a+bx Coefficient Data: a= b= Level at Y= 1070 Number of users per cell 137.3714 33.6504 27.7152 5 Erl/Km^2

Table 22:Estimation of the users per cell according to the simulation output, Web-only service, DL Iub congestion target = 1.07 Mbps According to the simulation results, approximately 5 users would cause congestion in the Iub interface. Checking the results assuming full time maximum utilization of the channel (and therefore Data Rate of the coded channel for a 384 Kbps data rate = 480 Kbps), we would have 5 users * 480 Kbps = 2400 Kbps (which would theoretically exceed the maximum capacity available of the E1 circuit), but assuming a reasonable utilization of about 50% of the time, the Figure would be 1200 Kbps which is close to the defined target of 1070 Kbps.

113

12

,9 7

00

Beneficiario COLFUTURO 2003

A.F. COSME. UMTS CAPACITY SIMULATION STUDY

7.1.2.4 Uplink Load

UL Load [%] 3.0000% Uplink Load [%] 2.5000% 2.0000% 1.5000% 1.0000% 0.5000% 0.0000% UL Load [%]

1. 62 00

3. 25 00

6. 49 00

12 .9 90

Traffic Density [Erl/Km^2]

Figure 39: UL Load, Web only service Taking a look at the simulation results, we can clearly see that UL load seems not to be a problem for the Web Service. Even with the highest simulated load for Web Service (25.97 Erl/Km2), the Uplink load is about 6%, quite far away from the target (60%). In these conditions, the different fits produce very different results, but for the purpose of this analysis the most restrictive setting among linear, quadratic and exponential fit is presented in the next table.

Uplink Load Exponential Fit: y=ae^(bx) Coefficient Data: a= b= Value at Y=60% (0.6) Number of users per cell

0.005193252 0.065165121 72.8858 13

25 .9 70
Erl/Km^2

Table 23: Estimation of the users per cell according to the simulation output, Web-only service, uplink load target = 60 %

114

7.1.2.5 Downlink Transmitted Power

DL_TxPower [dBm] 38,0000 37,8000 37,6000 37,4000 37,2000 37,0000 36,8000 36,6000 36,4000 36,2000 36,0000 35,8000

Power [dBm]

DL_TxPower [dBm]

00

00

00

3, 25

1, 62

6, 49

00

,9 9

traffic density [Erl/Km^2]

Figure 40: DL Transmitted power usage, Web-only service The Downlink transmitted power usage shows the same behavior trend as in the case of voice-only usage, although the levels are lower. This can be also due to the smaller number of Web users per cell. As the target value it is not present in the interpolation range, three estimated values are presented in the next table using extrapolation with the obtained analytical expressions.

Downlink Transmitted Power Target threshold = 90% (43 dBm) = 38.7 dBm Linear Fit: y=a+bx a= b= Value at Y=38.7 Number of users per cell Exponential Fit: y=ae^(bx) a= b= Value at Y=38.7 Number of users per cell 36.5313 0.0013 45.6290 8 Erl/Km^2 36.528181 0.047020985 46.1883 8 Erl/Km^2

115

12

25

,9 7

00

Beneficiario COLFUTURO 2003

A.F. COSME. UMTS CAPACITY SIMULATION STUDY

Quadratic Fit: y=a+bx+cx^2 a= b= c= Value at Y=38.7 Number of users per cell 36.504102 0.0536 -0.0002 53.5761 9 Erl/Km^2

Table 24:Estimation of the users per cell according to the simulation output, Web-only service, DL Transmitted power congestion target = 38.7 dBm According to these results, to reach the target for congestion in Downlink due to Transmitted Power usage, the required number of users is between 8 and 9. 7.1.2.6 Downlink Code Tree Usage
DL_Code tree usage, homogeneous scenario [%] 25.0000% 20.0000% 15.0000% 10.0000% 5.0000% 0.0000% 6.4900 12.9900 traffic density [Erl/Km^2] 25.9700 DL_Code tree usage[%]

Figure 41: DL code tree usage, Web only service According to the Figure, the code tree usage is lower than the code tree usage for voice, but this has to do also with the current implementation of the simulator that doesnt model the slow-start mechanism (i.e. PS services start with a data rate of 64 Kbps and as soon as there is capacity available in the cell they upgrade their data rate with a smaller spreading factor), therefore in a real-network the expected code tree usage would be higher than the value obtained in the simulations. It is proposed to try the same feature once the simulator includes the slow-start mechanism in its internal implementation. In the Figure, only the part corresponding to the range [6.49, 25.97] is presented due to no output data was obtained for DL Code Tree usage with the first two traffic densities. The corresponding fit for the range presented is summarized below.

116

Code tree usage [%]

DL Code Tree usage target =60% Linear Fit: y=a+bx Coefficient Data: a= b= Value at Y=60% (0.6) 87.49 Number of users per cell 16

0.043132 0.006364 Erl/Km^2

Table 25: Estimation of the users per cell according to the simulation output, Web-only service, DL code tree usage target = 60% 7.1.2.7 Throughput

Web Indoor Application DL Throughput per user

350.0000 300.0000 250.0000 200.0000 150.0000 100.0000 50.0000 0.0000 1.6200 6.4900 12.9900 25.9700 Traffic Density [Erl/Km^2]

Kbps

DL Throughput

Figure 42: Downlink throughput, Web only service, indoor users

Web outdoor Application DL Throughput per user

400.0000 300.0000 Kbps 200.0000 100.0000 0.0000 1.6200 6.4900 12.9900 25.9700 Traffic Density [Erl/Km^2] DL Throughput

Figure 43: Downlink throughput, Web only service, outdoor users

117

Beneficiario COLFUTURO 2003

pgina anterior

siguiente pgina

A.F. COSME. UMTS CAPACITY SIMULATION STUDY

Intuitively, it was expected that the performance in terms of throughput may be lower for Indoor users (due to the assumed penetration loss of 18 dB) than with outdoor users, but simulation results show a different behavior as it can be seen in Figures 42 and 43: Although the Downlink Throughput starts in a higher level for outdoor users, the throughput decreases faster than the throughput for indoor users, and for the maximum considered load, the Downlink throughput for the indoor users is slightly better than for the outdoor ones. Therefore it can be concluded that the 18 dBs of assumed losses for the indoor users have more impact in coverage terms rather than in the throughput experienced by the end user, and as there is almost no dropping probability because the channel switching to FACH, the indoor users experience on average the same throughput as their outdoor counter parts with the same mobility profile (both group of users with pedestrian mobility profile). In any case, with all the simulated traffic densities the throughput is above the internal target (100 Kbps), therefore estimations based on the best interpolation fits are provided. The results obtained for the data point corresponding to the traffic density of 3.25 Erl/Km2 were discarded due to some internal error in the simulator when simulating this load level.

Indoor users Exponential Fit: y=ae^(bx) Coefficient Data: a= b= Value at Y=100 Number of users per cell Outdoor users Exponential Fit: y=ae^(bx) Coefficient Data: a= b= Value at Y=100 Number of users per cell

341.31176 -0.013965516 87.9041 15

Erl/Km^2

380.60388 -0.019331111 69.1419 12

Erl/Km^2

Table 26: Estimation of the users per cell according to the simulation output, Web-only service, throughput target = 100 Kbps

118