Você está na página 1de 73

UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARÁ

CENTRO DE TECNOLOGIA
DEPARTAMENTO DE ENGENHARIA DE TELEINFORMÁTICA
PROGRAMA DE PÓS-GRADUAÇÃO EM ENGENHARIA DE TELEINFORMÁTICA

RAPHAEL BRAGA EVANGELISTA

CAPACITY AND INTERFERENCE ANALYSIS OF LTE MOBILE NETWORK


USING LICENSED SHARED ACCESS CONCEPT

FORTALEZA
2017
RAPHAEL BRAGA EVANGELISTA

CAPACITY AND INTERFERENCE ANALYSIS OF LTE MOBILE NETWORK USING


LICENSED SHARED ACCESS CONCEPT

Dissertação apresentada ao Programa de Pós-


Graduação em Engenharia de Teleinformática
da Universidade Federal do Ceará, como
requisito parcial à obtenção do título de mestre
em Engenharia de Teleinformática. Área de
concentração: Sinais e Sistemas

Orientador: Prof. Dr. Yuri Carvalho Bar-


bosa Silva

Coorientador: Dr. Carlos Filipe Moreira


e Silva

FORTALEZA
2017
Dados Internacionais de Catalogação na Publicação
Universidade Federal do Ceará
Biblioteca Universitária
Gerada automaticamente pelo módulo Catalog, mediante os dados fornecidos pelo(a) autor(a)

E92c Evangelista, Raphael Braga.


Capacity and Interference Analysis of LTE Mobile Network Using Licensed Shared Access Concept /
Raphael Braga Evangelista. – 2017.
73 f. : il. color.

Dissertação (mestrado) – Universidade Federal do Ceará, Centro de Tecnologia, Programa de Pós-


Graduação em Engenharia de Teleinformática, Fortaleza, 2017.
Orientação: Prof. Dr. Yuri Carvalho Barbosa Silva.
Coorientação: Prof. Dr. Carlos Filipe Moreira e Silva.

1. Acesso Compartilhado Licenciado. 2. Compartilhamento de Espectro. 3. Acesso Dinâmico ao


Espectro. 4. Gerenciamento de Espectro. 5. Redes Móveis. I. Título.
CDD 621.38
RAPHAEL BRAGA EVANGELISTA

CAPACITY AND INTERFERENCE ANALYSIS OF LTE MOBILE NETWORK USING


LICENSED SHARED ACCESS CONCEPT

Dissertation presented to the Graduate Program


in Teleinformatics Engineering of the Federal
University of Ceará, as part of the requirements
for obtaining the Master’s Degree title in
Teleinformatics Engineering. Concentration
area: Signals and Systems.

Approved in: 22/12/2017.

EXAMINATION BOARD

Prof. Dr. Yuri Carvalho Barbosa Silva (Advisor)


Federal University of Ceará

Dr. Carlos Filipe Moreira e Silva (Co-advisor)


Federal University of Ceará

Prof. Dr. Francisco Rodrigo Porto Cavalcanti


Federal University of Ceará

Prof. Dr. Paulo Jorge Coelho Marques


Telecommunications Institute
To all the ones I love.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my gratitude to everyone who contributed to me during all


my master period, giving me strength to overcome any obstacles that appeared during the whole
walk-through.
Prof. Yuri Silva who followed my academic growth since I was an undergraduate
student, always giving me councils and making himself useful to help me with any necessities I
needed.
Carlos Silva for all his help, patience, time, advice, etc. He was one of the main
vectors for me to have accomplished this stage of my life, even when he didn’t have much time
available, he was always there for me, supporting me.
I want to say thank to my parents, siblings and family in general for their conditional
love and support anytime and anywhere.
I also want to thanks all my friends that directly and indirectly helped me during this
tough time. Without them it would be impossible.
Last, but not least, I want to express my love and gratitude to God, for his blessings,
protection, kindness and generosity. I never stopped believing in your grace.
Fortaleza, December 2017.

Raphael Braga
“And following our will and wind, we may just
go where no one’s been. We’ll ride the spiral to
the end and may just go where no one’s been.
Spiral out, keep going.”
(Tool)
RESUMO

O problema da “escassez” de espectro pode ser abordado promovendo o uso mais eficiente desse
recurso. As técnicas de compartilhamento de espectro, por exemplo, TV White Spaces (TVWS)
e Acesso Compartilhado Licenciado (Licensed Shared Access, LSA), são boas soluções para
esse problema e já existem esforços de regulação e padronização em todo o mundo. Este trabalho
é focado no conceito de Licensed Shared Access (LSA) e é apresentada uma visão geral desta
abordagem de Acesso Dinâmico ao Espectro (Dynamic Spectrum Access, DSA). Também é
sugerido um possível estudo de caso do emprego deste conceito para o desenvolvimento da
indústria de mineração brasileira. Foi implementado um simulador de uma rede Long-Term
Evolution (LTE) que emprega o conceito de LSA para obter uma capacidade de rede adicional.
Finalmente, é realizada uma análise em termos de capacidade dos usuários secundários e
interferência dos usuários primários, como forma de trazer atenção e confiança no setor de
Telecomunicações dos benefícios que esse conceito pode trazer consigo.

Palavras-chave: Acesso Compartilhado Licenciado, Compartilhamento de Espectro, Acesso


Dinâmico ao Espectro, Gerenciamento de Espectro, Long-Term Evolution, Redes Móveis,
Capacidade, Interferência.
ABSTRACT

The spectrum “scarcity” problem can be tackled by promoting a more efficient use of this resource.
Spectrum sharing techniques, e.g. TV White Spaces (TVWS) and Licensed Shared Access
(LSA), are good solutions for this problem and there are already regulation and standardization
efforts worldwide. This work is focused on the LSA concept and it presents an overview of
this Dynamic Spectrum Access (DSA) approach. It is also envisioned a possible case study of
the employment of this concept for the Brazilian mining industry development. A simulator of
the LTE network has been designed, which employs the LSA concept in order to get additional
network capacity. Finally, an analysis is performed in terms of secondary users’ capacity and
primary users’ interference, as a way to bring trust and attention of the Telecommunications
sector with regard to the benefits that this concept can provide.

Keywords: Licensed Shared Access, Spectrum Sharing, Dynamic Spectrum Access, Spectrum
Management, Long-Term Evolution, Mobile Networks, Capacity, Interference.
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 – Frequency Allocation in Brazil. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22


Figure 2 – Protection areas in the 3.5 GHz band in Brazil. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Figure 3 – LSA use case illustration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Figure 4 – Relation among the LSA stakeholders for definition of the sharing framework
and the issuing by National Regulatory Authority (NRA) of individual right
of use to the LSA licensee(s). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Figure 5 – Example of a possible LSA system architecture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Figure 6 – Example of a possible LSA system architecture for the case study. . . . . . 39
Figure 7 – Evolved UMTS Terrestrial Radio Access Network (E-UTRAN) architecture. 41
Figure 8 – Cordless camera link scenario. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Figure 9 – Representation of a grid with 19 hexagon cells wrapped around. . . . . . . . 45
Figure 10 – Representation of a cell for the simulated scenario. Blue dashed arrows
represent signals of interest and red solid arrows represent interfering signals. 46
Figure 11 – A cluster with 19 cells with two LTE User Equipments (UEs) and one cordless
camera link. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Figure 12 – Emission mask considered for the simulation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Figure 13 – Example of an emission mask and interference in a victim receiver in a given
adjacent frequency. Three different bands are considered in the simulator. . 48
Figure 14 – Correlated shadowing inside a cell (values in dB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Figure 15 – CDF of secondary users’ average capacity for default parameters case. . . . 56
Figure 16 – CDF of secondary users’ average capacity for default parameters case varying
the interference-to-noise ratio. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Figure 17 – CDF of secondary users’ average capacity for default parameters case varying
the frequency separation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Figure 18 – Average interference on primary users × interference-to-noise ratio for dif-
ferent number of primary users. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Figure 19 – Average interference on primary users × frequency separation for different
number of primary users. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Figure 20 – Jain’s index × number of secondary users for different scheduling algorithms. 60
Figure 21 – Average secondary users’ capacity × number of secondary users for different
scheduling algorithms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Figure 22 – Average secondary users’ capacity × interference-to-noise ratio for different
number of primary users. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Figure 23 – Average percentage of LSA switched-on BSs (%) × interference protection
criterion for different number of primary Users. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Figure 24 – Average secondary users’ capacity × frequency separation for different num-
ber of primary users. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Figure 25 – Average percentage of LSA switched-on BSs (%) × frequency separation for
different number of Primary Users. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 – Spectrum auction for the 700 MHz band in Brazil. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23


Table 2 – Designated bands for ISM applications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Table 3 – Designated bands for operation in U-NII devices. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Table 4 – Simulation Parameters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

1G First Generation
3G Third Generation
3GPP Third Generation Partnership Project
4G Fourth Generation
5G Fifth Generation
Anatel National Telecommunications Agency (Agência Nacional de Telecomunicações)
ASA Authorized Shared Access
BILP Binary Integer Linear Programming
C-RAN Cloud Radio Access Network
CBRS Citizens Broadband Radio Service
CDF Cumulative Distribution Function
CEPT European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications (Conférence Européenne
des administrations des Postes et des Télécommunications)
CPS Cyber-Physical Systems
CR Cognitive Radio
CSI Channel-State Information
DSA Dynamic Spectrum Access
DSO Digital Switchover
E-UTRAN Evolved UMTS Terrestrial Radio Access Network
EC European Commission
ECC Electronic Communications Committee
EIRP Effective Isotropic Radiated Power
eNB Evolved NodeB
ENG Electronic News Gathering
EPC Evolved Packet Core
ETSI European Telecommunications Standards Institute
FCC Federal Communications Commission
FDD Frequency-Division Duplex
FIFO First-in-First-out
FSS Fixed Satellite Service
GLDB Geolocation Database
HetNet Heterogeneous Network
IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
IMT International Mobile Telecommunications
IoT Internet of Things
IoV Internet of Vehicles
IP Internet Protocol
ISM Industrial, Scientific and Medical
ITU International Telecommunication Union
ITU-R International Telecommunication Union Radio communication sector
LC LSA Controller
LR LSA Repository
LSA Licensed Shared Access
LTE Long-Term Evolution
LTE-A Long-Term Evolution Advanced
M2M Machine-to-Machine
MFCN Mobile/Fixed Communications Networks
MIMO Multiple Input Multiple Output
MNO Mobile Network Operator
MR Maximum Rate
NRA National Regulatory Authority
OB Outside Broadcasting
Ofcom Office of Communications
OFDMA Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access
OOB Out-of-band
PCAST President’s Council of Advanced Science & Technology
PF Proportional Fairness
PMSE Programme Making and Special Events
PRB Physical Resource Block
QoE Quality of Experience
QoS Quality of Service
RF Radio Frequency
RR Round Robin
RRC Reconfigurable Radio Systems
RSPG Radio Spectrum Policy Group
SAB Services Ancillary to Broadcasting
SAP Services Ancillary to Programme making
SAS Spectrum Access System
SC-FDMA Single Carrier Frequency Division Multiple Access
SDR Software Defined Radio
SINR Signal-to-Interference-plus-Noise Ratio
SISO Single Input Single Output
SON Self Organizing Networks
TC Technical Committee
TDD Time-Division Duplex
TC Technical Recommendation
TTI Transmission Time Interval
TV Television
TVWS TV White Spaces
U-NII Unlicensed National Information Infrastructure
UE User Equipment
UHF Ultra High Frequency
UK United Kingdom
UMTS Universal Mobile Telecommunications System
uRLLC Ultra-Reliable and Low-Latency Communications
USA United States of America
VHF Very High Frequency
Wi-Fi Wireless Fidelity
WSD White Space Device
CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
1.1 Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
1.1.1 General Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
1.1.2 Specific Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
1.2 Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
1.3 Scientific production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
1.4 Thesis organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
2 SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.1 Traditional Spectrum Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.2 Spectrum Sharing and Dynamic Spectrum Access . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.2.1 Concept and main examples of Dynamic Spectrum Access . . . . . . . . . 25
2.2.1.1 TV White Spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.2.1.2 Licensed Shared Access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
2.2.2 Enabler Concepts and Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
2.2.3 Dynamic Spectrum Access in Brazil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3 LICENSED SHARED ACCESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3.1 Definition and use case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3.2 LSA players and sharing framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
3.3 Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
3.4 Incumbent protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
3.5 Regulation and Standardization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
3.6 LSA case study in Brazil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
4 CAPACITY AND INTERFERENCE EVALUATION IN LTE/LSA NET-
WORK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
4.1 LTE overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
4.1.1 Long-Term Evolution Advanced (LTE-A) and Carrier Aggregation . . . . 42
4.2 PMSE overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
4.3 Scenario Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
4.3.1 Primary and secondary users operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
4.3.2 Physical Resource Blocks and Resource Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
4.3.2.1 Round Robin algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
4.3.2.2 Maximum Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
4.3.2.3 Proportional Fair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
4.3.2.4 Jain’s Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
4.3.3 Propagation channel considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
4.3.4 Signal-to-Inference-plus-Noise Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
4.3.5 Adjusted Shannon capacity formula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
4.3.6 Primary user protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
4.4 Simulation Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
4.5 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
5 CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
5.1 Acknowledgment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
17

