Fulltext01 PDF

M.Sc.
Thesis report
Pico Cell Densification Study in LTE

Heterogeneous Networks
Guanglei Cong
Supervisors:
Fredric Kronestedt Ming Xiao
Systems & Technology Communication Theory Lab
Development Unit Radio School of Electrical Engineering
Ericsson AB KTH
Pico Cell Densification Study in
LTE Heterogeneous Networks Abstract
Guanglei Cong 2012-09-13
Abstract
Heterogeneous Network (HetNet) deployment has been considered as
the main approach to boost capacity and coverage in Long Term Evolu-
tion (LTE) networks in order to fulfill the huge future demand on mo-
bile broadband usage. In order to study the improvement on network
performance, i.e. capacity, coverage and user throughput, from pico cell
densification in LTE HetNets, a network densification algorithm which
determines the placement locations of the pico sites based on pathloss
has been designed and applied to build several network models with
different pico cell densities. The study has been taken based on a real
radio network in a limited urban area using an advanced Matlab-based
radio network simulator. The simulation results show that the network
performance generally is enhanced by introducing more pico cells to the
network.
Keywords: HetNet, LTE, pico cell, densification, capacity, coverage,

throughput.
ii
LTE Heterogeneous Networks Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements
This thesis was performed in System & Technology, DU Radio, Ericsson
AB in cooperation with Communication Theory lab, EES, KTH. First of
all, I would like to express my appreciation and gratitude to my super-
visor from Ericsson AB Fredric Kronestedt for his great guidance and
kindness during the last six months. I would also like to thank my
supervisor from KTH Prof. Ming Xiao who gave me a great deal of
assistance and provided me with support throughout the entire thesis. I
must express my thanks to Dirk Gerstenberger and Fredric Kronestedt
for giving me this opportunity to spend six months in Ericsson AB to
accomplish my master thesis. My sincere gratitude is also directed to my
examiner Prof. Mikael Skoglund for his time and for his help when
applying for this thesis.
I would also like to thank the following people from Ericsson AB for
their support and kindness during the last six months: Gunther Auer,
Jason Chen, Peter Björkén, Stefan Ström, Thomas Chapman and Tomas
Lundborg.
iii
LTE Heterogeneous Networks Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Abstract ............................................................................................................. ii
Acknowledgements ....................................................................................... iii
List of Figures ................................................................................................. vi
List of Tables .................................................................................................viii
Terminology .................................................................................................... ix
1 Introduction ............................................................................................ 1
1.1 Background and problem motivation ...................................... 1
1.2 Overall aim ................................................................................... 1
1.3 Scope ............................................................................................. 1
1.4 Problem statement ...................................................................... 2
1.5 Outline .......................................................................................... 2
2 Theory ...................................................................................................... 3
2.1 Heterogeneous networks in LTE............................................... 3
2.1.1 Low power nodes deployment....................................... 3
2.1.2 Cell selection ..................................................................... 5
2.2 Two packet traffic models .......................................................... 7
2.2.1 Full buffer model .............................................................. 7
2.2.2 Equal buffer model........................................................... 8
2.2.3 Comparison ....................................................................... 9
2.3 Related Tools .............................................................................. 10
2.3.1 TEMS CellPlanner .......................................................... 10
2.3.2 Elin .................................................................................... 12
2.3.3 LTE Astrid ....................................................................... 12
3 Models ................................................................................................... 14
3.1 Studied Network ....................................................................... 14
3.2 Simulation parameters.............................................................. 15
3.3 Propagation models .................................................................. 17
3.3.1 Urban model ................................................................... 17
3.3.2 ITU indoor propagation model .................................... 18
4 Implementation ................................................................................... 20
4.1 Work flow ................................................................................... 20
4.2 Pico sites densification algorithm ........................................... 21
iv
LTE Heterogeneous Networks Table of Contents
5 Results ................................................................................................... 24
5.1 Network densification .............................................................. 24
5.2 Comparison of Pico sites densification algorithms .............. 28
5.3 Comparison of RSRP and Biased RSRP ................................. 30
5.4 Network Performance .............................................................. 31
5.4.1 Capacity and Coverage.................................................. 32
5.4.2 User throughput ............................................................. 38
5.4.3 An extreme case .............................................................. 43
5.5 Comparison of pico and macro cells served area ................. 45
6 Conclusions .......................................................................................... 48
References........................................................................................................ 49
v
LTE Heterogeneous Networks List of Figures
List of Figures
Figure 2.1: Heterogeneous Network .............................................................. 3
Figure 2.2: Cell selection in 3GPP LTE HetNets ........................................... 6
Figure 2.3: Users with different radio link condition................................... 8
Figure 2.4: Average bitrate in full buffer model ........................................... 8
Figure 2.5: Average bitrate in equal buffer model ....................................... 9
Figure 3.1: Analyzed area .............................................................................. 14
Figure 4.1: Work flow ..................................................................................... 20
Figure 4.2: Flow chart of pathloss based pico sites densification
algorithm .......................................................................................................... 22
Figure 5.1: Densified networks using pathloss based pico sites
densification algorithm (chapter 4.2) ........................................................... 25
Figure 5.2: Densified networks using randomly distributed pico sites
densification algorithm (chapter 4.2) ........................................................... 26
Figure 5.3: Pathloss based pico sites densification algorithm .................. 27
Figure 5.4: Randomly distributed pico sites densification algorithm ..... 27
Figure 5.5: Uplink comparison ...................................................................... 28
Figure 5.6: Downlink comparison ................................................................ 29
Figure 5.7: Uplink comparison ...................................................................... 30
Figure 5.8: Downlink comparison ................................................................ 31
Figure 5.9: Uplink mean user throughput vs uplink subscriber capacity
............................................................................................................................ 32
Figure 5.10: Uplink cell edge user throughput vs uplink subscriber
capacity ............................................................................................................. 33
Figure 5.11: Improvement of uplink capacity ............................................ 34
Figure 5.12: Improvement of uplink coverage ........................................... 35
Figure 5.13: Downlink mean user throughput vs downlink subscriber
capacity ............................................................................................................. 36
Figure 5.14: Downlink cell edge user throughput vs Downlink
subscriber capacity.......................................................................................... 37
Figure 5.15: Improvement of downlink capacity ....................................... 37
Figure 5.16: Improvement of downlink coverage ...................................... 38
Figure 5.17: Uplink user throughput maps ................................................. 39
Figure 5.18: Improvement of uplink mean user throughput .................... 40
Figure 5.19: Downlink user throughput maps............................................ 41
Figure 5.20: Improvement of downlink mean user throughput .............. 42
Figure 5.21: Downlink geometry distribution ............................................ 42
Figure 5.22: Uplink throughput vs capacity................................................ 43
vi
LTE Heterogeneous Networks List of Figures
Figure 5.23: Downlink throughput vs capacity .......................................... 44

