Journal of Physics: Conference Series

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS

Analyzing Study of Path loss Propagation Models in Wireless

Communications at 0.8 GHz
To cite this article: Haider Kadhim Hoomod et al 2018 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 1003 012028

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 173.211.126.50 on 25/05/2018 at 04:28

IHSCICONF2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1003 (2018)
1234567890 ‘’“” 012028 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1003/1/012028

Analyzing Study of Path loss Propagation Models in Wireless

Communications at 0.8 GHz

Haider Kadhim Hoomod1, Intisar Al-Mejibli2 and Abbas Issa Jabboory3

1
Computer Science Dept., Al-Mustansiriyah University, Baghdad, Iraq
2
Informatics Systems Management Dept., University of Information Technology and
Communication, Baghdad, Iraq
3
Informatics Institute for Postgraduate Studies, Iraqi Commission for Computer &
Informatics, Baghdad, Iraq
Corresponding address: [email protected], [email protected]

Abstract. The paths loss propagation model is an important tool in wireless network
planning, allowing network planner to optimize the cell towers distribution and meet
expected service level requirements. However, each type of path loss propagation
model is designed to predict path loss in a particular environment that may be
inaccurate in other different environment. In this research different propagation
models (Hata Model, ICC-33 Model, Ericson Model and Coast-231 Model) have
been analyzed and compared based on the measured data. The measured data
represent signal strength of two cell towers placed in two different environments
which obtained by a drive test of them. First one in AL-Habebea represents an urban
environment (high-density region) and the second in AL-Hindea district represents
a rural environment (low-density region) with operating frequency 0.8 GHz. The
results of performing the analysis and comparison conclude that Hata model and
Ericsson model shows small deviation from real measurements in urban
environment and Hata model generally gives better prediction in the rural
environment.

Keywords: Hata model, Path loss, Signal strength, Ericsson model, 0.8 GHz.

1. Introduction
In recent years, mobile wireless communications have developed rapidly, leading to make the
mobile phones become an integral part of people's lives. Hence the demand on services from
mobile wireless communications companies has increased [1][2]. Wireless network planners
are looking to improve connectivity between different points. Path loss propagation models is
an experimental mathematical formula for characterizing the propagation of radio waves as a
distance function between the antennas of transmitter and receiver. These models are designed
based on a large dataset collected from specific environments. Propagation model determine is
very important parameter in network planning and studies of interference with starting
deployment [3].
The remainder of the research is arranged as follows: Section 2 explores the related work
.Section 3 describes the path loss propagation models. Radio link budget calculation is
explained in section 4. Section 5 details the performance evaluation. In section 6, results and

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
IHSCICONF2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1003 (2018)
1234567890 ‘’“” 012028 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1003/1/012028

discussion is presented. The conclusions are discusses in section 7. The last section list the
research references.

2. Related Work
Several studies have been completed in the fields of path loss propagation model where good
results are obtained. All these studies are very important and play a vital role in wireless
network planning. Authors in [4] estimate five path loss propagation models Stanford
University Interim (SUI), COST-231, Hata-Okumura Extended Model (called also ECC-33
Model), Ericsson and the Hata-Okumura model. The results of these models compared with
actual measured data. The results of comparison show that the ECC-33 model suitable for a
suburban environment. In [3] authors gave a brief introduction to loss models, concluding that
each model is suitable for a specific environment. While [5] has analyzed and compared the
path loss values of the selected models in different environments with frequency 1700 MHz.
They concluded that SUI model calculations consistent with measurements data and it is
suitable for urban areas, unlike the cost 231 W-I model whose calculations do not correspond
to the measure data.
In this research, present four path loss propagation models (Hata Model, ICC-33 Model,
Ericson Model and Coast-231 Model) and then calculate the signal strength of theirs. The signal
strength of these models are analyzed and comparison with real measured data to see whether
these models are accurately used for prediction to the path loss.

3. Path Loss Propagation Models

Generally, some of propagation factors for instance reflection, scattering, diffraction,
absorption, and atmospheric particles affect the signal of wireless communication when
transmitted through a path [2, 6].
The main benefit for the use of the standard path loss models are time-saving and cost, despite
the limited accuracy. Through the results of many measurement efforts, the existing equations
are used in empirical models. The following are examples of the path loss propagation
models[4, 7]:

a. Free Space Path Loss Model

b. Okumura Model
c. HATA Path Loss Model
d. LHata Model (LHata)
e. COST 231 Extended Hata Model
f. ECC-33 or Hata – Okumura Extended Model
g. Walfisch-Ikegami Model
h. Stanford University Interim (SUI) model
i. Ericson Model

Field data for various environments have been used in the design of all the models mentioned
above. In this research, four path loss propagation models were used (HATA, COST 231, ECC-
33 and Ericson Models) because they are suitable to be implemented in the study area
environment at frequency 0.8 GHz.