1 INTRODUCTION

There is a considerable increase in mobile data traffic. According to forecasts [1],


this traffic will grow sevenfold between 2016 and 2021, and it will reach, by the end of 2021,
49 exabytes per month. This extra boom is mainly due to the popularization and proliferation
of devices worldwide, like smartphones and tablets, as well as the development of data-hungry
applications.
On one hand it is expected that there will be 29 billion connected devices in the whole
world by 2022, thanks to the advancements in technology and development of concepts, like
Machine-to-Machine (M2M), Internet of Things (IoT), and Internet of Vehicles (IoV), to name a
few [2]. On the other hand, applications which demand high data rate, like video streaming and
online gaming, are becoming more common. In order to be capable of dealing with this high
traffic, the next generation of communication systems, Fifth Generation (5G), predicted to be
launched by 2020, expects to provide a capacity increase of one to ten thousandfold compared to
the previous generation, Fourth Generation (4G) technology [3]. As a consequence of this, a
huge demand on Radio Frequency (RF) spectrum is also expected. However, this natural resource
is limited, and currently it is suffering from scarcity. Actually, this is an apparent scarcity, since
there are lots of bands (generally high GHz bands) not explored by any service.
The easiest way of trying to solve this “scarcity” problem is to explore the higher
frequency bands, in particular cm and mm wave bands, which have a lot of spectrum available [4].
However, this approach does not cover all use cases, since waves in high bands present hostile
propagation characteristics, e.g. strong path loss, atmospheric and rain absorption, low diffraction
around obstacles, etc; and therefore may not always be compatible with all applications, for
example, communications where devices are found in a mobile and very dynamic environment.
The massive Multiple Input Multiple Output (MIMO) technique is a very good
approach to deal with the propagation characteristics in higher bands. The utilization of large
antenna arrays allows a better steering of the signal transmission power towards the direction of
interest, enhancing the transmission gain. Furthermore, it allows the interference to be better
managed, which also improves the wireless communication in a network [4].
Another solution is to promote a more efficient spectrum use in frequencies which
are overused, typically the lower ones. The traditional way the spectrum is managed in most
countries, even in Brazil, is through the granting of spectrum licenses for exclusive use on
18

a long-term basis 1 . However, in some cases, a spectrum owner does not use the resource
assigned to him during all the time and in all geographical areas. Despite the fact that this static
approach is very robust in the avoidance of harmful interference among services, it leads to the
underutilization of spectrum.
Spectrum sharing comes out as a very good option to solve this inefficiency problem,
enabling a more dynamic access to the RF spectrum and allowing this resource to be shared
in a flexible way. This concept should not be confused with the unlicensed use of spectrum,
e.g. Industrial, Scientific and Medical (ISM) applications, where the spectrum in specific bands
is shared without the need of license and with services being subject to interference of other
services.
There are already two new spectrum management mechanisms which define different
generations of the spectrum sharing: the first generation with the TV White Spaces (TVWS)
solutions and the second one with the Licensed Shared Access (LSA) scheme; both having their
particularities and use cases well defined, which will be seen in a later chapter.
This work is focused on the LSA. This concept is applied to a Long-Term Evolution
(LTE) network and an assessment is performed in terms of capacity and interference of the
spectrum users.

1.1 Objectives

1.1.1 General Objectives

The main objective of this work is to analyze the potential and the benefits that
the employment of LSA can provide to a mobile network. For that, a simulator of an LTE
network was designed, to which the concept of LSA is applied. Furthermore, this work intends
to present an overview of DSA in the Brazilian regulatory scenario and also to suggest a possible
case study of the employment of the LSA concept in Brazil. Such study is expected to bring
the attention and trust of the Telecommunications sector, and specifically of Anatel and other
Brazilian stakeholders, to LSA and the benefits it could provide.

1.1.2 Specific Objectives

The specific objectives of this work are:


1 In Brazil, licenses for mobile broadband services have a duration of 15 years [5].
19

• To present an overview of the situation of DSA in the Brazilian regulatory scenario,


specially for LSA;
• To present a case study of the application of the LSA concept in the development of the
mining industry sector;
• To analyze the capacity gain of an LTE network brought by the employment of the LSA
concept;
• To analyze the interference in cordless camera services coming from an LTE network
employing the LSA concept;
• To analyze the impact in terms of capacity (secondary users) and interference (primary
users) due to the variation of different parameters:
– The separation between the operating frequency of the LSA band used by the sec-
ondary users, and the operating frequency of the primary ones;
– The interference protection criteria of the primary user receivers;
– Scheduling algorithms used;
– Number of primary users;
– Number of secondary users.
• To present an approach of primary users interference protection.

1.2 Contributions

In the literature, there are few practical studies regarding LSA employment in an
LTE network on physical layer. What it is mainly found are field tests regarding coexistence and
feasibility of this spectrum sharing concept.
The LSA concept is still in its beginning state and there is still a lot to be developed in
terms of regulation and standardization. It seems that there is still a mistrust on the employment
of LSA, mainly because of the possibility of harming the service of other spectrum owners. The
results of this analysis are expected to show both the gain in terms of network capacity and
the protection of the spectrum incumbent, as a way of encouraging the use of this concept as a
spectrum access approach world-wide.
20

1.3 Scientific production

EVANGELISTA, R. B. et al. TV White Spaces and Licensed Shared Access applied to the
Brazilian context. In: 12th EAI International Conference on Cognitive Radio Oriented Wireless
Networks. [S.l.: s.n.], 2017.
NASCIMENTO, M. F. S. do et al. TV White Spaces for digital inclusions in Brazil. Revista de
Tecnologia da Informação e Comunicação, v. 6, n. 2, p. 6–15, out. 2016. ISSN 2237-5104.
EVANGELISTA, R. B., SILVA, C.F.M. e, NASCIMENTO, M. F. S. do, Gerenciamento de
Espectro Eletromagnético. In: CAVALCANTI, F.R.P. et al. Sistemas de Telefonia Celular.
Elsevier, 2018 [to be published].

1.4 Thesis organization

This master’s thesis is organized as follows. Chapter 2 discusses about the spectrum
management and the recent concept of DSA. Chapter 3 presents important concepts regarding
LSA and also a case study of the LSA application in the Brazilian mining industry. The
simulation and considered scenario are presented in chapter 4, along with simulation results and
their analysis. The work is finally concluded in chapter 5, where possible future works are also
presented.
21

2 SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT

The radio waves are used in different wireless communication systems. In the
commercial sector, they can be seen in mobile communications networks and radio broadcasting,
in the public sector, they are used to support the national defense, aviation, emergency services,
etc [6].
Since the air is a medium shared by all the services, the spectrum needs to be managed
in order to avoid that the harmful interference from different spectrum owners becomes excessive.
If two systems transmit a signal at the same time, at the same frequency and sufficiently close to
each other, generally the services provided by them will be compromised by the interference of
each other. In some cases, “sufficiently close” means dozens or hundreds of meters. Furthermore,
even if the users transmit at adjacent frequencies, they can still suffer interference from each
other, because part of the transmit signal “leaks” to adjacent and alternate bands, arising from
modulation process, intermodulation products, frequency conversion products, etc.
In order to manage the spectrum, each country creates national norms to regulate the
generation and transmission of radio waves. For a proper spectrum management, the manager
gives to each user the right to transmit in a given frequency and in a given geographical area,
generally in the form of a license. The granting of these licenses must guarantee that no excessive
interference might be caused to other licensed users. In practice, this can be a very challenging
task, because it demands an accurate study of the physical and legislative environment of a given
region.
The main objective of spectrum management is to maximize this resource, so the
society can benefit from the gains that a greater availability of RF spectrum brings with it, e.g.
improvement of services and availability of new ones; and simultaneously guaranteeing that the
interference between different users remains stable and manageable. Figure 1 represents the
frequency allocation in Brazil for different kinds of services.
In this context, the next sections present two approaches of spectrum management,
its traditional model, which is commonly used in most of the countries, and the dynamic access
model, which is a new approach already being considered in some parts of the world.
Source: ANATEL (2015)
H F

EHF
SHF
VHF

UHF
VLF

30 GHz 3 GHz 300 MHz 30 MHz 3 MHz 3 kHz


30,005 3,025
R

S
S
S

31,000 30,010
S

31,300 3,100
OR

31,500
31,800 315,000 3,155
32,000
SEM

S S

32,300 322,000
ATRIBUIÇÃO

exc.Ae

3,300 328,600 3,200


33,000 335,400
33,400 9,000
LEGENDA:

3,400 363,100
ENTRE SATÉLITES

34,200 363,275
S

34,700 3,400
S

FAIXA SEM ATRIBUIÇÃO

35,200
35,500 378,700 14,000
AUXÍLIO À METEOROLOGIA
R

36,000 3,600 378,875 3,500


37,000 387,000
S

37,500
399,900 19,950
EXPLORAÇÃO DA TERRA POR SATÉLITE
S
S

3,800 400,050
S
S
S
S

400,150 37,500 3,800 20,050


S
S
S

38,000 401,000
S S
S
S

402,000 38,250
S
S
R

S
S

39,500 403,000
exc.Ae.

40,000 406,000
S

S
S
S S
S

40,500 406,100 4,000


S S
S S S
S

41,000 410,000 39,986


40,020 4,063 30 kHz
FIXO
S
S
Ae.
exc.

42,500 420,000
S

exc.Ae. 43,500 4,200 40,980


Ae.
exc.

430,000 41,015
S
S

47,000 432,000
S

47,200 438,000 4,438


440,000
FIXO AERONÁUTICO
S

50,200 4,400
Ae.
exc.

50,400 450,000
R
exc.Aé

S
S

51,400 455,000
S

52,600 4,500 456,000 4,650


L F

METEOROLOGIA POR SATÉLITE

54,250 459,000
R

55,780 460,000 4,700 30 kHz


56,900
S
OR

57,000
S

4,750
FREQÜÊNCIA PADRÃO/SINAIS HORÁRIOS

58,200 470,000
59,000 4,800
4,910 4,995
59,300 4,940 5,003
4,990 5,005
64,000 5,000 5,060
S

exc.Ae. 65,000 5,010 50,000


S

exc.Ae. 66,000 5,030


5,091 5,250 70,000
5,151
MÓVEL
S
S

Exc. Aé
S

5,250
71,000 Exc. Aé 5,255 90,000
Exc. Aé 5,350 5,450
S
S
TV CANAIS 14 a 36

74,000
MÓVEL MARÍTIMO
40,660-40,700MHz - Aplicações Industriais, Científicas e Médicas (ISM)

5,460 110,000
MÓVEL TERRESTRE
R

S
S

5,470 54,000 5,680


MÓVEL AERONÁUTICO

76,000 Exc. Aé 5,570


OR

Exc. Aé
S
S

77,500 5,650 5,730 130,000


78,000 Exc. Aé 5,725
S
S S

79,000 5,830
S
S
S

81,000 5,850 608,000 160,000


614,000 5,900
S
S
S
S

84,000 5,925
190,000
S

86,000
ATRIBUIÇÃO

6,200
TV

92,000
61-61,5GHz - Aplicações Industriais, Científicas e Médicas (ISM)
s

94,000
94,100
6,525
TV CANAIS 38 a 51

95,000 6,700
CANAIS 2 a 4
R

698,000 285,000
6,685
S
s
OR

100,000 7,075 6,765


Radiofarol

7,145 300 kHz


102,000 7,235
RADIONAVEGAÇÃO

RADIOLOCALIZAÇÃO
DE

7,250
exc.Aé

105,000 7,000
7,300
S

109,500 7,425 72,000 7,100

RADIONAVEGAÇÃO MARÍTIMA
111,800 73,000 7,200
114,250 74,600 7,300

RADIONAVEGAÇÃO AERONÁUTICA
S

116,000 74,800 7,350


7,750 75,200 7,400
S
S

7,850 75,400 Exc. Aé 7,450


MF

119,980 7,900 806,000 76,000


S

7,975 300 kHz


S

8,025
TV

122,250 315,000
exc.Aé

S
S

8,175
Radiofarol

123,000 8,100 325,000


s

8,195
CANAIS

8,400 890,000

S
S
S
S

8,500
8,550 902,000
5a6

130,000 8,650 exc.Ae. 907,500


8,750 exc.Ae. 915,000 88,000 8,815

RADIOAMADOR

RADIODIFUSÃO
134,000 8,850 exc.Ae. 928,000
R

9,000 exc.Ae. 942,000 8,965


6,765-6,795MHz - Aplicações Industriais, Científicas e Médicas (ISM)

RADIOASTRONOMIA
S
136,000 952,500
9,200 960,000 9,040 405,000
OR

S
9,300
FAIXAS

141,000
415,000
148,500 9,500 9,400

RADIODETERMINAÇÃO POR SATÉLITE


151,500 1.164,000
RÁDIO

9,800
155,500 9,900
FM

10,000 9,995
158,500 10,003
10,005

S
122-123GHz - Aplicações Industriais, Científicas e Médicas (ISM)
10,100
R

S
S
S

10,450 10,138
164,000 10,500 10,150

S
10,550 490,000
DE

167,000 10,600
902-928MHz - Aplicações Industriais, Científicas e Médicas (ISM)

S
10,680 108,000
SOS

S
10,700 510,000
exc.Aé

S
11,175

POR SATÉLITE
1.215,000 11,275
OR

174,500 11,400 525,000


R

S
S

PESQUISA ESPACIAL
174,800 1.240,000

OPERAÇÃO ESPACIAL

CARÁTER SECUNDÁRIO
11,600
182,000 11,700 535,000
S

185,000 117,975

S
1.300,000 12,100
12,200
190,000 12,230

S
S
12,500
191,800 1.350,000

S
12,700
R

12,750
1.400,000 13,200

R
RÁDIO OM

OR
S

SOS
exc.Aé
S
13,260
OR

S
S
13,250 1.427,000 136,000 13,360
R

s
13,400 1.429,000 13,410
S
R

1.452,000 137,000 Exc. Aé 13,570

S
S
200,000 1.492,000 137,025 13,870 1.605,000
13,750 1.518,000 137,175 Exc. Aé 14,000

EM ROTA
S
S

202,000 1.525,000 137,825 14,250 1.625,000

S
S
S
S S S S
S S S S

14,000 1.530,000 138,000 14,350

FORA DE ROTA
143,600

S
S
S

14,400 143,650 Exc. Aé

S
14,470 1.559,000 144,000 14,990
500kHz - Freqüência Internacional de Chamada e Socorro - Radiotelegrafia