Figure 5.24: Average uplink utilization of pico and macro cells with the
target of 1 Mbps uplink cell edge user throughput ................................... 45
Figure 5.25: Average downlink utilization of pico and macro cells with
the target of 10 Mbps downlink cell edge user throughput ..................... 45
Figure 5.26: Pico and Macro cells served area ............................................ 46
Figure 5.27: Comparison of Pico and Macro cells served area ................. 47
vii
LTE Heterogeneous Networks List of Tables
List of Tables
Table 2.1: Guidelines for LPNs deployment [3] ........................................... 5
Table 2.2: Comparison of Full and Equal buffer model ............................ 10
Table 3.1: LPNs deployment.......................................................................... 15
Table 3.2: Simulation parameters.................................................................. 16
viii
LTE Heterogeneous Networks Terminology
Terminology
Abbreviations
LTE Long Term Evolution
LPN Low Power Node
HetNet Heterogeneous Network
3GPP 3rd Generation Partnership Project
CSG Closed Subscriber Group
RRU Remote Radio Unit
UE User Equipment
RSRP Reference Signal Received Power
RSRQ Reference Signal Received Quality
eICIC Enhanced Inter-cell Interference Coordination
TCP TEMS CellPlanner
GSM Global System for Mobile Communications
CDMA Code Division Multiple Access
WCDMA Wideband Code Division Multiple Access
CPLM Composite Pathloss Matrix
ACP Automatic Cell Planning
SINR Signal to Interference plus Noise Ratio
ABR Achievable Bitrate
MRC Maximal Ratio Combining
IRC Interference Rejection Combining
ix
LTE Heterogeneous Networks Terminology
ISD Inter Site Distance
x
LTE Heterogeneous Networks 1 Introduction
1 Introduction
1.1 Background and problem motivation
Mobile broadband usage has increased dramatically the last couple of
years due to new types of terminals such as smart phones and tablet
computers. According to [1], in 2010, wireless devices only accounted
for 37% of IP traffic; but by 2015, wireless devices is estimated to con-
sume 54% of IP traffic while wired devices will only consume 46% of IP
traffic, which means that traffic from wireless devices will exceed wired
devices.
To support the huge future demands as both the number of users and
the user demand will increase, it is essential to enhance the network
capacity and coverage. But with the knowledge that the deviation be-
tween Long Term Evolution (LTE) link level performance and Shannon
capacity is very small which limits the potential to increase spectrum
efficiency [2], forcing us to find other means to meet the future demands.
A key method to fulfill the future needs is network densification

through adding smaller low power nodes (LPNs) in traditional high
power macro nodes, namely Heterogeneous Network (HetNet), which is
expected to boost capacity and coverage beyond what is available in
current LTE networks [3].
With the knowledge that HetNet deployment has a large potential to

improve the network capacity and coverage, the influence of pico cell
densification on the network performance is obviously of large interest.
1.2 Overall aim

In order to see how effective the method of HetNet is to solve the prob-
lem of the huge future demand on network performance, the project’s
overall aim is to investigate how the network performance will be
affected by deploying more and more pico cells in the network.
1.3 Scope
The study has its focus on the impact of pico cell densification on the
network performance, the cost of the pico sites deployment is ignored;
1
LTE Heterogeneous Networks 1 Introduction
as a result, the number of pico sites in the network models that have
been built in this project might be unrealistic.
The study will be taken based on a real radio network in a limited urban
area in a dense major European city, the results might vary for different
area and cities due to different terrain features and macro sites deploy-
ment.
1.4 Problem statement

To achieve the overall aim stated in chapter 1.2, the study has an objec-
tive to respond to the following questions:
• Is it true that adding more and more pico cells will result in larger
and larger capacity and coverage?
• Is there any upper limit on how many pico cells can be added to a
dense urban macro network and still improves the network per-
formance?
To achieve this objective, it is also desired to design a strategy of pico

sites deployment:
• How should the pico sites be deployed to achieve better network

performance from capacity and coverage point of view?
1.5 Outline
Chapter 2 provides the related theory concerning some aspects of
HetNet in LTE and some tools that have been used during this thesis
work.
In chapter 3, the network model and simulation parameters of this

project are presented, in addition with a brief discussion of an indoor
propagation model which has been applied in a part of this study.
Chapter 4 describes how the network models with different pico cell
densities have been built and simulated. A pico sites densification
algorithm to decide where to place the pico sites has been designed and
is also discussed in this chapter.
In chapter 5, the simulation result of this work will be presented.
The conclusions and possible future work will be presented in chapter 6.
2
LTE Heterogeneous Networks 2 Theory
2 Theory
2.1 Heterogeneous networks in LTE
Heterogeneous network (HetNet) has been identified as a key method to
fulfill the huge future demands on mobile broadband usage as both the
number of users and the user demand will increase. In 3GPP LTE
HetNets, traditional high power macro nodes are complemented with
low power nodes (LPNs) which cover small areas and offer very high
capacity and data rates in these areas [3], as illustrated in Figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1: Heterogeneous Network
Besides simply adding LPNs to the existing macro networks, there are
some other approaches to expand network capacity and coverage as
well, such as improving macro cells by allocating more spectrum and
densifying the macro sites. Compared with these two methods, adding
LPNs performs the same in the downlink and better in the uplink [3].
These three approaches can of course be combined together to meet
higher demand.
2.1.1 Low power nodes deployment