3.1 HATA Path Loss Model

This model introduces by Okumura model and it is useful for frequency range 150MHz to
1500MHz. This model is the most widely used in urban area, the path loss equation of this
model is [1] [8]:

PL(dB) = 69.55+26.16log10 (f)-13.82log10 (hb)-(ahm) + (44.9-6.55log10 (hb)) log10 (d) -C (1)

2
IHSCICONF2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1003 (2018)
1234567890 ‘’“” 012028 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1003/1/012028

3.2(log(11.75ℎ𝑚))2 − 4.97 𝑖𝑛 𝑢𝑟𝑏𝑎𝑛, 𝑓 > 400𝑀𝐻𝑧

ahm={ (2)
(1.1𝑙𝑜𝑔10 (𝑓 − 0.7)ℎ𝑚 − (1.56𝑙𝑜𝑔10 (𝑓 − 0.8) 𝑖𝑛 𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑛 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎
0 𝑖𝑛 𝑢𝑟𝑏𝑎𝑛
C={ (3)
40.49 + 4.78(𝑙𝑜𝑔10 (𝑓))2 − 18.33𝑙𝑜𝑔10 (𝑓) 𝑖𝑛 𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑛 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎
Where:
PL = path loss
f(MHz) =Frequency
d (Km) = Distance between transmitter and receiver antennas
ℎb (m) = Base station antenna height
hm(m)=Mobile station antenna height
C = environment factor

3.2 COST 231 Extended Hata Model

Cost 231model and also called Personal Communication System (PCS) Extension, it is the first
model used up to date. This model is an extension of the Okumura-Hata model to cover a wide
range of frequencies between (0.5-2 GHz), and is used for medium to small cities [3][4].

PL=46.3+33.9log10 (f)−13.82log10(hb) −ahm (44.9−6.55log10 (hb)) log10(d)+C (4)

3.2(log(11.75ℎ𝑚))2 − 4.97 𝑖𝑛 𝑢𝑟𝑏𝑎𝑛, 𝑓 > 400𝑀𝐻𝑧

ahm={ (5)
(1.1𝑙𝑜𝑔10 (𝑓 − 0.7)ℎ𝑚 − (1.56𝑙𝑜𝑔10 (𝑓 − 0.8) 𝑖𝑛 𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑛 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎

3 𝑖𝑛 𝑢𝑟𝑏𝑎𝑛
C={ (6)
0 𝑖𝑛 𝑠𝑢𝑏𝑢𝑟𝑏𝑎𝑛 𝑜𝑟 𝑟𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑙

3.3 ECC-33 or Hata – Okumura Extended Model

It is appropriate model for the Ultra High Frequency (UHF) band, and according to recent
recommendations of International Telecommunication Union-Radio communication (ITU-R),
it uses up to 3.5GHz. This model proposed based on the Okumura model [4].

PL= 92.4+20log(d)+20log(f)+20.41+9.83log(d)+7.89log(f)+9.56(log(f)) 2+log(hb/200)(13.958+5.8

log(d))2 +Gr (7)

[42.57 + 13.7 log(𝑓)][log(ℎ𝑚) − 0.585] 𝑖𝑛 𝑚𝑒𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑛 𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦

Gr={ (8)
0.759(ℎ𝑚) − 1.862 𝑖𝑛 𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑔 𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦

3.4 Ericson Model

Ericsson model is software provided by Ericsson Company to use for wireless network planner.
This model was developed based on the modified Okumura-Hata model for use in differing
propagation environments according to the parameters shown in Table (1) [5] [9].

PL=k0+k1+log10(d)+k2log10(hb)+k3log10(hb).log10(d)-3.2[log10(11.75hr)2]+44.49log10(f)-
478[log10(f)]2 (9)
Table 1. Ericson Models parameters
ENVIRONMENT K0 K1 K2 K3
TYPE
RURAL 45.95 100.6 12 0.1
SUBURBAN 43.20 68.63 12 0.1
URBAN 36.20 30.20 12 0.1

3
IHSCICONF2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1003 (2018)
1234567890 ‘’“” 012028 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1003/1/012028

4. Radio Link Budget Calculation

The link budget calculation in the cell is calculates for the farthest point from the cell tower. In
order to calculate the maximum coverage, consideration must be given to the minimum signal
intensity received by the receiver. The most important parameters of the budget calculation is
discussed in the following[6, 10].