SOCORRO E CHAMADA
S
S
S
S

209,000 14,500 1.610,000 146,000 15,005 1.705,000

S
S
14,800 1.610,600 148,000 15,010

S
S S
S
1.613,800 149,900 15,100
OR

EXCETO MÓVEL AERONÁUTICO


s

S
S
S
S

1.626,500 150,050
15,350 156,000

S
S
15,400 156,7625 15,800 1.800,000
15,430 1.660,000 SOS 156,8375

S
1.660,500 157,450

S
217,000 15,630 1.668,000 160,600 16,360 1.850,000
15,700 1.668,400 160,975
1.670,000 161,475

S
S
1.675,000 162,050
226,000 16,600

S
1.690,000 17,410
exc. Aé

S
17,100

S
1.700,000 174,000 17,480
FREQUÊNCIAS

13,563-13,567MHz - Aplicações Industriais, Científicas e Médicas (ISM)

S
231,500 17,200 1.706,000 2.000.000

S
232,000 17,300 1.710,000 17,900

S
17,700 17,970

S
S S
S
17,800 1.930,000 18,030 2.065,000
R OR

235,000 1.970,000 18,052

TV

S
18,100 1.980,000 18,068

S
S

238,000 18,400 18,168 2.107,000

S S

S
S
240,000 18,600 2.025,000 18,780

TERRA PARA ESPAÇO


ESPAÇO PARA TERRA
ESPAÇO PARA ESPAÇO
S
241,000 18,800 18,900 2.170,000

CANAIS
19,020 2.173,500

S
S

S
S
19,680 SOS 2.190,500

S
2.110,000 19,800 2.194,000

7 - 13
248,000 19,300

S
250,000 19,700 2.120,000 19,990
NO

252,000 20,100 19,995

S S S
S S
20,200 2.160,000 20,010

ESPAÇO PARA TERRA/TERRA PARA ESPAÇO


S
S
S
2.200,000
21,200 216,000 21,000

S
S
220,000 2.300,000

S
S
S

S
21,800 21,450
2.290,000 21,850
265,000 22,400 2.300,000 225,000 21,870
22,500 21,924
22,550 22,000

R
23,000

S
235,000 22,855 2.495,000
2.501,000

156,7625 MHz a 156,8375MHz - Faixa de Freqüência Internacional de Chamada e Socorro


23,600 2.450,000 23,200 2.502,000
275,000 23,350 2.505,000

OR
24,000 2.483,500 24,000

S
24,050

S
S
24,250 2.500,000 24,890

S
S
24,450 2.520,000 24,990
24,650 25,005

244-246GHz - Aplicações Industriais, Científicas e Médicas (ISM)


S
24,750 25,010

2.182 kHz - Freqüência Internacional de Chamada e Socorro - Radiotelefonia


25,070

S
25,250 2.655,000 25,210

S
25,500 25,550

ELABORADO PELA:
************************
2.690,000 25,670

S
S
S
2.700,000 26,100
BRASIL

2.400-2.500MHz - Aplicações Industriais, Científicas e Médicas (ISM)


27,000 267,000 26,175 2.850,000

26,957-27,283MHz - Aplicações Industriais, Científicas e Médicas (ISM)

S
Aé.
exc.
27,500 27,500

24-24,25GHz - Aplicações Industriais, Científicas e Médicas (ISM)

DE TELECOMUNICAÇÕES.
28,000

275 GHz A 1.000 GHz NÃO TEM


S

ATUALIZADO EM MARÇO DE 2015


A FAIXA DE RADIOFREQÜÊNCIAS DE
28,500

ATRIBUIÇÃO DA UNIÃO INTERNACIONAL


29,100 2.900,000

GERÊNCIA DE ESPECTRO, ÓRBITA E RADIODIFUSÃO


ATRIBUIÇÃO DE FAIXAS DE FREQUÊNCIAS NO BRASIL
S

S S
S S
29,500

ESTE QUADRO REPRODUZ, GRAFICAMENTE, A TABELA DE


29,700

S
S
S
300 GHz 30 GHz 3.000 MHz 300 MHz 30 MHz 3.000 kHz
Figure 1 – Frequency Allocation in Brazil.
22
23

Table 1 – Spectrum auction for the 700 MHz band in Brazil.


Lot Frequency range (MHz)a Minimum Bidb Winner Bidb
1 738–748 + 793–803 1928 Claro 1947
2 718–728 + 773–783 1928 TIM 1947
3 728–738 + 783–793 1928 Vivo 1928
4 708–718 + 763–773 1893 Not acquired –
5 708–718 + 763–773c 29.6 Algar 29.6
6 708–718 + 763–773c 5.3 Not acquired –
a 10 MHz for each link direction, uplink and downlink, respectively.
b Value in millions of reais (Brazilian currency).
c Despite the repeated frequency ranges, they were defined for different areas.

2.1 Traditional Spectrum Management

The traditional way radio spectrum is managed in most countries is by two ap-
proaches: command-and-control and commons.
In the command-and-control approach, the frequency bands are licensed to users
authorized by the government. The main spectrum allocation method is the spectrum auctions,
which are performed by the government. In these auctions, the eligible services (e.g. radio or
Television (TV) service) are specified for that particular frequency band. Any user/company
which provides the specified service and is interested in the use of the auctioned band can offer
the amount of money that it is willing to pay to the government to obtain the license. The
government selects the winner, which is allowed to use the frequency band under the rules and
regulations defined by the government and also during the time it determines [7]. For the sake of
curiosity, Table 1 shows an example of a spectrum auction that happened in Brazil [8].
The great advantage of this approach is its robustness regarding harmful interferences,
since only the licensed users are allowed to utilize a given frequency band. However, this
approach brings with it inefficiency in spectrum utilization, because an authorized user can not
utilize the whole spectrum all the time and in all the areas it is licensed to.
In the commons approach, any user has the right to access the spectrum without
need of a license (license-exempt). The use of spectrum is regulated by protocols and technical
standards. The main characteristic of this approach is the absence of interference protection [9].
This approach is mainly used in bands reserved for industrial, medical and scientific
purposes, called ISM bands (see Table 2, for example of bands used for ISM applications).
Nowadays, these bands are used also for non-ISM applications, e.g. cordless phones, car alarms
and Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 802.11 technology in local area
24

Table 2 – Designated bands for ISM applications.


Frequency range Central Frequency
13 553 to 13 567 kHz 13 560 kHz
26 957 to 27 283 kHz 27 120 kHz
40.66 to 40.70 MHz 40.68 MHz
902 to 928 MHz 915 MHz
2400 to 2500 MHz 2450 MHz
5725 to 5875 MHz 5800 MHz
24 to 24.25 GHz 24.125 GHz

Table 3 – Designated bands for operation in U-NII devices.


Band Frequency range
U-NII-1 5.150 to 5.250 GHz
U-NII-2A 5.250 to 5.350 GHz
U-NII-2B 5.350 to 5.470 GHz
U-NII-2C 5.470 to 5.725 GHz

networks [9].
Another example of band for unlicensed use of spectrum is the Unlicensed National
Information Infrastructure (U-NII) bands, defined by the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC). These bands are designated for fixed or mobile communications that use broadband
digital modulation techniques and provide high transmission rates. Examples of U-NII bands are
presented in Table 3 [10].

2.2 Spectrum Sharing and Dynamic Spectrum Access

The crucial issue related to the traditional spectrum management is its lack of
flexibility, which leads to an inefficiency in the use of this resource. Among the limitations of
the traditional approach, it can be mentioned [7]:
• The user licensed to use the spectrum can’t be changed and, therefore, if there is an
underutilization of this resource, it can’t be reallocated to another service that needs it;
• The granularity of spectrum use is fixed. This means that a frequency band granted to
a given service has a fixed size. This leads to some limitations, for instance, in certain
cases it may be necessary a shorter frequency band, just for use in a special scenario, e.g.
a supplementary band for a mobile operator to provide its traffic in areas with high density
of subscribers;
• The spectrum use can’t be unlicensed (with exception of the bands dedicated for unlicensed
25

use previously mentioned), and, therefore, if a service is underutilizing or even not utilizing
its allocated spectrum in a given area or time, unlicensed users are not allowed to use this
resource in an opportunistic fashion, what would enable a higher efficiency in spectrum
use.
To solve the problems due to the traditional spectrum management, more dynamic
approaches have emerged, which use new technologies and concepts that enable more flexibility
in spectrum access. DSA and spectrum sharing are two concepts very important in this matter.

2.2.1 Concept and main examples of Dynamic Spectrum Access

Spectrum sharing has different meanings. For a National Regulatory Authority


(NRA), it means to provide more spectrum for a service without interfering or bringing harm to
the existing users of that resource.
The focus of this work is on DSA, where the sharing is organized among users and
depends on demands of systems that share the resources, with the allocations changing with
time in a dynamic manner. This branch of spectrum sharing should not be confused with the
co-existence concept, where the shared spectrum is provided in a fixed or static manner, in a way
that there is no interference among users using the same or adjacent spectrum [11].
The main problem that comes with the DSA employment is the interference that new
users (also called secondary users) of the spectrum can bring to the original users (or primary
users) of this resource. For the traditional case where a service has an exclusive license to the
spectrum, the unwanted emissions that can cause interference in other services in the same or
adjacent bands are regulated through spectral masks, which are generally harmonized across
the world regions. For DSA, there is a sharing of spectrum in different radio technologies, then
some limits should be established regarding the transmit power and/or the sharing distance, so
that one service does not cause interference to the others and vice-versa, compromising the
communication.
Two examples of spectrum sharing techniques are TVWS and LSA.

2.2.1.1 TV White Spaces

TVWS is a portion of spectrum in the range of Very High Frequency (VHF) and
Ultra High Frequency (UHF) that is not in use at a particular time and location and, therefore, it
represents a new opportunity for wireless communication systems in a frequency band that has
26

good propagation characteristics. They emerge as a by-product of the Digital Switchover (DSO),
also known as the digital television transition; a process in which analog TV broadcasting is
replaced by the digital one. The DSO has been successfully completed in various countries and
it is still in progress in some others. In Brazil, for example, the Ministry of Communications
established in 2014 a DSO plan, starting in 2015 and gradually to be implemented until December
2018 [12].
The basic principle of TVWS consists of allowing unlicensed, secondary users to
access spectrum at specific geographic locations and/or during specific time intervals, not inter-
fering with terrestrial TV transmission or reception, or any other primary service. Importantly,
the TVWS regulations require White Space Devices (WSDs) to obtain authorization before they
can transmit, and require those devices to cease operation when they are located within protected
areas [13].
Since waves at the frequency range of TVWS have good propagation characteristics,
the application of this concept is more envisioned for use cases where there is a need for wireless
coverage extension. For example, TVWS can be used to improve the coverage of a 4G network
of a mobile operator in rural locations.
The potential uses of TVWS are still being considered by the industry and regulatory
bodies, because there are still uncertainties about what sort of TVWS availability is realistic,
and the amount of TVWS spectrum available can change significantly from one country to
another [14]. Many countries have studied the use of TVWS, but only two of them currently
have a proper regulation model that permits the license-exempt use of TVWS: the United States
of America (USA) with FCC, and the United Kingdom (UK) with Office of Communications
(Ofcom).
The extension of spectrum occupancy of TVWS has opened up a new dimension
for a variety of potential applications. The merit of TVWS exploitation is to provide innovative
applications not fully supported by existing technologies, and to offer resource expansion to
existing applications for enhanced performance [15]. One company that has begun developing
rural broadband equipment using TVWS is Carlson Wireless Technologies 1 from USA. The
company has more than a decade of experience in developing effective rural solutions. These
wireless radios can provide broadband data rate over much larger distances than the existing
Wireless Fidelity (Wi-Fi) routers, and in December 2013, FCC approved its commercial and
1 <http://www.carlsonwireless.com/>
27

unlicensed use in the USA.

2.2.1.2 Licensed Shared Access

While TVWS is considered a technology of the first generation of spectrum sharing,


LSA is the key example of a concept of the next generation [3]. Since the main topic of this
work is LSA, the concept is seen with further details in the next chapter.

2.2.2 Enabler Concepts and Technologies

DSA enables the efficient use of the spectrum, however it brings with it some
challenges for its proper operation. Such challenges can be overcome by the following concepts
and technologies:
• Software Defined Radio (SDR) is a radio frequency transmitter or receiver which employs
a technology that allows the radio frequency operational parameters (e.g. operating
frequency, type of modulation and transmission power) to be configured or modified via
software [16];
• Cognitive Radio (CR) is a radio frequency system which employs a technology that allows
the system to obtain knowledge about the operational and geographic environment and to
adjust dynamically and autonomously its operational parameters and protocols according
to the acquired knowledge, so to achieve predefined objectives and learn with the obtained
results [16];
• Spectrum Sensing involves incorporating spectrum scanners in network nodes. They
sweep the radio frequency energy in a given channel to verify its availability. In order
for an equipment to utilize a certain channel, it should be considered available by these
scanners [15];
• Geolocation Database (GLDB) is a database with location maps of free available channels
for different frequency bands, along with allowed transmission power for secondary use.
In this approach, the secondary devices obtain the available channels through a GLDB
query. In order for this concept to be reasonable, it is necessary to constantly update the
channel availability information at the database.
Each of those concepts applied to communication systems contribute for a dynamism
in spectrum access and use. For instance, SDR enables a higher flexibility in mobile equipment
operation, allowing its fast and easy reconfiguration, in order to meet certain real time criteria.
28

The CR allows the spectrum sensing, so the spectrum sharing is possible without harming primary
users. The GLDB concept can be combined with spectrum sensing to bring more reliability and
robustness in the available channel detection.

