Performance of Wi-Max receiver in presence of DS-UWB system

K. Sarfaraz, S.A. Ghorashi, M. Ghavami and A.H. Aghvami

The effect of UWB interference on a Wi-Max receiver has not been addressed in the literature. This effect is analysed and it is shown that for a realistic scenario a DS-UWB system interference will not have a destructive effect on the performance of a Wi-Max receiver.

where P( f ) is the Fourier transform of p(t). According to the FCC requirements, UWB pulses should be transferred using the 3.110.6 GHz portion of the spectrum. So, P( f ) should be shifted up to the desired frequency band with a carrier frequency fc: 1 SUWB f fS f fc S f fc g 2 6

Introduction: Wi-Max systems, based on the IEEE 802.16 standard, aim to deliver high data rates with speeds up to 75 Mbits=s to a broad geographical area [1, 2]. IEEE Working Group 802.16 is responsible for the development of the standard behind Wi-Max. For non-line-ofsight (NLOS) communication suitable for urban use, the group focussed on frequencies in the 211 GHz portion. However, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) ruling has restricted operation of UWB systems to the 3.110.6 GHz frequency range [3]. Thus, UWB systems will share the bands used by IEEE-802.16 systems and may pose a threat to a Wi-Max receiver located in their vicinity. Thus, it is vital that UWB developers ensure devices pose no threat to the operation of Wi-Max receivers. The coexistence issue of UWB systems with many narrowband systems has been investigated in the literature [4] but the effect of UWB interference on Wi-Max systems has not been addressed. Here, we analyse this issue by comparing interference produced by a UWB hot spot with threshold interference values for different modes of operation dened for Wi-Max systems. Interference thresholds: Reduction in SNR in the presence of UWB interference could be referred to as degradation (d) [5]: SNR I N UWB d SINR N 1

Therefore, the interference power received at the victim system owing to the ith UWB device would be (neglecting path loss): fh SUWB f df 7 IUWB ; i
fl

where fl and fh specify the receiver bandwidth. The UWB device signal power SRX at the victim receiver can be expressed as: SRX f Af GTX GRX SUWB f PL r 8

GTX and GRX are the transmitter and the receiver antenna gains. Af is the activity factor and represents the percentage of active UWB devices at an instant. PL(r) is path loss and r represents the distance between the UWB transmitter and the victim receiver. A free-space propagation model has been used for path-loss calculations: PL r a0 Lp r2 9

a0 (4p=l)2 and Lp represents the wall penetration loss which has been considered to be 10 dB [7]. Consider n UWB devices distributed between [rmin, rmax] in the vicinity of the victim receiver. The average transmit power density of UWB devices can be written as:
n P

STX ;i A 10

rI

i1

Such reduction in SNR will worsen system performance. With specications provided in [6] for maximum acceptable degradation, we calculate the maximum IUWB for which the performance of the victim receiver (Wi-Max receiver) is satisfactory. Using (1) we can calculate the maximum tolerable interference for different modes of Wi-Max specied in [8]. The calculations show that of the dened modes, two have lower tolerable interference levels and might be in immediate danger in the presence of UWB interference. These two modes are WirelessMAN-SCa and WirelessMAN-OFDM [8]. Maximum tolerable interference values (Imax) for these two modes are reected in Table 1.

where A represents the area of the room in which the hot spot is located and STX,i is the transmit power of the ith UWB device. The received interference by the victim receiver can be calculated as: fh Af GTX GRX rI dSdf 11 I a0 L p r 2 fl S and fh I
fl j

Af GTX GRX rI rdrdjdf a0 Lp r2 r

12

Combining (7), (8) and (12) for a Gaussian pulse shape would result in:

Table 1: Maximum tolerable interference for WirelessMAN-SCa and WirelessMAN-OFDMA modes