Transmitter Power: the maximum transmission power from cell towers antenna typical value
from 36-46 dBm.
Antenna Gain: Antenna gain depends mainly on carrier frequency, size of antenna and device
type. The cell tower antenna gain is a typical 15-18 dBi.

Losses: Includes cable and body losses on both sides (cell tower antenna and phone). Cable
losses depend on the length and type of cable and frequency; it varies from 1-6 dB for cell tower
antenna, and phone losses, in practical planning it is considered to be 0 dB[11].

EIRP: Is a stand for Effective Isotropic Radiated Power, the term is used to express how much
transmitted power is radiated in the desired direction. It takes into account all type of losses and
the gain of the transmitter antenna as:

EIRP (dBm) = Pt (dBm) + Ga (dBi) – Cable losses

(10)
Where:
Pt(dBm): Cell tower transmitting power
Ga(dBi): Antenna gain in reference to isotropic antenna
RX Level: Is a stand for received signal level, which considered the signal strength obtained
by the mobile phone from cell tower antenna. It is importing factor who determines that the
reception was good or not [12]. The RX level ranges and rating shown in table (2) and
mathematical formula to calculate the Rx level is [6][13]:

RxLev (dBm) = EIRP - Pl – ABL- IDM - LSM - LACC –GA (11)

Where:
EIRP (dBm)= Effective Isotropic Radiated Power
Pl (dB) = path loss propagation model
ABl (dB) = antenna / body loss.
IDM (dB) = degradation margin of Interference.
LSM (dB) = Log normal shadowing margin.
LACC (dB) = cell tower antenna cable and connector (0 dB).
GA (dB) = Cell tower antenna gain.

Table 2. RX level ranges and rating [14]

VALUE RATING
-47 TO -10DBM Very good
-6O TO -47DBM Good
-75 TO -60DBM better range of
coverage
-90 TO -75DBM average coverage
-95 TO -90DBM poor coverage
-110 TO -95DBM very bad coverage

4
IHSCICONF2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1003 (2018)
1234567890 ‘’“” 012028 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1003/1/012028

5. Performance Evaluation
Practically, measured the signal strength by a drive test for two cell towers. First one in AL-
Habebea represents an urban environment (high-density region) and the second in AL-Hindea
district represents a rural environment (low-density region), Figure (1) and figure (2) show the
location maps of the computerized areas of the cell towers (rural and urban) under study in
which the drive test was applied.
The path loss propagation of four models (Hata Model, ICC-33 Model, Ericson Model and
Coast-231 model) are calculated using the parameters shown in table (3) in MATLAB 2016.
Then, the signal strength of these models are computed using equations (11), (12).

Figure 1. Drive test Simulation Environments in Urban

Figure 2. Drive test Simulation Environments in Rural

5
IHSCICONF2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1003 (2018)
1234567890 ‘’“” 012028 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1003/1/012028

Table 3. Path loss parameters

PARAMETERS VALUE

FREQUENCY 800 MHz

TRANSMITTER POWER 46 dBm
CELL TOWER ANTENNA 20 m urban, 30 m rural
HEIGHT
PHONE ANTENNA HEIGHT 1.5 m
ANTENNA GAIN 18 dB
ANTENNA CABLE LOSS 1.5 dB
ANTENNA BOUY LOSS 3 dB
IDM 3 dB
LSM 5 dB for 90% coverage

The root mean square error (RMSE) of signal strength for these four type models has been
calculated and compared with measurement data to predicate an appropriate path loss model
[4].
∑𝑁
𝑖=1(𝑅𝑋𝑚𝑖 −𝑅𝑋𝑖 )
2
RMSE=√ 𝑁
(12)

Where RXmi is the measured signal strength in dBm, RXi is the calculated signal strength in
dBm, and N is the samples number of measured signal strength.

6. Results and Discussion

After calculating the path loss propagation values of the four models as shown in figure (3) and
figure (4) and then calculating the RMSE as shown in the table (4)

Figure 3. Comparison Signal Strength of Four Models with Measured Data from Urban Area

6
IHSCICONF2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1003 (2018)
1234567890 ‘’“” 012028 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1003/1/012028

Figure 4. Comparison Signal Strength of Four Models with Measured Data From Rural Area

Table 4. Root Mean Square Error

PATH LOSS URBAN RURAL
MODELS
HATA MODEL 23.43 4.23
COST 32 MODEL 31.68 27.09
ECC33 MODEL 170.09 207.44
ERICSON MODEL 23.88 7.75

Figure (3) shows the path loss in the urban environments (Al-Habebea) using Hata model and
Ericsson model have small deviation compared to other models.
Figure (4) shows the path loss in the rural environments (AL-Hindea) using Hata model has
small deviation compared to other models.
The difference in empirical values (the non-straight line graph) to Baghdad's urban environment
has many obstacles in the way, such as many nearby high buildings.