2.2.3 Dynamic Spectrum Access in Brazil

One way to increase the provision of wireless broadband in general is the employ-
ment of techniques or technologies to allow the RF spectrum to be used more dynamically
and efficiently, so a broader range of stakeholders could have access to and explore wireless
broadband. Either TVWS or LSA are very good tools for reaching this efficiency and dynamism
of spectrum use.
At the moment, it seems that Anatel is particularly interested in fostering the devel-
opment of telecommunications/broadband in rural and remote areas. This can be attested in
the Anatel regulatory agenda, which indicates a movement towards the regulation of the use of
TVWS for the development of broadband of Brazilian rural areas, as a regulatory impact analysis
on the use of white spaces in VHF and UHF bands is expected to happen by the second semester
of 2018 [17].
In Brazil, there is still no ongoing regulatory actions related to LSA, but there is
already research regarding the application of this concept in the Brazilian scenario. In [18] there
is a spectrum sharing proposal based on the LSA concept with its specificities, in order for it to
be more appropriate to the Brazilian reality. The candidate frequency bands for LSA in Brazil
are: 1.4 GHz (L-Band), 2.7 GHz (2500 to 2690 MHz) and 3.5 GHz (3565 to 3650 MHz). In the
same reference, there is also an analysis of the protection areas in the whole Brazil territory in the
3.5 GHz band, for which the Fixed Satellite Service (FSS) is the main incumbent in the country.
Figure 2 shows the protection areas for co-channel operation (red circles) and adjacent-channel
operation (blue circles).
Furthermore, the effort in the direction of TVWS regulation is the first step towards
the use of the spectrum sharing concept, hence there is some hope in the Brazilian regulatory
scenario for LSA implementation in the near future.
29

Figure 2 – Protection areas in the 3.5 GHz band in Brazil.

Source: RON, C. V. R.; MELLO, L. A. R. de S.; ALMEIDA, M. P. C. de (2017)


30

3 LICENSED SHARED ACCESS

With the previously mentioned apparent spectrum scarcity problem, the USA Presi-
dent’s Council of Advanced Science & Technology (PCAST) reported [19] the urgency within
the wireless industry for new alternatives to overcome this spectrum crisis. The spectrum sharing
concept was highlighted as an excellent option, with potential to unlock a considerable amount
of spectrum to different systems and services with different spectrum needs and dynamics. In
Europe, at the same period, the European Commission (EC)’s advisory group Radio Spectrum
Policy Group (RSPG) also shows itself interested in the spectrum sharing concept, specifically
in LSA as a complementary spectrum tool to deal with the increasing demand for mobile data
traffic. The RSPG opinion stated that “To meet the growing demand for spectrum the industry
and administrations are under pressure to introduce new technologies and regulatory mechanisms
to optimize the use of the limited frequency resources. In this context, the promotion of the
shared use of radio spectrum resources is a valuable means to offer additional spectrum access to
broadband communications, for license exempt but also licensed usage, which is a new paradigm
referred to as Licensed Shared Access.” [20].
These documents show high-level policy drivers efforts towards a spectrum sharing
concept, and specifically LSA. However, in order for the spectrum sharing concept to be deployed
in commercial services, a close cooperation between business, policy and technology domains is
necessary, mainly because the application of this concept means several radio systems operating
in the same band and/or at the same time, fact that can weaken the stakeholders’ trust, once
this can be translated into interference between systems and therefore compromise their service
provision. This thinking can create a certain fear in the adoption of the sharing approach, instead
of exclusive long duration licensing, where the interference is well-known, managed and the
Quality of Service (QoS) is guaranteed.
Therefore, it can be observed that only a subset of researches regarding spectrum
sharing has entered into the regulatory and business domain. One clear example of this, it is the
research on spectrum sensing through the application of cognitive radio to deal with interference
issues [11]. Despite that, there is also the TVWS concept, which was supported by NRAs and
standardization bodies, mainly in USA [21] and UK [22]. In [23], it is possible to see an example
of a product commercially available off-the-shelf, which applies the TVWS solution to deliver
wireless broadband connection to costumers in non-line-of-sight and rural locations.
Nowadays, the spectrum sharing concepts under study are LSA [24] from Europe
31

and Spectrum Access System (SAS) [25] from the USA. Both concepts are very similar, however
SAS is based on a three-tier model, introducing three different levels of priority (LSA has two
tiers: incumbent and LSA licensee), and, more notable than this, the sensing is mandatory in
SAS system for determination of incumbent usage information. The FCC considers the Citizens
Broadband Radio Service (CBRS) 3.5 GHz band for sharing through the SAS system, which in
the USA is used by military radar and FSS services [3].
As the focus of this work is LSA, this is the only concept that is deepened here.
Further details regarding SAS can be seen in [26].

3.1 Definition and use case

LSA is a new complementary licensing method that enables the spectrum allocated
to an incumbent, which is underutilized, to be shared in time, frequency and space with other
services (called LSA licensee), such as Mobile Network Operators (MNOs). The differential of
this spectrum sharing concept is that the conditions, similar to the exclusive licensing, assure the
rights of use for both incumbent and LSA licensee, and therefore QoS can be guaranteed in both
services.
The major use case for the LSA concept is the “Bandwidth Expansion for Mobile
Network Operator” defined by the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI)
in [27]. In this use case, an MNO operating LTE in a licensed band already assigned to it, can
apply for an individual authorization through the concept of LSA, which enables the MNO to
use RF frequencies within the 2300 to 2400 MHz band (Third Generation Partnership Project
(3GPP) LTE Band 40) and expand its total bandwidth through carrier aggregation mechanisms.
Figure 3 illustrates this principle.
The new concepts of Heterogeneous Network (HetNet) and Self Organizing Net-
works (SON) enable the management and integration of LSA spectrum to MNO. The MNO
can be formed of different layers, e.g macro cells or small cells, with different operational
frequencies, with the possibility to move users between the LSA band (when it is available) and
its licensed one, balancing the load. Despite that, when an evacuation is needed due to incumbent
necessities, the network can dynamically organize itself to prevent the incumbent from being
subject to harmful interference [11].
32

Figure 3 – LSA use case illustration.

Licensed
Spectrum LSA Spectrum
Source: Created by the Author

3.2 LSA players and sharing framework

The main players in the LSA approach are the incumbent, the NRA and the LSA
licensee. According to the LSA concept [24], the spectrum sharing is allowed in a binary basis,
in this sense, both incumbent and LSA licensee have exclusive individual access to a spectrum at
a given time and location. The NRA is responsible for the identification of LSA spectrum to be
licensed and definition of the sharing framework [24].
The sharing framework is a set of sharing rules which will cause changes, if any, in
the spectrum use by the incumbent (in time, frequency and/or space) and defines the possible
available spectrum for access by the LSA licensee under LSA regime with its corresponding
technical and operational conditions [28].
Even though the sharing framework is defined as being from the NRA responsibility,
its development is made with help of the other two key stakeholders, incumbent and LSA licensee.
The incumbent defines the part of its spectrum that will be made available for sharing, the license
duration, geographical area and evacuation time. Comparing this approach with the traditional
auctioning for spectrum licensing, the LSA enables faster, lower cost and flexible access to
spectrum, being an alternative for the re-farming process, which is lengthy and expensive [11].
After the definition of the sharing framework, the NRA can issue an individual
33

right of use to the LSA licensee, so the latter is able to use the additional spectrum. Figure 4
summarizes this relation among the stakeholders.

Figure 4 – Relation among the LSA stakeholders for definition of the sharing framework and the
issuing by NRA of individual right of use to the LSA licensee(s).

Incumbent(s) LSA Licensee(s)


Denition
of sharing
framework

Individual
right
of use

NRA

Source: Created by the Author

3.3 Architecture

The LSA architecture introduces two logical entities, the LSA Controller (LC) and
the LSA Repository (LR) [29]. These two entities are necessary to support the dynamic access
to the LSA spectrum and to guarantee the incumbent rights and interference free operation.
The LR plays the role of a database. Its main functions are the following [29]:
• the entry and storage of information regarding incumbent’s spectrum use and protection
requirements;
• transmission to LCs of availability information;
• reception and storage of acknowledgement information received from the LCs;
• support the NRA to monitor operation of the LSA system;
• it guarantees that the LSA system works according to the sharing framework.
The LC is an entity located within the LSA licensee’s domain. Its key functions are
the following [29]:
• provides to the LSA licensee the spectrum resource availability information from the LR;
• allows that acknowledgment information is exchanged between LSA licensee and LR;
• supports the mapping of availability information into appropriate radio configurations by
interacting with the licensee’s network management system.
Figure 5 illustrates a possible architecture of the LSA system with the entities
mentioned previously. In this case, the spectrum management depends on a centralized database
(LR), hence, no sensing mechanism is required to support the identification of incumbents
34

activity and its protection against interference. According to information sent a priori from the
incumbents regarding spectrum usage and protection requirements to the LR, the latter assesses
the availability of LSA spectrum over space and time. The LC can either grant access or request
to vacate channels to LSA licensees based on the LR information gathered through an interface
between both entities defined in [29]. The LR is located outside the LSA licensee network and it
can serve multiple networks. Differently, the LC is considered as part of a specific network.

Figure 5 – Example of a possible LSA system architecture.


Incumbent 1

LSA
Incumbent 2
Repository

Incumbent 3

LSA
Controller

Mobile Network
Management
Licensed
System Spectrum LSA Spectrum

Source: Created by the Author

3.4 Incumbent protection

The protection of incumbent is one of the main challenges of LSA and this topic
is very sensitive, since the service provided by the primary user can be compromised by the
secondary. In the LSA use case, the 2300 to 2400 MHz band is considered, and over different
countries the incumbent service is not the same. It can be allocated to Programme Making
and Special Events (PMSE) services, military aircraft telemetry services, amateur radio and,
etc. Information regarding the allocation and destination of this and other bands for different
35

European countries can be found in [30]. In Brazil, the same kind of consultation can be
performed at Anatel’s Interactive systems [31].
According to the information related to incumbent’s location and protection criteria,
exclusion and protection zones can be defined to protect the incumbent from harmful interference.
These zones are typically defined as circles of few kilometers with center being the victim sites.
It was also defined another kind of zone called restriction zone. The definition of each type of
zone is the following [32]:
• Exclusion Zone: a geographical area defined for a frequency range and time period, within
which interferers are not allowed to have active radio transmitters;
• Protection Zone: a geographical area defined for a frequency range and time period, where
victim receivers will not be subject to harmful interference from interferers;
• Restriction Zone: a geographical area defined for a frequency range and time period,
where LSA licensees are allowed to have active radio transmitters under certain restrictive
conditions.

3.5 Regulation and Standardization

LSA, firstly known as Authorized Shared Access (ASA), was studied and developed
in Europe as a joint effort of the Electronic Communications Committee (ECC), the European
Conference of Postal and Telecommunications (Conférence Européenne des administrations des
Postes et des Télécommunications, CEPT) and the ETSI. It was introduced as an alternative for
the growing interest in spectrum sharing by the EC RSPG [33]. The EC requested the opinion of
RSPG regarding spectrum regulations and economic aspects of LSA. Part of the group response
was already quoted at the beginning of this chapter [20]. With the favorable opinion of RSPG
related to the consideration of the LSA concept as a way to offer additional spectrum access to
broadband communications, the EC issued a mandate to CEPT to develop harmonized technical
conditions for the 2300 to 2400 MHz band for the provision of wireless broadband services [34].
After this, CEPT ECC issued an ECC Recommendation on the cross-border coordination for
Mobile/Fixed Communications Networks (MFCN) and between MFCN and other services in the
interested band [35], and an ECC decision on the harmonized technical and regulatory conditions
for the use of the same band for MFCN [36]. As a response for the EC mandate [34], CEPT
published reports related to harmonized technical conditions at the 2.3 GHz band, complementing
the work done by ECC. In [37], there is the definition of some sharing scenarios with different
36

incumbents (e.g. PMSE and telemetry services) and also example of implementation of the
scenarios. Another report is more focused on studying just the PMSE use case and guidelines
for implementation of the sharing framework [32].
Despite the fact that the LSA concept was developed for the European context and
its application is a national matter, for this and any innovation to scale and succeed is essential
a global spectrum harmonization. It is possible to observe some studies of the International
Telecommunication Union Radio communication sector (ITU-R) considering LSA [38, 39, 40].
The responsible for the standardization activities of LSA is ETSI with its Techni-
cal Committee (TC) Reconfigurable Radio Systems (RRC), after EC issued a standardization
mandate on RRC [41]. In its first Technical Recommendation (TC) [27], the LSA concept is
introduced in high level with its key use case, operational features, functions and performance
requirements. The system requirements are specified in [42] and the system architecture and high
level procedures are described in [29]. The last completed specification addresses information
elements and protocols for interface between LR and LC [43].

