Experiment 3

Aim

To evaluate the performance of a Universal Mobile Telecommunication System

(UMTS) network with the various scenarios described below

Methodology
Qualnet simulation software was used for all simulations. Four scenarios were designed and
simulated as described below.
Scenario 1
The first scenario consisted of an HLR connected to a GGNS then to an SGSN, RNC and the two
node B. 24 nodes were connected together with node B wirelessly.
Second scenario
In the second scenario, the set up was the same as in the first except that two Node B elements
were considered and the 12 UE were connected to one node B wirelessly while the other 12 UE
were connected in a similar fashion to another wireless network with another node B.
Third scenario
In the third scenario, nodes shared the same SGSN, but 12 nodes had a different RNC and the other
12 nodes were connected likewise wirelessly through another RNC.
Fourth scenario
The last scenario the common element was the HLR so that 12 nodes were wirelessly connected
to the node B, which in turn was connected to RNC, GGSN and SGSN. The other twelve nodes
were connected likewise to different GGSN, SGSN, RNC and node B. in all the scenarios, the
parameters of the simulation are shown in Table 1 below.
Table 1: simulation parameters

Parameter Value
Simulation time 358 s
Frequency 1.8 GHZ, 1.75 GHz
Average call time 50 s
Call start time 25s
Call duration 180s

Results
This section shows the performance parameters that were considered for comparison of these different
scenarios.

Fig 1: Throughput analysis for the scenarios

It can be observed that in terms of the throughput scenario 1 have the least, whilst scenario 4
shows the highest, followed by scenario 3 and 2.

Measurement messages
 MEASUREMENT REPORT messages sent
120

100

80

60

40

20

0
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4

Fig 2: measurement report messages sent

We observe that scenario 1 has more number of measurement report messages sent. The other
three scenarios have got also most the same number of measurement report messages. This might
be because they are distributed systems, unlike the first scenario which is more centralized.
Average end to end delay

End to End delay

0.06

0.05

0.04

0.03

0.02

0.01

0
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4

Fig 3: end to end delay

From figure 3, we observe that the first scenario has the least end to end delay, while the second
scenario has the highest. One reason might be because of the increased delays incurred at the
SGSN.
Average DL radio resource
 DL radio resource
80000

70000

60000

50000

40000

30000

20000

10000

0
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4

Fig 4 average DL radio resources

Number of VLR added

Number of VLR entries added

25

20

15

10

0
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4

Fig 5 number of VLR entries added

The least VLR added are observed in scenario 4, whilst all others have number of VLR added
lying between 15 and 20

Routing area update messages received

 Number of ROUTING AREA UPDATE messages
received
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4

Fig 6: Routing area updates received

Scenario 3 configuration has more routing updates received, whilst scenario 4 have got the least.

PS domain data packets received from PLMN

PS domain data packets from my PLMN

17640
17620
17600
17580
17560
17540
17520
17500
17480
17460
17440
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4

Fig 7: PS domain data packets received

Packet switched domain data packets are received more in scenario1 and they are least received
in scenario 4.

Conclusion
In this experiment simulation of a UMTS system has been done in Qualnet environment for
different scenarios. The performance of the different network configuration has been compared
for all scenarios in terms of throughput, end to end delay, average UL and DL radio resource
allocated to node B, number of VLR entries added, number of routing area update received and
the number of PS domain packets routed to my PLMN. Different scenarios have been observed to
perform differently to each of these test metrics. Based on the resource optimization preferred,
different network configurations can be chosen.