BW(MHz) Imax(WirelessMAN-SCa) (dBW) 1.25 2.5 10 20 141.9 138.8 132.9 129.9

 r fh p r p I1;UWB C1 ln max erf t 2p f fc 2 rmin fl

13

Imax(WirelessMAN-OFDM) (dBW) 134.5 131.5 127.0 123.9

UWB signal model and interference scenario: DS-UWB systems are analysed. The baseband signal can be written as: SUWB
1 P k1

where C1 pts2K2K=4Tc. K 2nAf GTXGRX=a0LpR2, R is the radius of c 1 the area containing the UWB devices. In the same way, for Gaussian monocycle:   r 14 I2;UWB C2 V ln max rmin where p p 2 f 2 2 V 2p erf 2pt f fc 4pt f fc e2p t f fc fh l and C2 ps2K2K=4tTc. c 2 Discussion: Using (11) and (12) we can calculate the aggregate interference of a UWB hot spot and compare it with values in Table 1 to establish whether the produced interference has any destructive effects on the Wi-Max receiver. As the receiver bandwidth of a Wi-Max device depends on regulatory laws [8], we can have different receiver bandwidths. Thus, Figs. 1 and 2 show aggregate interference curves for different values of receiver bandwidth and number of users for both of the used pulse shapes. To check the validity of (11) and (12), both analytical and simulation results are included. To plot simulation curves we rst calculated the 15

ck pt kTc

p(t) is the baseband pulse transmitted in each chip interval of duration Tc and ck is the amplitude of the transmitted chip. We have considered two different pulse shapes which are Gaussian pulse and Gaussian monocycle as shown in (3) and (4), respectively [9]: p1 t K1 et=t 2 2t P2 t K2 2 et=t t
2

3 4

K1 and K2 are constants that can be calculated using the permitted energy (specied by FCC UWB indoor mask [3]) for the pulse shape. t is the scaling factor. Power spectrum of the baseband signal is: S f s2 jP f j2 Tc 5

ELECTRONICS LETTERS 8th December 2005 Vol. 41 No. 25

transmitted power by each UWB device. Having the distance of each device from the victim receiver, received power at the receiver for each device was calculated. Aggregate interference would be the summation of all these values. The effect of carrier frequency is shown in both Figures. As the magnitude of Gaussian monocycle is smaller compared to Gaussian pulse in lower frequencies, it produces less interference for lower carrier frequencies. Gaussian pulse would outperform Gaussian monocycle for higher fc.

Conclusions: The performance of a Wi-Max receiver located in the vicinity of a DS-UWB hot spot has been evaluated. It is concluded that for different values of receiver bandwidth and the number of users the aggregate UWB interference resulting from a realistic hot spot scenario will be maintained below the threshold levels in Table 1. The two systems can coexist with the UWB system, posing no threat to the operation of the Wi-Max receiver. # IEE 2005 Electronics Letters online no: 20053598 doi: 10.1049/el:20053598 11 October 2005

K. Sarfaraz, S.A. Ghorashi, M. Ghavami and A.H. Aghvami (Kings College London, Centre for Telecommunications Research, 26-29 Drury Lane, WC2B 5RL London, United Kingdom) E-mail: khodayar.sarfaraz@kcl.ac.uk References
1 2 3 Vaughan-Nichols, S.J.: Achieving wireless broadband with Wi-Max, IEEE Comput., 2004, 37, (6), pp. 1013 Ghosh, A., et al.: Broadband wireless access with WiMax=8O2.16: current performance benchmarks and future potential, IEEE Commun. Mag., 2005, 43, (2), p. 129136 Revision of part 15 of the Commissions rules regarding ultra-wideband transmission systems, First Report and Order, Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Washington, DC, ET Docket 98-153, FCC 02-48, 2002 Hamalainen, M., et al.: On the UWB system coexistence with GSM900, UMTS=WCDMA, and GPS, IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., 2002, 20, (9), pp. 17121721 Giuliano, R., and Mazzenga, F.: On the coexistence of power-controlled ultrawide-band systems with UMTS, GPS, DCS 1800, and xed wireless systems, IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., 2005, 54, (1), pp. 6281 802.16-2004 IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks, Part 16: Air interface for xed broadband wireless access systems Ghavami, M., Michael, L.B., and Kohno, R.: Ultra wideband signals and systems in communications engineering (John Wiley & Sons Ltd)

4 5 6 Fig. 1 Comparison between aggregate interference with threshold values for WirelessMAN-SCa and WirelessMAN-OFDM for two values of fc for both pulse shapes (n 50, Af 50%) 7

Fig. 2 Aggregate interference against number of users for both Gaussian pulse and Gaussian monocycle for two values of fc (Af 50%, BW 10 MHz)

ELECTRONICS LETTERS 8th December 2005 Vol. 41 No. 25