3.6 LSA case study in Brazil

Some examples of case studies for employment of the LSA concept to the Brazilian
scenario can be devised, taking advantage of the flexibility and accessibility in spectrum access
provided by the LSA concept to improve important activities or sectors.
Brazil is very rich in natural resources, holding a very large mineral repository. The
Brazilian mining industry has a great importance worldwide, producing and exporting high
quality ores, which makes mining a very important activity for the Brazilian economy. Brazil
is very well ranked in the world for different minerals regarding its production and reserves.
Forecasts show excellent perspectives for this economic activity for the next decades [44].
The importance of the mining industry makes the development of this activity crucial
for Brazilian economy growth. In the current globalized world, to face competition, the industry
must be in constant development so that the productivity is maximized. The Industry 4.0 is
the concept used for the following industrial revolution that is about to happen and which was
defined in Germany, one of the world top competitive manufacturing industries. This concept is
expected to improve the “industrial processes involved in manufacturing, engineering, material
usage and supply chain and life cycle management” [45].
The key feature of Industry 4.0 and the enabler of such improvements is what has
37

been called the smart factory, which is a factory that assists people and machines in performing
their tasks through the awareness of the physical and virtual world. This awareness is allowed
thanks to a network compatible equipment called Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS) supplied with
sensors and actuators, which monitor physical industrial processes, helping to decentralize
decisions. In the smart factories, these CPSs are interconnected using the concept of IoT, so the
industry is a network of automated machines and people, with the possibility of some activities
being controlled remotely by the latter [46].
Regarding the automation process envisioned by Industry 4.0, the wireless factory
automation is recently drawing more interest than the wired one, since the former presents
attractive advantages, e.g. low installation and maintenance cost, higher flexibility.
One main challenge of wireless factory automation is its requirements regarding
communications latency and reliability. Industrial applications like packaging machines need
very strict requirements (latency less than 1 ms and block error probability around 10−8 or
10−9 ) [47]. Such services with very rigorous requirements, mainly in respect to latency and
reliability, were defined by International Telecommunication Union (ITU) as Ultra-Reliable and
Low-Latency Communications (uRLLC) [48].
In recent years, there were some advances in wireless technologies for factory
applications, e.g. WirelessHART, ISA 100.11a, Industrial WLAN [49]. However, these solutions
together with other proprietary ones operate mostly on unlicensed spectrum, and, hence, there
are no QoS guarantees, since there is interference from other services using the shared band.
The employment of the Industry 4.0 concept to the mining industry in Brazil is a
process that needs to occur in order to keep this sector competitive in the world market [50],
and the application of the LSA framework concept is a good approach to address the challenges
mentioned previously. The LSA band would be made available to the mining companies with
QoS guarantees, since this is a key feature of the exclusive licensing basis of this concept. Despite
that, this solution facilitates the granting of spectrum license to the companies, in comparison
with the traditional bidding process, which happens not so often and has quite expensive bids.
The flexibility of LSA is another advantage for this case study. The definition of the
sharing framework by the stakeholders facilitates that the conditions of the parts are met. For
example, a mining company would require the spectrum just for a specific part of the country,
for a certain time and with a particular bandwidth size.
The interference that one service could generate on another is an issue that needs to
38

be considered carefully, since the interference management is made using data that is present
at the LSA repository (e.g., incumbent location, maximum Effective Isotropic Radiated Power
(EIRP)) together with a propagation model. Since the mining sites are very particular, with a
irregular relief and big depressions, the propagation model is very different from the ones already
studied and available in the literature. Therefore, it represents a critical part for which a certain
importance must be given.
Using this approach, all the stakeholders are contemplated. The financial investment
of the mining company would be addressed to the incumbent. The LSA licensee would have the
access to the licensed spectrum with the QoS guarantees that it needs. The advantage for Anatel
would be a more efficient use of the spectrum, alleviating, in this sense, the spectrum “scarcity”
problem.
Figure 6 depicts a possible architecture for the described case study. The FSS is
considered the incumbent user, sharing its 3.5 GHz band through the LSA concept. Anatel
manages a database with the spectrum access information according to the information provided
by FSS. A mining company contacts Anatel for new spectrum access. Anatel checks its database
and grants spectrum access to the mining company. The mining company is free to use the LSA
spectrum for its smart factory.
Regarding the financial exchange that could occur, the FSS receives money from
Anatel for making the spectrum of the former (or part of it) available to be exploited through the
LSA concept. Finally, a mining company pays directly Anatel for additional spectrum, without
the need to take part of spectrum auctions.
This case study could also be implemented through the SAS concept, since both
LSA and SAS are quite similar. The possible advantage of using SAS for this case study is the
fact that both band and service are the same already considered in the SAS use case. Despite
that, the sensing mechanism of the SAS system would solve the previously mentioned problem
of the propagation model for mining sites.
39

Figure 6 – Example of a possible LSA system architecture for the case study.

Source: Created by the Author


40

4 CAPACITY AND INTERFERENCE EVALUATION IN LTE/LSA NETWORK

For the assessment of an LTE network on which the concept of LSA is applied,
a simulator at the physical layer level was developed. The next sections make an overview
of LTE/PMSE and describe the scenario considered in the simulator, as well as concept and
parameters used. Finally, the obtained results are presented and analyzed.

4.1 LTE overview

The cellular networks are currently at the 4G, evolving since the First Generation
(1G) with growing data rates both in downlink and uplink, thanks to the development of new
technologies. The LTE was launched as a project in 2004 by 3GPP as result of the redesign
of both radio and core network of the Third Generation (3G) technology, Universal Mobile
Telecommunications System (UMTS) [51].
LTE is sometimes considered a 3.9G system [52], since the term 4G remains unde-
fined. ITU has developed a framework of standards (International Mobile Telecommunications
(IMT) system) for mobile telephony, in order to support the development of standards for global
mobile communications. It has started with the IMT-2000, also referred as 3G, and evolving
for the next generation of standards, known as IMT-Advanced, with improved technical and
operational criteria, for instance, the target throughput for IMT-Advanced is 100 Mb/s in a high
mobility environment and 1 Gb/s in a stationary environment. It is seen further in this chapter
that LTE does not satisfy this and other technical requirements set by 3GPP for IMT-Advanced
systems. Since the term 4G is usually applied by mobile operators to the IMT-Advanced
technologies, 3.9G is also used to refer to LTE and other evolved 3G technologies [53].
3GPP standards are organized as releases and the first standard of this group related
to LTE is the release 8. The main objective of LTE is to provide high throughput, low latency
and all-Internet Protocol (IP) radio access network optimized to support flexible bandwidth.
The LTE network architecture is simpler than the one of 3G networks. This is due
to the elimination of circuit-switched services, eliminating the mobile switching center. This
architecture is divided into radio network and core network.
The LTE radio network is called Evolved UMTS Terrestrial Radio Access Network
(E-UTRAN) and consists of Evolved NodeBs (eNBs), which are base stations that provide user
and control plane protocol terminations towards the User Equipment (UE). The interconnection
41

between eNBs is made through the X2 interface. The base stations are also connected to the
core network, which is called Evolved Packet Core (EPC) 1 through the S1 interface. Finally,
the communication between eNB and UE is made wirelessly by the Uu interface. Figure 7
summarizes the E-UTRAN architecture just described [54].

Figure 7 – E-UTRAN architecture.


E-UTRAN

X2
eNB eNB

X2 X2

EPC
Uu S1
EU eNB
Source: Created by the Author

The main design targets of LTE are the following [55]:


• Downlink peak throughput of 100 Mb/s for downlink and 50 Mb/s for uplink over a
20 MHz bandwidth;
• Communication with terminal moving in high speed (up to 500 km h−1 );
• Cell coverage of 5 km when performance is met (Otherwise, up to 100 km of coverage);
• Scalable bandwidths.
LTE air interface uses Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access (OFDMA)
and Single Carrier Frequency Division Multiple Access (SC-FDMA) as multiple access schemes
for downlink and uplink, respectively. It supports both Time-Division Duplex (TDD) and
Frequency-Division Duplex (FDD) for link direction separation. Other important concepts
introduced in LTE are adaptive link adaptation, time-frequency scheduling and MIMO antenna
systems.
1 The core network is out of scope of this work, hence it is not further described.
42

4.1.1 Long-Term Evolution Advanced (LTE-A) and Carrier Aggregation

In order to comply with the IMT-Advanced requirements, 3GPP developed its


Release 10 with major features referred as LTE-A. The main objective of the enhancements of
LTE-A is cost reduction and throughput improvement in cell edge [52].
Among the new functionalities brought by LTE-A, carrier aggregation is the more
relevant for this work.
Carrier aggregation is a simple way to increase the individual throughput by increas-
ing the channel bandwidth. This concept does not mean to increase the maximum bandwidth of
LTE, 20 MHz, instead it makes possible to aggregate the capacity of several individual carriers.
It should be noticed that the carriers that are aggregated don’t necessarily need to be in adjacent
bands, actually they can belong to different LTE bands. Further details can be found in [56].

4.2 PMSE overview

PMSE applications, as the name says, can be Programme Making related, for exam-
ple, the making of a programme for broadcast, the making of a film, etc; and Special Events
related, for example, large cultural, sport, entertainment festival coverages.
PMSE refers to a variety of different services, i.e. SAP/SAB, ENG/OB and ap-
plications used in meetings, conferences, cultural and educational activities, trade fairs, local
entertainment, sport, religious and other public or private events for perceived real-time presenta-
tion of audiovisual information [57].
The definition of each of those acronyms are the following [57]:
• SAP are related to activities in the making of “programmes”, e.g. film making, adver-
tisements, concerts and other activities not initially intended for broadcasting to general
public;
• SAB are related to activities of broadcasting industry carried out in the production of their
program material;
• ENG is related to the collection of video and/or audio by wireless cameras and/or micro-
phones with radio links to the news room and/or to the portable tape or other recorders;
• OB is related to the temporary provision of programme making facilities at the location of
on-going news, sport or other events, lasting from a few hours to several weeks.
The definitions of SAP and SAB are not mutually exclusive, hence SAP/SAB is gen-
43

erally used to refer to the whole variety of services. Similarly, the term ENG/OB is considered.
There is a variety of PMSE applications which can be divided in a total of seven
categories [57]:
• Radio camera (line-of-sight/non-line-of-sight): Handheld or otherwise mounted camera
with integrated or Clip-on transmitter, power pack and antenna for carrying broadcast-
quality video together with sound signals over short-ranges line-of-sight/non-line-of-sight;
• Miniature camera/links: Very small transmitter and miniature camera for specialist action
shots, e.g. helmet cam, covert assignments, UAV, etc. Can be body worn or covert
assignments;
• Portable video link: Small transmitter, for deployment over greater ranges, typically up to
2 km;
• Mobile air-to-ground video link: Video transmission system employing radio transmitter
and receivers mounted on helicopters, airships or other aircraft.(includes repeaters and
relays);
• Mobile vehicular video link (including ground-to-air): Video transmission system employ-
ing radio transmitter mounted in/on motorcycles, racing motorbikes, pedal cycles, cars,
racing cars or boats. One or both link terminals may be used while moving;
• Temporary point-to-point video links: Temporary link between two points (e.g. part of
a link between an OB site and a studio or network terminating point), used for carrying
broadcast quality video/audio signals. Link terminals are mounted on tripods, temporary
platforms, purpose built vehicles or hydraulic hoists. Two-way links are often required.
For sharing and compatibility studies, these categories can be grouped and reduced to
four other categories: cordless camera link, portable video link, mobile video link and temporary
point-to-point video links.
The category that is studied in this work is the cordless camera link, since it is the
category with the most related work in the literature. In [58], interference measurements are
performed for spectrum sharing under the LSA concept between LTE network and cordless
camera in the 2300 to 2400 MHz band. A coexistence study between broadband wireless systems
and other services in the 2300 to 2400 MHz band for co-channel and adjacent channel case,
including cordless camera link and LTE network, is done in [59]. According to the latter work,
the coexistence between cordless camera link and LTE system is feasible in adjacent and alternate
channel case, since the required separation distance between the services is moderate. For the
44

co-channel case, additional interference mitigation mechanisms are necessary for operation in
the same area and time.
Cordless camera category includes radio camera (line-of-sight) and radio camera
(non-line-of-sight), this service is normally used by a cameraman to transmit video and audio
from transmitter in a handheld camera to an outside broadcasting vehicle at short distances (up
to 500 m). Characteristics of the cordless camera transmitter and receiver can be found in [57].
Figure 8 depicts an example of the cordless camera link scenario.

Figure 8 – Cordless camera link scenario.

Source: Created by the Author

4.3 Scenario Description

The simulation scenario consists of an LTE network on which the concept of LSA is
applied to extend its total network capacity. In this case, the considered primary user is a PMSE
application, particularly cordless camera service, and the secondary user is the LTE network
itself.
The main goal of the simulator is to perform an LTE resource allocation, considering
that an additional band coming through the LSA concept is aggregated to the LTE licensed band.
Furthermore, the simulator also outputs capacity results of the secondary users and interference
values of primary ones. Hence, the simulation runs at the physical layer level only and higher
layer level procedures are neglected.
In this simulation, the LTE network operates at LTE FDD band 7 (Uplink: 2500 to
2570 MHz, Downlink: 2620 to 2690 MHz) with a bandwidth of 10 MHz in each link direction.
The LTE cellular deployment is composed of 19 hexagonal cells with one sector per cell.
The wrap-around technique is employed to avoid boundary effects [60], see Figure 9 for the
representation of the grid. In each cell site center, there is one LTE eNB equipped with a
45

single omni-directional antenna. A fixed number of LTE UEs (also equipped with a single
omni-directional antenna) are distributed randomly over each cell site.

Figure 9 – Representation of a grid with 19 hexagon cells wrapped around.


Grid with Wrap Around

3000 11
11 12 10
12 10 13 3 9
13 3 9 4 2
2000 4 2 14 1 8
14 1 8 5 7
5 7 15 6 19
15 6 19 16 18 11
1000 16 18 11 17 12 10
Y-coordinate (meters)

11 17 12 10 13 3 9
12 10 13 3 9 4 2
13 3 9 4 2 14 1 8
0 4 2 14 1 8 5 7
14 1 8 5 7 15 6 19
5 7 15 6 19 16 18
15 6 19 16 18 11 17
-1000 16 18 11 17 12 10
17 12 10 13 3 9
13 3 9 4 2
4 2 14 1 8
-2000 14 1 8 5 7
5 7 15 6 19
15 6 19 16 18
16 18 17
-3000 17

-4000 -3000 -2000 -1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000


X-coordinate (meters)

Source: Created by the Author

It is assumed that in each cell site, there is a fixed number of cordless camera links,
composed of transmitter and receiver, which operate in the 2300 to 2400 MHz band. This service
agreed in sharing its resources through the LSA concept and expects to be protected against
interference coming from LSA licensees.
The representation of a single cell for the described scenario with primary and
secondary users is depicted in Figure 10.
Figure 11 represents a cluster of 19 hexagonal cells with two LTE UEs and one
cordless camera link extracted from the simulator.
46

Figure 10 – Representation of a cell for the simulated scenario. Blue dashed arrows represent
signals of interest and red solid arrows represent interfering signals.

Source: Created by the Author

4.3.1 Primary and secondary users operation

As it was previously exposed in section 4.2, it is unfeasible to both primary and


secondary users coexist in the same band at the same time, hence a separation frequency is
considered between the operating frequency of PMSE and the one possibly used by the LTE
network through the LSA concept (LSA operating frequency). It is assumed that, when available,
the additional LSA bandwidth is aggregated to the LTE network licensed bandwidth through
carrier aggregation mechanism, which, for simplicity, is just seen as a summation of bandwidths
in the simulator.
Since the primary and secondary users operate in adjacent channels, emission masks
are considered for both PMSE [61] transmitter (see Figure 12a) and eNB [62] (see Figure 12b),
in order to compute the power that leaks in adjacent channels from primary and secondary trans-
missions, respectively and vice-versa. This leakage occurs immediately outside the transmission
bandwidth. It is termed as Out-of-band (OOB) emission, and it results from the modulation pro-
cess [63]. The emission mask defines the permissible OOB emission outside the bandwidth [64].
Due to the operation in adjacent bands, the simulator considers three different bands:
the LTE licensed band, PMSE application band, and the LSA band used by the LTE network
47

Figure 11 – A cluster with 19 cells with two LTE UEs and one cordless camera link.