LPNs deployment is a real challenge in HetNets, many aspects need to
be considered [3]:
• Demand: traffic volumes, traffic location, target data rates
• Supply: macro cell coverage, site availability, backhaul transmis-

sion , spectrum and integration with the existing macro network
3
• Commercial: technology competition, business models
In [3], some guidelines for LPNs deployment are provided:
• Open or closed access
Open access means LPNs are available for all subscribers to ac-
cess. Open access should be chosen for public systems deployed
by operators.
Closed access refers that LPNs belong to a Closed Subscriber

Group (CSG), that is to say access is only available for users in
CSG. Closed access is always used in user-deployed cases (by in-
dividual, enterprises).
• Indoor or outdoor deployment
Deploying indoor LPNs is suitable in cases when traffic is con-

centrated to specific indoor locations such as shopping malls.
Outdoor LPNs deployment that also covers indoor areas is pref-

erable in cases such as local traffic hotspots cover a wide area in-
cluding several buildings or the macro cells in the existing net-
works are too sparse to meet indoor service demand.
• Type of LPNs
There are several types of LPNs: Remote Radio Units (RRUs),

conventional pico nodes, relay nodes. RRUs are suitable for net-
works with low-latency and high-capacity backhaul; otherwise
stand-alone pico base stations should be preferable. Deploying
relay nodes is a preferred option for networks without wire
backhaul.
• Frequency reuse
The HetNets can be seen as composed of two layers: macro cell

layer and pico cell layer. The two layers can use different fre-
quency band or share the same band. Reusing the frequency band
of the macro cell layer for the pico cell layer is of course spec-
trum-efficient. When spectrum is scarce or capacity is the diver,
frequency should be reused. However, due to the inter-layer in-
terference, elaborate cell planning and interference management
technique is needed.
4
Table 2.1 summarizes the rules addressed above.
Choices Guidelines
Open access Operator-deployed

Access
Closed access User-deployed
Concentrated large indoor

Indoor
hotspot
Deployment
Outdoor hotspot or many smaller
Outdoor
indoor hotspot
Low-latency and high-capacity
RRU
backhaul (fiber)
Stand-alone pico base High-latency and low-capacity
Type of LPNs
stations backhaul (copper/microwave)
Relay nodes No wire backhaul
Spectrum is scarce /
Reuse macro spectrum
Capacity is driver
Frequency reuse
Separate spectrum CSG
Table 2.1: Guidelines for LPNs deployment [3]
2.1.2 Cell selection

Conventionally, cell selection is based on the downlink received signal
strength which means mobile users will connect to the site from which
the received power is strongest. For example, in 3GPP LTE, cell selection
is performed according to two parameters measured by a User Equip-
ment (UE): Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP) and Reference
Signal Received Quality (RSRQ) [4].
“Reference signal received power (RSRP), is defined as the linear av-

erage over the power contributions (in [W]) of the resource elements
that carry cell-specific reference signals within the considered meas-
urement frequency bandwidth” [4].
RSRQ is calculated based on RSRP which provides additional infor-

mation and ensures a reliable cell selection decision when RSRP is not
sufficient.
In homogeneous networks, RSRP based cell selection guarantees good

channel conditions in both downlink and uplink. But in HetNets, since
the transmission power in the downlink is different between the LNPs
and the macro nodes and this transmission power difference doesn’t
5
present in the uplink, RSRP based cell selection only guarantees good
downlink channel conditions. As illustrated in Figure 2.2: in the grey
area, the macro node is selected based on the downlink RSRP, but for
the uplink the LPN is better since the transmission power is the same
and the pathloss is lower towards the LPN [3]. That is to say, a better
cell selection for the uplink is minimum pathloss cell section [5].
Downlink RSRP cell boundary
Uplink minimum pathloss cell boundary

Biased RSRP cell boundary (RSRP + offset)
Figure 2.2: Cell selection in 3GPP LTE HetNets
As shown in Figure 2.2, the optimal cell boundary of downlink and

uplink is not identical. To solve this problem, the RSRP cell boundary of
the LPN should be extended. The most straightforward way is to extend
the RSRP cell boundary by increasing the LPN transmission power, but
this method reduces site availability since it affects the site size and the
cost [3]. Another means without increasing the output power is to add
an offset to the RSRP from the LPNs which will affect the cell selection
and increase the pico cell range – Biased RSRP cell selection [3][5][6], see
Figure 2.2.
Biased RSRP cell selection mechanism could of course improve the

uplink performance. However, it causes higher downlink interference
for users in the extended cell range area. Some interference management
techniques have been developed to solve this problem such as enhanced
Inter-cell Interference Coordination (eICIC) [7]. Without this kind of
interference management, there should be a tradeoff between downlink
and uplink performance. Biased RSRP cell selection with a modest offset
3-4dB performs the best in many cases [6].
6
2.2 Two packet traffic models

In the simulation of LTE networks, there are mainly two packet traffic
models: full buffer model and equal buffer model. These two models are
both implemented in the simulator used in this project.
2.2.1 Full buffer model