7. Conclusions
The mainly objective of this research is to analyze and compare the appropriate path loss
propagations model in wireless communication systems in different environment. The
measured data and signal strength values of selected empirical path loss models in urban and
rural environments are analyzed and compared at frequency 0.8 GHz. Path loss model is the
most important parameter for network planners to achieve an acceptable quality of service for
the users in wireless systems. This research study the path loss using four models: Hata Model,
ICC-33 Model, Ericson Model and Coast-231 Model based on using the same parameters. The
results of comparison conclude that the Hatta Model and Ericsson model are better predictive

7
IHSCICONF2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1003 (2018)
1234567890 ‘’“” 012028 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1003/1/012028

of the urban environments. In addition to, Hata models generally gives better prediction in the
rural environment.

8. References
[1] Z. Nadir, M. Bait-Suwailam, and M. Idrees 2016, "Pathloss Measurements and
Prediction using Statistical Models," in MATEC Web of Conferences.
[2] H. K. Hoomod, I. Al-Mejibli, and A. IssaJabboory 2017, "Optimizing SOM for cell
towers distribution," in New Trends in Information & Communications Technology
Applications (NTICT), 2017 Annual Conference on, Baghdad, pp. 138-143.
[3] K. J. Parmar and D. V. D. Nimavat 2015, "Comparative Analysis of Path Loss
Propagation Models in Radio Communication," International Journal of Innovative
Research in Computer and Communication Engineering, vol. 3, pp. 840-844.
[4] M. S. Mollel and M. Kisangiri 2014, "Comparison of Empirical Propagation Path Loss
Models for Mobile Communication," Computer Engineering and Intelligent Systems,
vol. 5, pp. 1-10.
[5] Y. Zakaria, J. Hosek, and J. Misurec 2015, "Path Loss Measurements for Wireless
Communication in Urban and Rural Environments," American Journal of Engineering
and Applied Sciences, vol. 8.
[6] D. S. A. Mawjoud 2008, "Evaluation of power budget and Cell coverage Range in
Cellular GSM System," AI-Rafidain Engineering, vol. 16, pp. 37-47.
[7] P. K. Sharma and R. K. Singh 2012, "Cell Coverage Area and Link Budget Calculations
in GSM System," International Journal of Modern Engineering Research (IJMER), vol.
2, pp. 170-176.
[8] N. V. K. Ramesh, K. S. Kumar, D. V. Ratnam 2015, A. Hussain, Y. V. S. Jaswanth, and
P. S. Chaitanya, "Comparative Analysis Of Path Loss Attenuation At Outdoor For 1.8
Ghz, 2.1 Ghz In Urban Environment," Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information
Technology, vol. 82, p. 85.
[9] M. S. Mollel and M. Kisangiri 2014, "An overview of various propagation model for
mobile communication," in Science, Computing and Telecommunications (PACT), 2014
Pan African Conference on, pp. 148-153.
[10] B. Seifu 2012, "LTE Radio Network Planning: Modeling Approaches for the Case of
Addis Ababa," in Electrical and Computer Engineering Department. vol. Masters of
Science in Electrical Engineering Ethiopia Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa University, p.
108.
[11] A. Obot, O. Simeon, and J. Afolayan 2011, "Comparative analysis of path loss prediction
models for urban macrocellular environments," Nigerian journal of technology, vol. 30,
pp. 50-59.
[12] O. Shoewu, Adedipe, A. and, and F. O. Edeko 2011, "CDMA network coverage
optimization in South-Eastern Nigeria," American Journal Of Scientific And Industrial
Research.
[13] R. Mardeni and L. Y. Pey 2012, "Path loss model optimization for urban outdoor
coverage using Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) system at 822MHZ," Modern
Applied Science, vol. 6, p. 28.
[14] N. T. Makanjuola, O. O. Shoewu, L. A. Akinyemi, and A. A. Ajasa 2015, "Comparative
Analysis of GSM Network and IS-95 CDMA Network Using Signal Strength," The
Pacific Journal of Science and Technology vol. 16.

Acknowledgment:
The authors wish to acknowledge Watanea Wireless Communication for technical support.