Secondary RX
Primary RX
1000 Primary TX
11
Secondary TX

12 10

500
13 3 9
Y-coordinate (meters)

4 2

0
14 1 8

5 7

-500
15 6 19

16 18

-1000
17

-1500 -1000 -500 0 500 1000 1500


X-coordinate (meters)

Source: Created by the Author

whenever possible. Figure 13 presents these three different bands and an illustration of the
emission mask of eNB.

4.3.2 Physical Resource Blocks and Resource Allocation

Only the downlink scenario is simulated, i.e. transmission from eNB to UE, where
the LTE technology employs OFDMA technique. OFDMA enables multiple UEs to receive
information at the same time in different “subchannels”, which are termed Physical Resource
Blocks (PRBs). PRB is a frequency-time block composed of 12 consecutive subcarriers spaced
by 15 kHz (total bandwidth of 180 kHz) that lasts for one slot, 0.5 ms.
The PRBs are scheduled for different UEs by an eNB scheduler at each two slots,
1 ms, which is the time duration of a transmission on the radio link, referred as Transmission
Time Interval (TTI). This activity is called resource allocation and 3GPP specifications do not
define scheduling algorithms to be used in LTE network, hence it is the role of the mobile
operator to define the scheduling algorithm used in its network [65].
48

Figure 12 – Emission mask considered for the simulation.


(a) PMSE Transmitter Emission Mask.
-100

-102

-104

-106

-108
Unwanted Emission (dBc)

-110

-112

-114

-116

-118

-120

-122

-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25


Frequency (MHz)

(b) eNB Emission Mask.


-100

-102

-104

-106
Unwanted Emission (dBc)

-108

-110

-112

-114

-116

-118

-120

-122
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25
Frequency (MHz)

Source: Created by the Author

Figure 13 – Example of an emission mask and interference in a victim receiver in a given adjacent
frequency. Three different bands are considered in the simulator.
Power

PMSE
Bandwidth
Transmitter
Emission Mask
Leakage Power
on PMSE RX
LTE
Bandwidth

...
Frequency Separation
Op. Freq Frequency
Op. Freq LSA Op. Freq
LSA
PMSE Bandwidth LTE

Source: Created by the Author


49

The scheduling is divided into two classes: channel independent and dependent
scheduling. The channel independent scheduling tries to share the radio resources to the users
with justice and equity and assumes the channel to be time invariant and error-free. Examples of
algorithms of this class are: First-in-First-out (FIFO) and Round Robin (RR). Channel dependent
scheduling takes advantage of the Channel-State Information (CSI) reported periodically by UEs
to eNB, to estimate the channel quality experienced by each UE. With this information, the
scheduler may try to maximize QoS or it may try to provide fairness among UEs. Examples of
algorithms of this class are: Maximum Rate (MR) and Proportional Fairness (PF) [66].
Three different algorithms are considered in the simulator: RR, MR, and PF.

4.3.2.1 Round Robin algorithm

In the RR algorithm, the scheduler assigns the resources to the users in a cyclic
fashion without considering the channel conditions as previously mentioned, this is an example
of a channel independent algorithm. This algorithm is the one that shares the resources with
highest fairness, however it has a poor performance regarding cell throughput [67].

4.3.2.2 Maximum Rate

In the MR algorithm, the maximum overall throughput is maximized by assigning


the PRB n to the UE j? with highest instantaneous data rate R̂nj on that resource. This can be
expressed as

n o
j? = argmax R̂nj (4.1)
j

The drawback of this algorithm is its unfairness in resource sharing among UEs,
especially the ones located at cell edge [66].

4.3.2.3 Proportional Fair

The PF algorithm seeks a trade-off between spectral efficiency and fairness among
UEs. This is done by assigning at each TTI t the PRB n to the UE j? according to
( )
R̂nj (t)
j? = argmax (4.2)
j T j (t)
50

where R̂nj (t) is the estimated instantaneous throughput, and T j (t) is the past average throughput
up to the TTI t, calculated by

 
1 1
T j (t + 1) = 1 − T j (t) + R j (t) (4.3)
NPF NPF

where NPF is the fairness window and R j (t) is the throughput of UE j over all PRBs at TTI t.
Comparing to the MR algorithm, PF inserts fairness in resource sharing among
UEs, since the denominator in (4.2) accounts for UEs experiencing bad channel conditions, and
consequently increases their priority. Therefore, there is a compromise between fairness and
overall capacity [66].

4.3.2.4 Jain’s Index

The fairness of a scheduling algorithm is an important feature that can be measured


quantitatively. This can be performed through the calculation of the so-called Jain’s Index. The
following equation can be used for this purpose [68]

!2
N
∑xj
j=1
f (x) = N
, xj ≥ 0 (4.4)
N ∑ x j2
j=1

where N is the number of users that the resources are being shared with and x j is the number of
resources allocated to user j.
The “equality” of resource allocation is measured by this index. It varies from 0 to 1,
with 0 meaning poor fairness, and 1 meaning complete justice in resource distribution.

4.3.3 Propagation channel considerations

The environment considered in the cell sites is the urban microcell. The propagation
channel consists of distance-dependent path loss and log-normal shadowing. Please note that fast
fading is not considered, because the envisioned scenario has low mobility (PMSE applications
in music festival or sport events) and multipaths are few (also due to Single Input Single Output
(SISO) configuration), which results in a small delay spread. Despite from that, it is assumed that
all received signals are long-term averaged, which makes the fast fading effect negligible [69].
51

The path loss is based on the COST 231 Walfish-Ikegami [70]. The correlated shadowing
approach was considered, hence shadow fading values observed in two points of the network
close to each other have some level of correlation. In this approach, the coverage area is divided
into square grids. For each grid point, there is a shadow fading value associated to it. The
smallest separation between two grid point is called decorrelation distance, hence the shadow
fading samples of the grid points are uncorrelated. To obtain the shadow fading value of a point
in the network, a linear interpolation is performed with the shadow fading values of the grid
points of the square grid in which the point is located [71]. Figure 14 illustrates the shadowing
distribution inside a cell.

Figure 14 – Correlated shadowing inside a cell (values in dB).


300

20

200

10

100
Y-coordinate (meters)

-10

-100

-20

-200

-30
-300
-300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300
X-coordinate (meters)

Source: Created by the Author

4.3.4 Signal-to-Inference-plus-Noise Ratio

The LTE network works with full frequency reuse, i.e. all its bandwidth is available
for allocation in each cell, yielding inter-cell interference dominated channel conditions.
The total transmit power from an eNB is divided among the allocated PRBs equally,
hence the transmit power in the PRB n of the eNB c is denoted as pc,n . Furthermore, h j,c,n
represents the desired channel between the eNB c and UE j at the PRB n, and h j,c0 ,n represents
the interfering channel between the eNB c0 and UE j at the PRB n. Perfect CSI is assumed to be
available at the UEs.
The Signal-to-Interference-plus-Noise Ratio (SINR) in the PRB n of UE j is given
52

by

|h j,c,n |2 pc,n
γ j,c,n = C
(4.5)
∑ |h j,c0 ,n |2 pc0 ,n + η2
0
c 6=c
c0 =1

where C is the quantity of cells (and, also for this simulator, the quantity of eNBs) in the LTE
network, and η 2 is the average power of additive white Gaussian noise.
For the purpose of the resource allocation, it should be mentioned that the SINR,
which indicates the channel quality in a given TTI, considers an estimation of interference, since
its actual value depends on resource allocations that happen in the very same TTI. For the
simulator, the estimation is given by the value of interference obtained in the previous TTI.
Note that (4.5) suffers a slight change for the LSA band. It is considered additionally
the interference coming from the primary users of the spectrum in OOB emissions from the
transmitters, as given by

|h j,c,n |2 pc,n
γ j,c,n = C K
(4.6)
∑ |h j,c0 ,n |2 pc0 ,n + ∑ |h j,k,n |2 pk,n + η2
0
c 6=c k=1
c0 =1

where K is the number of cordless camera links, h j,k,n is the interfering channel between the UE
j and the cordless camera link transmitter k at the PRB n, and pk,n is the power transmitted in an
OOB emission of the cordless camera link transmitter k at the PRB n.

4.3.5 Adjusted Shannon capacity formula

LTE uses fast link adaptation, which means that according to the CSI of the link,
different modulation and coding schemes are used, which has a direct impact in the capacity. For
simplicity, the simulator considered an adjusted Shannon capacity formula, in order to obtain
capacity values from SINR, given by [72]

 
SINR
S(bits/s) = BWeff ρ log2 1 + (4.7)
SINReff

where BWeff and SINReff adjust the bandwidth and SINR of the Shannon capacity formula for
the LTE. ρ is a correction factor.
53

4.3.6 Primary user protection

One of the most important things related to coexistence studies is the definition of
the interference protection criterion to be used. This criterion defines, under specific conditions,
a relative or absolute interference level at a victim receiver, such that the performance capabilities
of the radiocommunication system are not significantly compromised. It can be characterized by
an absolute interference power level (I), interference-to-noise power ratio (I/N), or carrier-to-
interfering signal power ratio (C/I) [73].
The interference protection criterion used in this work is the I/N, since there are
coexistence studies of cordless camera and LTE network which use this criterion [59]. With a
established value of I/N it is possible to derive the maximum interference that a primary user
receiver can receive without having its service compromised, through the value of its thermal
noise (N).
In order to protect the primary user, the total interference coming from the leaked
power of secondary transmitters using the LSA band is computed. It is considered that the
harmful interference coming from other cordless camera links is handled by the own service by
time multiplexing, for instance. Hence, primary-to-primary interference is not considered in the
total primary user interference calculations, and this value for the cordless camera link receiver r
is given by

C
Ik = ∑ |hc,k |2 p†c (4.8)
c=1

where hc,k is the interfering channel between the eNB c and the cordless camera link receiver k,
and p†c is the power transmitted in an OOB emission of the eNB c. It is also assumed perfect
CSI availability at the cordless camera link receivers.
It is assumed that whenever possible the LTE network uses the LSA bandwidth,
since the limit of maximum interference in all primary user receivers (K) is respected. If the limit
is surpassed, LTE eNB must turn off its LSA capabilities immediately, so the limit is satisfied.
In order to obtain which eNBs from its total number (C) must be turned-off, the following binary
linear integer optimization problem was modeled:

maximize 1CT x
x
(4.9)
subject to Ax  Imax 1K C
54

where (·)T represents the transposition operator; x is a vector of binary variables with dimension
(C × 1), wherein xc , ∀c ∈ {1, . . . ,C}, represents the eNB c LSA switched-on (xc = 1) or switched-
off (xc = 0); 1u is a vector of ones with dimension (u×1); A is a matrix with dimension (K C ×C),
wherein the element ak,c , ∀k ∈ {1, . . . , K C } and ∀c ∈ {1, . . . ,C}, represents the total interference
of the cordless camera receiver k located in the cell c, given by equation (4.8). And, finally, Imax
is the maximum acceptable interference in a cordless camera receiver obtained by the considered
interference protection criterion.
The optimization problem (4.9) tries to maximize the number of LSA switched-on
eNBs subject to the condition that every cordless camera receiver must have its maximum
acceptable interference respected (Ik ≤ Imax , ∀k ∈ {1, . . . , K C}). As the values in the optimized
variable just assume integer and binary results, and the objective function and constraints are
linear, this optimization problem is an example of a Binary Integer Linear Programming (BILP)
problem [74] and can be solved by the CPLEX solver at runtime for each LTE subframe [75].
In a more practical view, there is a need for a centralized unity responsible for
gathering and processing the interference data, and for monitoring the LTE eNBs’ states (LSA
switched-on/off). The 5G concept of Cloud Radio Access Network (C-RAN) can be used for
this purpose, since it allows a centralized processing and management of network resources [76].

4.4 Simulation Environment

The simulator was implemented using a Monte Carlo method for better statistical
results. Table 4 shows some important parameters used in the simulation.

4.5 Results

In this section, the results obtained with the simulator are presented. There are some
variations in parameters for comparison analysis. The default parameters are the following:
• Number of primary users: 1;
• Number of secondary users: 8;
• Scheduling algorithm: proportional fair;
• Interference-to-Noise ratio (I/N): -6 dB;
• Operating frequency separation between primary and secondary users: 15 MHz.
Figure15 shows two Cumulative Distribution Functions (CDFs) of the average
55

Table 4 – Simulation Parameters.