Definition of full buffer:
• Static traffic: the number of active users in the system is fixed, no

arrivals and departures;
• Infinite sessions: each active user’s session lasts forever creating

infinite data volume;
• Best effort: each active user fully utilizes the radio link.
In full buffer model, on one hand, the radio links are always utilized
since active users are fixed and last forever.
On the other hand, users with different radio conditions spend same
time in the system (infinite session), that is to say, users with poor radio
conditions generate less data. As shown in Figure 2.3, user A and B are
always sending data, as a result A and B contributes the same to the
system throughput as illustrated in Figure 2.4.
As a conclusion, full buffer model gives optimistic performance estima-

tion which may deviate from reality.
7
User A: 10 Mbps User B: 1 Mbps
Figure 2.3: Users with different radio link condition
Bitrate
average
Figure 2.4: Average bitrate in full buffer model
2.2.2 Equal buffer model

Definition of equal buffer:
• Dynamic traffic: the number of active users in the system is not

fixed, new session arrivals and complete session departures;
• Finite sessions: each active user’s session ends when all data have
been transmitted, all sessions have the same volume of finite data
to send;
• Best effort: available link bitrate is utilized.
In equal buffer model, on one hand, radio links will be idle when all
users are inactive.
8
On the other hand, users with different radio conditions have same
finite data volume to send (finite session), that is to say, users with poor
radio conditions spend more time in the system. As shown in Figure 2.3,
user A and B are sending the same volume of data, say 100 Mbits, user
A needs 10s and user B needs 100s. As a result, B contributes 10 times
more than A to the system throughput as illustrated in Figure 2.5.
As a conclusion, equal buffer model brings down the system capacity

but it is more realistic. As a result, equal buffer model is chosen for this
study and the simulation results shown in chapter 5 are all from equal
buffer model.
Bitrate
average
Figure 2.5: Average bitrate in equal buffer model
2.2.3 Comparison
Some main differences between full buffer model and equal buffer
model are listed in Table 2.2.
9
Full buffer Equal buffer

Fixed active users, no Random dynamic active users,
Queue
arrivals and departures arrivals and departures
Volume per
Infinite Finite, fixed
user
Depend on radio condition of the
Session time Infinite
user
Stability Always utilization < 100%
User arrival No arrivals e.g., Poisson arrival

Table 2.2: Comparison of Full and Equal buffer model
2.3 Related Tools

As mentioned before, the study in this project will be taken based a real
radio network in a limited urban area. To achieve this, several tools will
be used during the whole process of this project.
2.3.1 TEMS CellPlanner

In some studies of radio network, the simulations based on the calculat-
ed on-grid site locations and simplified propagation models are not
sufficient compared with the realistic site data and propagation predic-
tion. TEMS CellPlanner (TCP), a commercial cell planning tool, can be
used to export such realistic data [9].
“TEMS CellPlanner is a graphical PC-based application for design-

ing, implementing, and optimizing mobile radio networks. It assists
you in performing complex tasks, including network dimensioning,
traffic planning, site configuration, and frequency planning, and
network optimization” [10].
TCP supports multiple mobile technologies such as GSM (Global Sys-

tem for Mobile Communications), CDMA (Code Division Multiple
Access), WCDMA (Wideband Code Division Multiple Access) and
WiMax. The main features of TCP that will be used in this project are
pathloss analysis and Composite Pathloss Matrix (CPLM) analysis.
The propagation models TCP used for these analyses are [11]:
• 9999 model
• Urban model
• Okumura-Hata model
10
• Walfish-Ikegami model
Pathloss analysis in TCP is performed for each individual sector: a bin

matrix is built for each sector with the pathloss from the sector antenna
to each bin within the prediction radius set manually. And TCP gives
pathloss predictions very close to realistic data based on the inputs of
TCP such as [11]:
• Terrain data: elevation, etc.
• Land use data: buildings, trees, open area, etc.
• System data: technology, frequency, etc.
• Site data: site location, etc.
• Antenna data: height, gain, etc.
CPLM analysis in TCP merges the pathloss results from individual

sectors into a composite dataset based on the following parameters [11]
[12]:
• Max. pathloss (dB): largest pathloss which is considered to be rel-

evant and allowed for the calculation. Any pathloss higher than
this value is not included in the resulting CPLM calculation;
• Max delta pathloss (dB): largest difference between lowest and

largest pathloss values in the resulting CPLM calculation. The
lowest pathloss value is searched. Any value higher than lowest
pathloss + maximum delta pathloss is not included in the calcula-
tion;
• Max. number of cells: maximum number of cells from which the

pathloss values are considered in CPLM calculation at any one
bin.
Another useful module of TCP is Automatic Cell Planning (ACP) which

optimizes the network performance in a limited area by modifying the
parameters of the sector antennas. ACP runs under some user-defined
performance targets on coverage, quality and capacity, as well as some
user-defined configuration constraints on the sector antennas, e.g.,
constraints on power, electrical tilt, mechanical tilt and azimuth.
11
2.3.2 Elin
Elin is a program package which can be integrated with the TCP instal-
lation. Elin is used to export system data, site data and calculated prop-
agation data (see chapter 2.3.1) from TCP into some wireless network
simulators (e.g., LTE Astrid which will be introduced in the following
chapter) [9]. The exported data is stored in a so called proj mat-file
(Matlab data file) created by Elin.
The pathloss values are stored in a g-matrix in proj. The pathloss values
are sorted to have the best values of each bin in the first column of the g-
matrix, second best in the second column and so on. Another matrix,
namely cellno-matrix, with the same size of the g-matrix contains the
cell numbers corresponding to the pathloss values in the g-matrix [9].
These two matrixes together can be used by the wireless network simu-
lators to calculate received signal strength, Signal to Interference plus
Noise Ratio (SINR) and so on, and to do cell selection for each bin dur-
ing the simulation.
2.3.3 LTE Astrid