Parameter Value/Comment Ref.
Cellular layout 19 hexagonal cells w/ wrap around [60]
Cellular environment Urban-microcell [70]
Inter-site distance 500 m [70]
LTE Link direction Downlink -
Frequency reuse factor 1 -
LTE carrier frequency 2650 MHz [56]
PMSE carrier frequency 2305 MHz [57]
LTE/LSA/PMSE application bandwidth 10 MHz [56] [57]
eNB transmit power 38 dBm [77]
PMSE transmit power 20 dBm [57]
Number of LTE UEs per cell 4, 8, 12, or 16 -
Number of PMSE links per cell (K) 1, 2, or 3 -
Path loss model Cost231 Walfisch-Ikegami [70]
Shadowing model Correlated [71]
Shadowing std. dev. 10 dB [70]
Bandwidth efficiency (BWeff ) 0.83 [72]
SINR efficiency (SINReff ) 1.6 [72]
Correction factor (ρ) 1 [72]
Op. freq. separation (LSA – PMSE) 5, 10, 15 or 20 MHz -
Interference-to-Noise Ratio (I/N) 0, -3, -6 or -9 dB -
Scheduling algorithms RR, MR, or PF -
Simulation time 1s -
Number of Monte Carlo iterations 150 -

capacity of secondary users for the case in which the LSA concept is used in the LTE network
(red curve) and the case it is not (blue curve). The simulation parameters of Table 4 have been
considered, as well as the default parameters discussed in the beginning of this section. It is
noticeable the improvement brought by the employment of the LSA concept just looking the
right shift of the red curve related to the blue one. While in the case “LSA OFF”, 50% of the
secondary users have an average capacity greater than approximately 2.85 Mb/s, in the “LSA
ON” case this value is approximately 4.29 Mb/s, which represents a gain of 50.2%.
Considering again the default parameters, with exception of the I/N factor, which
was varied with values contained in Table 4, five different CDFs of average capacity of secondary
users are depicted in Figure 16. The leftmost curve is just a benchmark, representing the “LSA
OFF” case. As expected, all the “LSA ON” cases present a better performance in terms of
secondary user capacity. As the restriction becomes less strict (increasing in I/N factor), the
CDF curve shifts more to the right, having a better performance. This is what is expected, since a
less strict protection of primary users implies in more LSA switched-on eNBs, and, consequently,
56

Figure 15 – CDF of secondary users’ average capacity for default parameters case.
1

0.8

0.6
50.2%

0.4

0.2
LSA OFF
LSA ON
0
2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Average capacity (Mbps)
Source: Created by the Author

more bandwidth available for the LTE network.


Figure 17 is similar to the previous result, but the I/N factor is maintained constant
in its default value, and the operating frequency separation between primary and secondary users
is varied with the values of Table 4. For this case, as the frequency separation increases, the
performance in terms of secondary users capacity improves. The improvement is expected, since
with a larger frequency separation, less power is leaked from the secondary transmitter through
the emission mask to the primary user receiver, implying less interference on the latter ones,
and, consequently more LSA switched-on eNBs and more LSA bandwidth available for the LTE
network. It can be noticed that the result for the 5 MHz separation case is very close to the “LSA
OFF” case, this is given by the fact that there is an overlap of both primary and secondary user
bands due to its proximity (in Figure 13, when the LSA operating frequency is 5 MHz closer to
PMSE operating frequency, due to their bandwidth, 10 MHz, there is an overlap between the
bands), which proves that the co-channel coexistence between cordless camera and LTE network
is unfeasible in moderate distances, as it was said before.
The next result is presented in Figure18. For this result, the interference-to-noise
ratio and number of primary users are varied according to the values specified in Table 4, and the
remaining ones are considered as default. The graphic is the average interference on primary
57

Figure 16 – CDF of secondary users’ average capacity for default parameters case varying the
interference-to-noise ratio.
1

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3
LSA OFF
0.2 I/N = 0 dB
I/N = -3 dB
0.1 I/N = -6 dB
I/N = -9 dB
0
2 3 4 5 6
Average capacity (Mbps)
Source: Created by the Author

users against the different values of I/N factors with three curves, each one representing a
different number of primary users. Considering the variation in the I/N factor, all three curves
behave as expected, less strict interference protection criterion (increase in the I/N factor),
implies in a higher interference suffered on the primary users. It is possible to notice also
that as the number of primary users increases, the interference on the primary users decreases,
this is given by the fact that more primary users means more users to be protected against
interference, since there is a fixed I/N ratio, this implies in a higher probability of switching off
LSA capabilities in eNBs, which in turn implies in less interference on primary users.
The result presented in Figure 19 is similar to the previous one, except that the
operating frequency separation between primary and secondary users is varying (considering
Table 4), instead of the I/N factor. The variation of average interference with number of primary
user is still according what is expected as it was explained in the previous result. The interference
in the primary users seems to increase with the frequency separation, but for larger separations
the variation starts to decrease. This is noticed for the curve of one primary user curve, where the
value of average interference in 20 MHz is smaller than the one in 15 MHz. This behavior can
58

Figure 17 – CDF of secondary users’ average capacity for default parameters case varying the
frequency separation.
1

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3
LSA OFF
0.2 FS: 5 MHz
FS: 10 MHz
0.1 FS: 15 MHz
FS: 20 MHz
0
2 3 4 5 6
Average capacity (Mbps)
Source: Created by the Author

be understood by the fact that as the frequency separation increases the amount of power that
leaks decreases, which has two opposite effects, it can increase the average interference, since it
implies in more LSA switched-on eNBs, and it can decrease the average interference, since it
implies also in a smaller interfering power of the primary users transmitters. It can be noticed
also a missing point in the three primary users curve in the 5 MHz frequency separation. This is
because a scenario with a very small separation frequency and a greater number of primary users
doesn’t allow any LSA switched-on eNBs without surpassing the maximum interference limit,
implying that the average interference on primary users in this case is −∞, or 0 in linear scale.
Figure 20 presents a graphic of Jain’s index value against number of secondary
users. All the parameters are considered as the default, except the number of secondary users
and scheduling algorithms, which vary according to the values established in Table 4. The
curve representing the MR algorithm works as expected, having the worst fairness among all
the algorithms, and with decreasing fairness for increasing number of secondary users. Since
it prioritizes just the user with best channel condition, more users means lower fairness. The
RR case also behaves as expected, it presents the fairest results. The PF is the more anomalous
59

Figure 18 – Average interference on primary users × interference-to-noise ratio for different


number of primary users.
-120

-125
Average Interference (dBm)

-130

-135

-140
1 Primary User
2 Primary Users
3 Primary Users
-145
-9 -6 -3 0
Interference to Noise Ratio (dB)
Source: Created by the Author

Figure 19 – Average interference on primary users × frequency separation for different number
of primary users.
-125

-130
Average Interference (dBm)

-135

-140

-145
1 Primary User
2 Primary Users
3 Primary Users
-150
5 10 15 20
Frequency Separation (MHz)
Source: Created by the Author
60

Figure 20 – Jain’s index × number of secondary users for different scheduling algorithms.
0.8

0.7
RR Alg
PF Alg
MT Alg
0.6
Jain's Index

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2
4 8 12 16
Number of Secondary Users
Source: Created by the Author

curve. It was expected a curve below the RR case and above the MR one, but this is not observed,
the PF curve gets close to the RR curve. A possible explanation of this behavior is the slow
channel variation. As it was considered, the fast fading effects are neglected in the propagation
channel, and path loss and shadowing effects represent slow time variations in the channel, hence
it implies that the numerator in the objective function of (4.2) doesn’t change often, which makes
the priority dependent of the denominator, which depends basically on the fact of whether the
user has been scheduled previously or not. Therefore, it behaves approximately similar to the
RR case.
The result presented in Figure 21 is very similar to the previous result, the only
modification is in the y-axis of the graphic, which changed the Jain’s index values to average
secondary users capacity. As expected, the best performance in terms of capacity is obtained by
the MR algorithm, followed by PF, with RR as the worst result. All the curves behave similarly,
with an increase in the number of secondary users, the average capacity results decreases. This
is expected, since there will be more users to share the total bandwidth, meaning less capacity.
Figure 22 presents a graphic of average secondary users capacity against I/N factor.
The quantity of primary users and I/N factor are varied according to Table 4 and the remaining
61

Figure 21 – Average secondary users’ capacity × number of secondary users for different
scheduling algorithms.
12
RR Alg
PF Alg
10 MT Alg
Average capacity (Mbps)

0
4 8 12 16
Number of Secondary Users
Source: Created by the Author

parameters are considered as default. The results show a better performance in terms of capacity
for the case with less primary users. Besides that, it can be noticed that the performance also
increases as the interference protection becomes less strict, as it was already explained in the
analysis made for the results in Figure 16. The “LSA OFF” case curve was also plotted as a
benchmark. The maximum gain is for the case with 0 dB of I/N factor and one primary user,
with a value of approximately 2.18 Mb/s. When assuming the I/N ratio mostly considered in the
literature, -6 dB and one primary user, there is still a considerable gain of 1.44 Mb/s.
The graphic of Figure 23 is similar with the one previously presented, except that
the y-axis is changed to be the average percentage of LSA switched-on eNBs. This result is just
to corroborate the relation between the percentage of LSA switched-on eNBs and the capacity
performance. As it can be seen, both present curves with similar slopes. Variation in this
percentage goes from almost 0% in the worst case (three primary users and -9 dB of I/N factor)
to 63% in the better case (one primary user and 0 dB of I/N factor).
Figure 24 presents a graphic similar to the one in Figure 22, with exception that
the I/N factor is considered constant in its default value and the frequency separation is varied
according to the values in Table 4. The results show a better performance in terms of capacity
62

Figure 22 – Average secondary users’ capacity × interference-to-noise ratio for different number
of primary users.
5.5
1 Primary User
2 Primary Users
5 3 Primary Users
LSA OFF
Average capacity (Mbps)

4.5

3.5

2.5
-9 -6 -3 0
Interference to Noise Ratio (dB)
Source: Created by the Author

for the case with less primary users. Besides that, it can be noticed that the performance also
increases as the frequency separation also increases, as it was already explained in the analysis
made for the results in Figure 17. The “LSA OFF” case curve was also plotted as a benchmark.
The maximum gain is for the case with 20 MHz of frequency separation and one primary user,
with a value of approximately 2.39 Mb/s. In the worst case, three primary users and 5 MHz of
frequency separation there is no apparent gain.
The graphic of Figure 25 is similar with the one previously presented, except that
the y-axis is changed to be the average percentage of LSA switched-on eNBs. This result is to
once again corroborate the relation between the percentage of LSA switched-on eNBs and the
capacity performance. Again, it is noticed that both graphics present curves with similar slopes.
Variation in this percentage goes from almost 0% in the worst case (three primary users and
5 MHz of frequency of separation) to 72% in the better case (one primary user and 20 MHz of
frequency of separation).
63

Figure 23 – Average percentage of LSA switched-on BSs (%) × interference protection criterion
for different number of primary Users.
70
1 Primary User
2 Primary Users
60
Average Percentage of Switched On BSs

3 Primary Users

50

40

30

20

10

0
-9 -6 -3 0
Interference to Noise Ratio (dB)
Source: Created by the Author
64

Figure 24 – Average secondary users’ capacity × frequency separation for different number of
primary users.
5.5
1 Primary User
2 Primary Users
5 3 Primary Users
LSA OFF
Average capacity (Mbps)

4.5

3.5

2.5
5 10 15 20
Frequency Separation (MHz)
Source: Created by the Author
65

Figure 25 – Average percentage of LSA switched-on BSs (%) × frequency separation for differ-
ent number of Primary Users.
80
1 Primary User
70 2 Primary Users
Average Percentage of Switched On BSs

3 Primary Users

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
5 10 15 20
Frequency Separation (MHz)
Source: Created by the Author
66

5 CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK

Significantly more spectrum and much wider bandwidth than what is available today
will be needed in order to reach the targets of future mobile broadband systems. It is visible that
the fixed frequency allocation scheme has resulted in an underutilization of the spectrum both
spatially and temporally.
The spectrum sharing concept is an innovative option to solve the spectrum “scarcity”
problem by promoting a more efficient use of this resource. Brazil still has a lot to advance in
the adoption of the spectrum sharing concept, as there were very few regulatory actions in that
direction. TVWS regulation studies are already expected to happen by 2018. Nevertheless, there
is still no visible effort related to the employment of the LSA concept in the Brazilian scenario.
This work is focused on the LSA concept and an overview of this concept, architec-
ture and regulatory/standardization is presented. Besides that, it proposes a case study of the
employment of LSA to develop the Brazilian mining industry, giving a better perspective on how
this European approach can be addressed for the Brazilian scenario.
Simulation results have also been presented in this work, which intend to evaluate
the employment of the LSA concept in LTE network in terms of secondary users capacity and
primary users interference.
According to the analysis performed here, all results behave as expected in theory,
confirming the simulator design. The unfeasibility of co-channel coexistence of cordless camera
and LTE network in moderate distances was corroborated in the results. A gain of up to 2.2 Mb/s
of secondary users capacity is possible with less strict protection requirements, and up to
2.5 Mb/s with large frequency separation between primary and secondary operating frequency.
The interference protection is guaranteed by the I/N criterion and decreases with the increase in
the number of primary users. Furthermore, it also increases with a less strict I/N criterion and
has a smaller increase with frequency separation.
It is expected that this work will help in bringing trust and attention of the Telecom-
munications sector to the benefits and gains in the employment of the LSA concept. It is also
expected to bring the attention of Anatel and other Brazilian stakeholders to the application of
the LSA concept and the benefits it could bring not only for the telecommunications sector, but
also for the whole country economy.
As future work, the following can be envisioned:
• To implement uplink direction in the simulator: as it just implemented the downlink part,
67

it is also very important to see the behavior of the system for the contrary link direction;
• To implement three sector cell and higher frequency reuse: in the simulator, it was
considered just the one sector cell with full frequency reuse. It is possible to increase
the number of sectors, in order to have a more realistic LTE network, with more total
capacity per cell, and to increase the frequency reuse to alleviate the total interference in
the secondary users;
• To considerate fast fading: in the simulator the fast fading effects were neglected, which
has an impact on channel variation speed. A possible future work would be modeling this
effect, so the simulator is more realistic.
• Try different primary protection criteria: this work considered only the I/N factor. There
are other ways to protect the primary and this could be researched and implemented in the
simulator.
• Try different resource allocation algorithms: besides the considered three simple schedul-
ing algorithms (RR, MR, and PF). Different scheduling algorithms could be tried, with
different objectives, for instance considering an allocation of LSA bandwidth where the
interference in the primary is smaller;
• Implement the simulation in testbed for Quality of Experience (QoE) assessment: in
order to have a better notion of the gain and benefits LSA brings and to attest the primary
users protection, this simulation approach could be designed in a real testbed and QoE
assessment could be performed, along with primary interference measurements. In Finland,
there is a real LSA testbed, where this experiment could be performed [78].

5.1 Acknowledgment

The research leading to these results received funding from the European Commis-
sion H2020 programme under grant agreement no. 688941 (FUTEBOL), as well as from the
Brazilian Ministry of Science, Technology, Innovation, and Communication (MCTIC) through
RNP and CTIC.
68

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1 CISCO. White paper, Cisco Visual Networking Index: Global Mobile Data Traffic Forecast
Update, 2016 – 2021. 2017.