LTE Astrid is a static LTE network simulator in Matlab which conducts
Monte Carlo method [13] in the simulation. The realistic network data
exported from TCP via Elin can be analyzed with respect to capacity
and coverage by LTE Astrid.
The entire simulation in LTE Astrid comprises of several Monte Carlo

runs. Each run is a network snapshot with randomized distributed users
in the area [14]. The number and locations of the users follows the pre-
defined parameters, i.e., traffic distributions and utilization.
LTE Astrid simulates the network using RSRP based cell selection. With
LPNs deployed, the simulator should be modified to apply Biased RSRP
cell selection with an offset added to the RSRP from LPNs as discussed
in chapter 2.1.2.
The two packet traffic models, full and equal buffer models, addressed
in chapter 2.2 are both implemented in LTE Astrid. Achievable bitrate
(ABR) is the main output from LTE Astrid Monte Carlo simulation
which is the way to calculate system throughput (STP) for full and equal
buffer model:
• Full buffer model estimate: STPFB = mean( ABR) × u
12
• Equal buffer model estimate: STPEB = 1 / mean(1 / ABR ) × u
• STPFB ≥ STPEB
Here, u means utilization which defines the probability that a cell has a
user to schedule. In LTE Astrid, STP is actually calculated in a similar
but more advanced approach.
One problem in wireless network simulation is “border effects”, i.e., the

number of cells in an area might be very large which makes the simula-
tion of all the cells infeasible, but simulating a part of them would
underestimate interference for the users in the border cells. One method
to avoid this problem is called “wrap-around” which models the system
as homogeneous and connects the edges of the simulation area in a
torus fashion. But this method is not realistic in HetNets for analyzing
real networks. Another solution is to analyze a small area while simulate
a relatively larger area. The smaller area is denoted active area while the
larger one is denoted supporting area. The cells in the active area are
active cells while surrounding cells are supporting cells [14]. These two
areas should be defined in TCP by polygons in advance and network
data in the supporting area should be exported via Elin.
13
LTE Heterogeneous Networks 3 Models
3 Models
3.1 Studied Network
As mentioned before, the study will be taken based on a real radio
network in a limited urban area in a dense European city as shown in
Figure 3.1.
5
x 10
1.822
1.82
1.818
1.816
1.814
[m]
1.812
1.81
1.808
1.806
1.804
1.802
5.28 5.285 5.29 5.295 5.3 5.305

[m] 5
x 10
Figure 3.1: Analyzed area
The studied network models are built based on existing WCDMA 2.1
GHz site grid:
• Macro cells: 228 cells in total (83 sites)
• Macro inter site distance(ISD): 250-350 m
• 60% of study area is indoor area
• Macro sites average antenna height ~33 m
14
• Macro sites average antenna electrical tilt: ~5.15 deg
• Macro sites average antenna mechanical tilt: ~1.46 deg
Analyzed area:
• Area: ~1.4 km2
• Macro cells: 24 cells (9 sites)
High resolution maps are used:
• 3D building data bases
• 5x5m bin resolution
3.2 Simulation parameters

According to chapter 2.1.1, the choices of LPNs deployment in this
project are listed in Table 3.1. Lamp post deployment means the LPNs
are deployed several meters away from the buildings. And in the project,
they are deployed 3 meters away.
Access Open access
Deployment Outdoor (lamp post deployment, ~3 m)
Type of LPNs RRU
Frequency reuse Reuse macro spectrum

Table 3.1: LPNs deployment
All the results demonstrated in this report, unless otherwise indicated,

are obtained based on simulation parameters in Table 3.2.
15
Parameter Value
Carrier frequency 2.6 GHz
Bandwidth 20 MHz
Biased RSRP cell selection with 4dB
Cell selection
offset (Chapter 2.1.2)
80% of the traffic is generated from
Network
indoor area (all buildings in the
Traffic distribution
area), the rest 20% is distributed
outdoor
Utilization 1, 5, 10, 20, 30, 50, 70 , and 95 %
Packet traffic model Equal buffer model
Output power 60 W
Average antenna height ~33 m
Average antenna gain ~16 dBi
Macro Sites ~5.15o (Electrical tilt)

Average antenna tilt
~1.46o (Mechanical tilt)
Tx/Rx 2 Tx/2 Rx
Maximal Ratio Combining (MRC) in
Diversity combining
uplink
Output power 5W
Antenna height 5m
Antenna gain 12 dBi
Pico Sites Antenna half power beam 63o (Horizontal)
width (HPBW) 28o (Vertical)
Tx/Rx 2 Tx/2 Rx directional antenna
Diversity combining MRC in uplink
Max output power 21 dBm
Min output power -40 dBm
Antenna height 1.5 m
UE Antenna gain -1 dBi

Tx/Rx 1 Tx/2 Rx omni antenna
Body loss 3 dB
Interference Rejection Combining
Diversity combining
(IRC) in downlink
Table 3.2: Simulation parameters
16
3.3 Propagation models

3.3.1 Urban model
As addressed in Chapter 2.3.1, there are several propagation models
which are implemented in TCP. Since this study will be taken in an
urban environment, the urban model is the one which will be mainly
used for pathloss analysis.
In an urban environment, radio wave propagation has two dominant

paths which are over the rooftops and along the street. The first path
dominants when the UE is far from the site, while the second path
dominants when the UE is near to the site [15].
The urban model is valid under the following conditions [10][15]:
• Frequency from 450 MHz up to 2200 MHz;
• Receiving antenna at distance to the base station antenna from 0

m up to (at least) 50 km;
• Base station antenna heights between 5 m and 60 m and antennas

placed below as well as above rooftops;
• Large receiving antenna height from 1.5 m up to 5 m.
The urban model consists of three wave propagation algorithms [15]:
• Half-screen model: calculates propagation above the rooftop and

generates pathloss Labove;
• Recursive micro cell model: calculates propagation between

buildings, i.e. along the street, and generates pathloss Lbelow;
• Building penetration model: calculates propagation from an out-

door base station antenna to an indoor UE and generates pathloss
Linside;
The urban model pathloss is expressed as:
Lurban = min( Labove , Lbelow )
17
As mentioned before, the radio waves propagation has two dominant

paths and the received signal strength is the sum of both. In most situa-
tions, one of the paths will dominate, so Lurban which takes the minimum
is justified [15].
The building penetration model pathloss is determined by [15]:
Linside = Loutside + Lw + d sα
in which
Loutside is the pathloss from the base station antenna to a point just
outside the external wall;
Lw is the penetration loss through the external wall;
ds is the distance inside building [m];
α is the building penetration slope [dB/m].
In this project, Lw=12 dB and α = 0.8 dB/m.
3.3.2 ITU indoor propagation model

ITU (International Telecommunication Union) indoor propagation
model estimates the pathloss of radio propagation in the indoor envi-
ronments. This model is applicable to frequency from 0.9 up to 5.2 GHz
and to buildings with 1 to 3 floors [8].
According to ITU indoor propagation model, the indoor propagation

pathloss is [8]:
Lindoor = 20 log f + N log d + Pf (n) − 28 ,
in which,
f is the transmission frequency [MHz];
d is the transmission distance [m];
N is the distance power loss coefficient;
Pf(n) is the floor loss penetration factor;
n is the number of floors via transmission.
18
In this project, ITU indoor propagation model is applied in pico sites

placement algorithm which will be addressed in chapter 4.2. It is just
used for rough estimation of the pathloss from the newly added pico
site. After pico cell placement is done, the pathloss will be calculated in
TCP.
Since only rough estimation is needed, the floor loss penetration factor
Pf(n) is ignored here. And the distance power loss coefficient N is chosen
to be 28.
Taking into account of the exterior wall loss Lwall=12 since the pico sites
will be placed outdoor, the total pathloss estimation can be expressed as:
L = Lindoor + Lwall = 20 log f + 28 log d − 16
19
LTE Heterogeneous Networks 4 Implementation
4 Implementation
4.1 Work flow
4 pico cells/macro cell
.
.
.
Desity
Elin New Elin

TCP Project Pico Sites Cells Project LTE
TCP
Project densification Astrid
ACP
(WCDMA) (Matlab) (Matlab)
Simulation
Results
Performance
Evaluation
Figure 4.1: Work flow
The whole project process is organized as Figure 4.1:
1. Export Elin project of the original network with macro cells only
from TCP;
2. Based on the Elin project, densify the network with new pico sites
in Matlab using the pico sites densification algorithm which will
be discussed in chapter 4.2. Network densification should be
done with several pico cell densities;
3. Import the new pico sites to the original TCP project, run ACP to
optimize the network and export Elin projects of the networks af-
ter densification;
4. Run LTE Astrid for the networks with different pico cell densities;
5. Evaluate simulation results.
20
4.2 Pico sites densification algorithm

As mentioned in chapter 1.4, how should the pico sites be deployed to
achieve better network performance is of the interest of this project as
well, a pico sites densification algorithm based on pathloss is designed.
Briefly speaking, the core of the algorithm is as following:
1. Find the indoor bins with worst pathloss;
2. Find the closest outside-wall bin;
3. Find an outdoor bin 3 meters away from this outside-wall bin

(lamp post deployment);
4. Place the pico site in this outdoor bin and point the sector anten-
na to the worst pathloss indoor bin.
The details about how the algorithm works are illustrated in Figure 4.2:
1. Find the worst pathloss indoor bin based on the first column of
the g-matrix from the Elin project file exported from TCP;
2. Find the closest outside-wall bin to this indoor bin, then find an
outdoor bin 3 meters away from this outside-wall bin;
3. Check if this outdoor bin fulfills the distance constrain predefined,

minpico2pico: if not, redo the previous steps for the next worst
pathloss indoor bin; if yes, continue;
4. Place a pico site in this outdoor bin and point the antenna to the
worst pathloss indoor bin currently considered;
5. Calculate pathloss vector for the indoor bins within 100 meters to
the new pico site;
6. Compare the new pathloss vector with the first column of previ-
ous g-matrix and modify the pathloss values of the indoor bins
covered by the new pico site;
7. Check if the picodense target is fulfilled: if not, redo the previous

steps to find the next pico site position; if yes, stop searching.
21
Start
Find the worst Find the next

pathloss worst pathloss Place a pico in this
indoor bin indoor bin outdoor bin
Point the sector

Find the closest antenna to the worst
outside-wall bin pathloss indoor bin
Calculate pathloss for

the indoor bins within
Find an outdoor 100 meters to the new
bins 3 meters pico site2
away from this
outside-wall bin
Modify pathloss
values of the indoor
bins covered by the
pico site
pico2pico no
>minpico2pico1
no
picodense3 fulfilled?
yes
yes
End
1. minpico2pico: minimum distance between pico sites, a constraint to reduce

interference between pico sites.
2. Pathloss calculated based on ITU indoor propagation model.
3. picodense: pico cell density target, e.g., 4 pico cells/macro cell.
Figure 4.2: Flow chart of pathloss based pico sites densification algorithm
In this project, the parameter minpico2pico has been chosen to be 30

meters. This might not be a perfect choice. And the parameter picodense
has been chosen to be 4, 8, 12, 16 and 20 in order to build network mod-
els with different pico cell densities; an extreme case with picodense
being 40 has also been studied.
In the following chapter, the network performance will be compared

between the network where pico sites are placed using this pathloss
22
based algorithm and the network where pico sites are placed randomly.
In the randomly distributed algorithm, the pico sites are also deployed
outdoor (lamp post deployment), but the placement positions are ran-
domly selected without the constraint of the parameter minpico2pico.
23
LTE Heterogeneous Networks 5 Results
5 Results
In this chapter, the results of pico sites densification will be shown
followed by the simulation results for the network models with different
pico cell densities.
5.1 Network densification