2 ERICSSON. Ericsson Mobility Report. 2017.

3 MUECK, M. D.; SRIKANTESWARA, S.; BADIC, B. White paper, Spectrum Sharing:


Licensed Shared Access (LSA) and Spectrum Access System (SAS). 2015.

4 ANDREWS, J. G. et al. What will 5G be? IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in


Communications, v. 32, n. 6, p. 1065–1082, jun. 2014. ISSN 0733-8716.

5 RFB (Ed.). DOU - Seção 1, Resolução no 321, de 27 de setembro. 2002.

6 CAVE, M.; DOYLE, C.; WEBB, W. Essentials of Modern Spectrum Management. New
York, USA: Cambridge University Press, 2007. ISBN 978-0-511-33551-8.

7 HOSSAIN, E.; NIYATO, D.; HAN, Z. Dynamic Spectrum Access and Management
in Cognitive Radio Networks. New York, USA: Cambridge University Press, 2009. ISBN
978-0-11-58032-1.

8 TELECO. 4G: Frequências e licitações: Licitação de frequências de 700 MHz para 4G da


Anatel. 2016. Disponível em: <https://goo.gl/svtjZc>.

9 MAZAR, H. Radio Spectrum Management: Policies, Regulations and Techniques. Chichester,


United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons, 2016. ISBN 978-1-118-51179-4.

10 FCC. Revision of Part 15 of the Commission’s Rules to Permit Unlicensed National


Information Infrastructure (U-NII) Devices in the 5 GHz Band, ET Docked No. 13-49. [S.l.],
2013.

11 MATYJAS, J. D.; KUMAR, S.; HU, F. (Ed.). Spectrum Sharing in Wireless Networks:
Fairness, efficiency, and security. Boca Raton, USA: CRC Press, 2017. ISBN 978-1-4987-2635-1.

12 NASCIMENTO, M. F. S. do et al. TV White Spaces for Digital Inclusions in Brazil. Revista


de Tecnologia da Informação e Comunicação, v. 6, n. 2, p. 6–15, out. 2016. ISSN 2237-5104.

13 NOGUET, D.; GAUTIER, M.; BERG, V. Advances in opportunistic radio technologies for
TVWS. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking, v. 2011, n. 1, p. 170,
nov. 2011. ISSN 1687-1499.

14 HORVITZ, R. et al. TV White Spaces: A pragmatic approach. 1. ed. [S.l.]: ICTP-The Abdus
Salam International Centre for Teoretical Physics, 2013. ISBN 978-9295003-50-7.

15 ALEMSEGED, Y. D. et al. TV White Space Spectrum Technologies: Regulations, Standards,


and Applications. Boca Raton, USA: CRC Press, 2012. ISBN 978-1-4398-4880-7.

16 ITU-R. Definitions of Software Defined Radio (SDR) and Cognitive Radio System (CRS).
[S.l.], 2009.

17 ANATEL. Portaria No 491, de 10 de Abril de 2017. 2017.


69

18 RON, C. V. R.; MELLO, L. A. R. de S.; ALMEIDA, M. P. C. de. A spectrum sharing


proposal based on LSA/ASA for the brazilian regulatory framework. In: 2017 IEEE Wireless
Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC). [S.l.: s.n.], 2017. p. 1–6. ISSN
1558-2612.

19 PCAST President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology . Report, Realizing the
Full Potential of Government-Held Spectrum to Spur Economic Growth. 2012.

20 RSPG Radio Spectrum Policy Group. Report, Opinion on Licensed Shared Access.
RSPG13-538. 2013.

21 FCC. White Space Database Administration. Disponível em: <http://www.fcc.gov/topic/


white-space>.

22 OFCOM. TV White Space Databases. 2016. Disponível em: <https://www.ofcom.org.uk/


spectrum/spectrum-management/TV-white-space-databases>.

23 TECHNOLOGIES, C. W. RuralConnect TV White Spaces Radio. Disponível em:


<https://www.carlsonwireless.com/ruralconnect/>.

24 ECC. Licensed Shared Access (LSA), ECC Report 205. [S.l.].

25 FCC. Amendment of the Commission’s Rules with Regard to Commercial Operations in the
3550- 3650 MHz Band. [S.l.], 2015.

26 MUN, K. White paper, CBRS: New Shared Spectrum Enables Flexible Indoor and Outdoor
Mobile Solutions and New Business Models. 2017.

27 ETSI. System Reference document (SRdoc); Mobile Broadband Systems in the 2 300 MHz -
2 400 MHz band under Licensed Shared Access (LSA). [S.l.].

28 ECC. Guidance for the implementation of a sharing framework between MFCN and PMSE
within 2300-2400 MHz. [S.l.].

29 ETSI. System architecture and high level procedures for operation of Licensed Shared
Access (LSA) in the 2 300 MHz - 2 400 MHz band. [S.l.].

30 OFFICE, E. E. C. ECO Frequency Information System. Disponível em: <https:


//www.efis.dk/>.

31 ANATEL. Sistemas Interativos. Disponível em: <http://www.anatel.gov.br/institucional/


sistemas-interativos>.

32 CEPT. Report, Technical sharing solutions for the shared use of the 2300-2400 MHz band
for WBB and PMSE. CEPT Report 58. 2015.

33 RSPG Radio Spectrum Policy Group. Report, Report on Collective Use of Spectrum (CUS)
and other spectrum sharing approaches. RSPG11-392. 2011.

34 EU European Commission. Report, Mandate to CEPT to develop harmonized technical


conditions for the 2300-2400 MHZ (’2.3 GHZ’) frequency band in the EU for the provision of
wireless broadband electronic communications services. DG CONNECT/B4. 2014.
70

35 CEPT. Report, Cross-border coordination for mobile/fixed communications networks


(MFCN) and between MFCN and other systems in the frequency band 2300-2400MHz. ECC
Recommendation (14)04. 2014.

36 CEPT. Report, Harmonized technical and regulatory conditions for the use of the band
2300-2400 MHz for Mobile/Fixed Communications Networks (MFCN). ECC Decision (14)02.
2014.

37 CEPT. Report, Technological and regulatory options facilitating sharing between Wireless
broadband applications (WBB) and the relevant incumbent services/applications in the 2.3 GHz
band. CEPT Report 56. 2015.

38 ITU-R. Report, Cognitive radio systems in the land mobile service. Report M.2330. 2014.

39 ITU-R. Report, Future technology trends of terrestrial IMT systems. Report M.2320. 2014.

40 ITU-R. Report, Innovative regulatory tools to support enhanced shared use of the spectrum.
draft new Report ITU-R SM. 2014.

41 EU European Commission. Report, Standardization mandate to CEN, CENELEC and ETSI


for Reconfigurable Radio Systems. M/512 EN. 2012.

42 ETSI. System requirements for operation of Mobile Broadband Systems in the 2 300 MHz -
2 400 MHz band under Licensed Shared Access (LSA). [S.l.].

43 ETSI. Information elements and protocols for the interface between LSA Controller (LC)
and LSA Repository (LR) for operation of Licensed Shared Access (LSA) in the 2 300 MHz - 2
400 MHz band. [S.l.].

44 ENERGIA, M. de Minas e. Plano Nacional de Mineração 2030: Geologia mineração e


transformação mineral. 2011.

45 KAGERMANN, H.; WAHLSTER, W.; HELBIG, J. (Ed.). Recommendations for


implementing the strategic initiative Industrie 4.0: Final report of the industrie 4.0 working
group. 2013.

46 HERMANN, M.; PENTEK, T.; OTTO, B. Design principles for industrie 4.0 scenarios. In:
2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. [S.l.: s.n.], 2016. p. 3928–3937.
ISSN 1530-1605.

47 ASHRAF, S. A. et al. Ultra-reliable and low-latency communication for wireless


factory automation: From LTE to 5G. In: 2016 IEEE 21st International Conference on
Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (ETFA). [S.l.: s.n.], 2016. p. 1–8. ISBN
978-1-5090-1314-2.

48 JI, H. et al. Introduction to ultra reliable and low latency communications in 5G.
Computing Research Repository (CoRR), abs/1704.05565, abr. 2017. Disponível em:
<http://arxiv.org/abs/1704.05565>.

49 CHRISTIN, D.; MOGRE, P. S.; HOLLICK, M. Survey on wireless sensor network


technologies for industrial automation: The security and quality of service perspectives. Future
Internet 2010, v. 2, p. 96–125, abr. 2010. ISSN 1999-5903.
71

50 BRASIL, A. Brazil: innovation key to mining and metallurgical industry to compete abroad.
Rio de Janeiro: [s.n.], 2016. Disponível em: <https://goo.gl/EZELV2>.
51 SAUTER, M. From GSM to LTE-Advanced: An introduction to mobile networks and
mobile broadband. 2. ed. [S.l.]: John Wiley & Sons, 2014. ISBN 978-1-118-86195-0.
52 WONG, D. T. C. et al. Wireless Broadband Networks. 1. ed. Hoboken, USA: John Wiley &
Sons, 2009. ISBN 978-0-470-18177-5.
53 ITU. IMT-Advanced. 2017. Disponível em: <http://www.itu.int/net/newsroom/wrc/2012/
reports/imt_advanced.aspx>.
54 ETSI. Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA) and Evolved Universal
Terrestrial Radio Access Network (E-UTRAN); Overall description; Stage 2. [S.l.].
55 ETSI. Requirements for Evolved UTRA (E-UTRA) and Evolved UTRAN (E-UTRAN). [S.l.].
56 ETSI. Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); User Equipment (UE) radio
transmission and reception. [S.l.].
57 ECC. Characteristics of PMSE digital video links to be used in compatibility and sharing
studies. [S.l.].
58 KALLIOVAARA, J. et al. Interference measurements for licensed shared access (LSA)
between LTE and wireless cameras in 2.3 GHz band. In: 2015 IEEE International Symposium
on Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks (DySPAN). [S.l.: s.n.], 2015. p. 123–129.
59 ECC. Broadband Wireless Systems Usage in 2300-2400 MHz , ECC Report 172. [S.l.].
60 LIN, Y.-B.; MAK, V. W. Eliminating the boundary effect of a large-scale personal
communication service network simulation. ACM Trans. Model. Comput. Simul., ACM,
New York, NY, USA, v. 4, n. 2, p. 165–190, abr. 1994. ISSN 1049-3301. Disponível em:
<http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/175007.175012>.
61 ETSI. Electromagnetic compatibility and Radio spectrum Matters (ERM); Wireless
Video Links (WVL) operating in the 1,3 GHz to 50 GHz frequency band; Part 1: Technical
characteristics and methods of measurement. [S.l.].
62 ETSI. Base Station (BS) radio transmission and reception. [S.l.].
63 ITU-R. Unwanted emissions in the spurious domain. [S.l.], 2003.
64 DAHLMAN, E.; PARKVALL, S.; SKOLD, J. 4G: LTE/LTE-Advanced for Bobile
Broadband. Waltham, USA: Academic Press, 2014. ISBN 978-0-124-19985-9.
65 ELNASHAR, A.; EL-SAIDNY, M.; SHERIF, M. Design, Deployment and Performance of
4G-LTE Networks: A Practical Approach. Chichester, United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons,
2014. ISBN 978-1-118-68321-7.
66 SULTHANA, S. F.; NAKKEEERAN, R. Study of downlink scheduling algorithms in LTE
networks. Journal of Networks, v. 9, n. 12, dez. 2014.
67 KAWSER, M. T. et al. Performance comparison between round robin and proportional fair
scheduling methods for lte. International Journal of Information and Electronics Engineering,
v. 2, n. 5, set. 2012.
72

68 JAIN, R. K.; CHIU, D.-M. W.; HAWE, W. R. Technical Report, A Quantitative Measure of
Fairness and Discrimination for Resource Allocation in Shared Computer Systems.

69 DWARAKANATH, R. C.; NARANJO, J. D.; RAVANSHID, A. Modeling of interference


maps for licensed shared access in lte-advanced networks supporting carrier aggregation. In:
2013 IFIP Wireless Days (WD). [S.l.: s.n.], 2013. p. 1–6. ISSN 2156-9711.

70 3GPP. Spatial channel model for Multiple Input Multiple Output (MIMO) simulations. [S.l.],
2009. Disponível em: <http://www.qtc.jp/3GPP/Specs/25996-900.pdf>.

71 CARDIERI, P. Resource allocation and adaptive antennas in cellular communications.


Tese (Doutorado), 2000.

72 MOGENSEN, P. et al. LTE capacity compared to the shannon bound. In: 2007 IEEE 65th
Vehicular Technology Conference - VTC2007-Spring. [S.l.: s.n.], 2007. p. 1234–1238. ISSN
1550-2252.

73 NTIA. Interference protection criteria. Phase 1 - Compilation from Existing Sources. [S.l.].

74 CHINNECK, J. W. Pratical Optimization: A gentle introduction. Disponível em:


<www.sce.carleton.ca/faculty/chinneck/po.html>.

75 IBM. ILOG CPLEX Optimization Studio 12.4.0. Disponível em: <https://www.ibm.


com/support/knowledgecenter/SSSA5P_12.4.0/ilog.odms.cplex.help/refmatlabcplex/html/
cplexbilp-m.html>.

76 CHECKO, A. et al. Cloud RAN for mobile networks – a technology overview. IEEE
Communications Surveys Tutorials, IEEE, v. 17, n. 1, p. 405–426, 2015. ISSN 1553-877X.

77 3GPP. Base Station (BS) radio transmission and reception (FDD). [S.l.], 2007. Disponível
em: <http://www.arib.or.jp/IMT-2000/V740Dec09/5_Appendix/Rel5/25/25104-5d0.pdf>.

78 PALOLA, M. et al. Live field trial of Licensed Shared Access (LSA) concept using LTE
network in 2.3 GHz band. In: 2014 IEEE International Symposium on Dynamic Spectrum
Access Networks (DYSPAN). [S.l.: s.n.], 2014. p. 38–47.

Você também pode gostar