Figure 5.1 and Figure 5.2 illustrates the densified networks: the results
of the pathloss based pico sites densification algorithm are shown in
Figure 5.1 while the results of randomly distributed algorithm are
presented in Figure 5.2. Compare these two figures, it can be seen that
some of the pico sites in Figure 5.2 are very close to each other since
there is no constraint on the minimum distance between pico sites
(minpico2pico) in the randomly distributed algorithm.
In Figure 5.1 and Figure 5.2, only network models with pico cell density
up to 20 picos/macro are shown since the sites in the 40 picos/macro case
are too dense and won’t be very clear to be shown on the map here.
24
Macro only 4 picos/macro cell
8 picos/macro cell 12 picos/macro cell
Figure 5.1: Densified networks using pathloss based pico sites densification
algorithm (chapter 4.2)
25
Macro only 4 picos/macro cell
Figure 5.2: Densified networks using randomly distributed pico sites densification
algorithm (chapter 4.2)
26
Figure 5.3 shows the average cell density (per km2) and average ISD of
the networks where pico sites are placed using the pathloss based algo-
rithm, while Figure 5.4 shows the average cell density and ISD of the
networks where pico sites are placed randomly. Here one extreme case
with pico density to be 40 picos/macro is also illustrated. As shown in
these two figures, the average cell density presents no large difference;
however the ISD of the pathloss based algorithm is longer since there is
a constraint on the minimum distance between pico sites (minpico2pico)
in this algorithm.
Average cell number per km2 Inter site distance [m]

700 350
305
600 579 300
500 250
Average cell number [/km2]
400 200
ISD [m]
303
300 150
251
110
200 191 100 86
129 70
60 55
100 74 50 38
18
0 0
0 4 8 12 16 20 40 0 4 8 12 16 20 40
Pico cell density (picos/macro) Pico cell density (picos/macro)
Figure 5.3: Pathloss based pico sites densification algorithm
Average cell number per km2 Inter site distance [m]

700 350
616 305
600 300
500 250
Average cell number [/km2]
400 200
ISD [m]
299
300 150
258
200 177 100 93
126 65
53 48
100 70 50 40
27
18
0 0
0 4 8 12 16 20 40 0 4 8 12 16 20 40
Figure 5.4: Randomly distributed pico sites densification algorithm
27
5.2 Comparison of Pico sites densification algorithms

In order to choose a better pico sites densification algorithm for the main
parts of this project, in this chapter the network performance is com-
pared between the pathloss based algorithm and the random one.
Figure 5.5 and Figure 5.6 show the user performance (y-axis) versus
capacity (x-axis) for both uplink and downlink. Two types of user per-
formance measures are used: mean and 10% worst user throughput. In
this project, the cell edge user throughput is defined as the 10th percen-
tile of the user throughput in the analyzed area.
Uplink indoor Uplink outdoor

30 50
4 picos/macro(Pathloss based) 4 picos/macro(Pathloss based)
4 picos/macro(Random) 45 4 picos/macro(Random)
25 12 picos/macro(Pathloss based) 12 picos/macro(Pathloss based)
40
12 picos/macro(Random) 12 picos/macro(Random)
Mean user throughput [Mbps]

35
20 20 picos/macro(Random) 20 picos/macro(Random)
30
15 25
20
10
15
10
5
5
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200 250
Subscriber capacity [GB/month/subscriber] Subscriber capacity [GB/month/subscriber]

3.5 40
3
Throughput 10% worst uers [Mbps]
30
2.5 20 picos/macro(Pathloss based) 20 picos/macro(Pathloss based)
25
2
20
1.5
15
1
10
0.5 5
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200 250
Figure 5.5: Uplink comparison
As illustrated in Figure 5.5, the two pico sites densification algorithms

result in almost the same uplink performance for lower pico cell densi-
ties, e.g., 4 picos/macro. That is to say, for low pico cell densities the
uplink performance is mainly related to the number of cells in the net-
work rather than the position of cells. However for higher pico cell
densities, e.g. 20 picos/macro, the pathloss based algorithm performs
better than the random one according to Figure 5.5. As a conclusion, for
the uplink, the advantage of the pathloss based algorithm compared
28
with the random one becomes clearer for higher pico cell densities. The
difference between the algorithms increases with pico cell density.
Downlink indoor Downlink outdoor

80 120
12 picos/macro(Pathloss based) 100 12 picos/macro(Pathloss based)
60

50
40 60
30
40
20
20
10
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

35 100
30
80
70
60
20
50
15
40
10 30
20
5
10
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Figure 5.6: Downlink comparison
Figure 5.6 illustrates the downlink performance comparison. It is obvi-

ous that the pathloss based algorithm results in better performance than
the random one on the downlink.
29
5.3 Comparison of RSRP and Biased RSRP

According to the results in chapter 5.2, the pathloss based pico sites
densification algorithm will be chosen for the following simulation and
discussion.
As shown in Figure 5.7 and Figure 5.8, biased RSRP cell selection with
4dB offset presents a better improvement than RSRP based cell selection
on both uplink and downlink performance. But according to some
previous studies, biased RSRP cell selection with higher offset will
degrade the downlink performance.

30 50
4 picos/macro(RSRP+4dB) 4 picos/macro(RSRP+4dB)
4 picos/macro(RSRP) 45 4 picos/macro(RSRP)
25 12 picos/macro(RSRP+4dB) 12 picos/macro(RSRP+4dB)
40
12 picos/macro(RSRP) 12 picos/macro(RSRP)
35
20 20 picos/macro(RSRP) 20 picos/macro(RSRP)
30
15 25
20
10
15
10
5
5
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200 250

3.5 40
3
30
2.5 20 picos/macro(RSRP+4dB) 20 picos/macro(RSRP+4dB)
25
2
20
1.5
15
1
10
0.5 5
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200 250
Figure 5.7: Uplink comparison
30

80 120
70 4 picos/macro(RSRP) 4 picos/macro(RSRP)
12 picos/macro(RSRP+4dB) 100 12 picos/macro(RSRP+4dB)
60

50
40 60
30
40
20
20
10
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

35 100
30
80
12 picos/macro(RSRP)
12 picos/macro(RSRP)
25 20 picos/macro(RSRP+4dB) 20 picos/macro(RSRP+4dB)
70
60
20
50
15
40
10 30
20
5
10
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Figure 5.8: Downlink comparison
5.4 Network Performance

Based on the comparisons in chapter 5.2 and 5.3, the following simula-
tion results are obtained from the network models where pico sites are
placed using the pathloss based algorithm, and biased RSRP cell selec-
tion with 4dB offset has been applied during the simulation.
In this chapter, the uplink and downlink performance for the indoor and
outdoor users will be analyzed separately.
31
5.4.1 Capacity and Coverage

As illustrated in Figure 5.9 and Figure 5.10, for the uplink, with the same
target of mean user throughput or the same target of cell edge user
throughput, the subscriber capacity keeps increasing with pico cell
densification.
Uplink indoor (RSRP+4dB offset) Uplink outdoor (RSRP+4dB offset)
30 50
Macro only Macro only
4 picos/macro 45 4 picos/macro
25 8 picos/macro 8 picos/macro
40
12 picos/macro 12 picos/macro

35
30
15 25
20
10
15
10
5
5
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200 250
Uplink all area (RSRP+4dB offset)

35
Macro only
4 picos/macro
30
8 picos/macro
12 picos/macro
25 16 picos/macro
20 picos/macro
20
15
10
0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Subscriber capacity [GB/month/subscriber]
Figure 5.9: Uplink mean user throughput vs uplink subscriber capacity
32

3.5 40
3

30
2.5 16 picos/macro 16 picos/macro
25
2
20
1.5
15
1
10
0.5 5
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200 250
Uplink all area (RSRP+4dB offset)

5
Macro only
4.5 4 picos/macro
8 picos/macro
4
12 picos/macro
16 picos/macro
3.5
20 picos/macro
3
2.5
1.5
0.5
0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Figure 5.10: Uplink cell edge user throughput vs uplink subscriber capacity
Figure 5.11 illustrates one example of the improvement of uplink capac-

ity: with the same target of 1 Mbps uplink cell edge user throughput,
uplink capacity improves with pico cell densification. For the network
with pico cell density less than 4 picos/macro, the cell edge throughput
can never reach 1 Mbps, thus the capacity is shown to be 0.
33
Uplink cell edge throughput=1Mbps, RSRP+4dB offset

40
Uplink subscriber capacity [GB/month/subscriber]
35
30
25
20
15
10
0
0 4 8 12 16 20
Pico cell density (picos/macro)
Figure 5.11: Improvement of uplink capacity
From Figure 5.10, it is also possible to see that with the same target of
uplink capacity, the cell edge user throughput grows with densification,
that is to say the uplink coverage of the network has been improved. An
example is shown in Figure 5.12 with a target of 3.1
GB/month/subscriber uplink capacity, the improvement of cell edge
user throughput is significant especially for the indoor users which
presents an exponential growth manner. For the uplink, pico cell densi-
fication benefits the indoor users much more than the outdoor users
from the coverage point of view.
34
Uplink indoor, Capacity=3.1GB/month/subscriber, RSRP+4dB offset Uplink outdoor, Capacity=3.1GB/month/subscriber, RSRP+4dB offset
3.5 40
3 35
Cell edge throughput [Mbps]

30
2.5
25
2
20
1.5
15
1
10
0.5 5
0 0
0 4 8 12 16 20 0 4 8 12 16 20
Uplink all area, Capacity=3.1GB/month/subscriber, RSRP+4dB offset

5
4.5
4
3.5
2.5
1.5
0.5
0
0 4 8 12 16 20
Figure 5.12: Improvement of uplink coverage
According to Figure 5.13 and Figure 5.14, the same result with the
uplink can be drawn for the downlink. Compare Figure 5.15 with Figure
5.11 and Figure 5.16 with Figure 5.12, the enhancement of the downlink
capacity and coverage from pico cell densification is not as significant as
the uplink capacity and coverage. Furthermore, the capacity in Figure
5.15 seems to increase linearly; and the increase of cell edge user
throughput in Figure 5.16 slows down with higher pico cell densities
which indicates an upper limit.
35
Downlink indoor (RSRP+4dB offset) Downlink outdoor (RSRP+4dB offset)

80 120
60

50
40 60
30
40
20
20
10
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Downlink all area (RSRP+4dB offset)

80
Macro only
70 4 picos/macro
8 picos/macro
12 picos/macro
60
16 picos/macro
20 picos/macro
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Figure 5.13: Downlink mean user throughput vs downlink subscriber capacity
36

35 100
30
80

70
60
20
50
15
40
10 30
20
5
10
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Downlink all area (RSRP+4dB offset)

40
Macro only
35 4 picos/macro
8 picos/macro
12 picos/macro
30
16 picos/macro
20 picos/macro
25
20
15
10
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Figure 5.14: Downlink cell edge user throughput vs Downlink subscriber capacity
Downlink cell edge throughput=10Mbps, RSRP+4dB offset

150
Downlink subscriber capacity [GB/month/subscriber]
100
50
0
0 4 8 12 16 20
Figure 5.15: Improvement of downlink capacity
37
Downlink indoor, Capacity=7.8GB/month/subscriber, RSRP+4dB offset Downlink outdoor, Capacity=7.8GB/month/subscriber, RSRP+4dB offset
35 100
90
30
80

25 70
60
20
50
15
40
10 30
20
5
10
0 0
0 4 8 12 16 20 0 4 8 12 16 20
Downlink all area, Capacity=7.8GB/month/subscriber, RSRP+4dB offset

40
35
30
25
20
15
10
0
0 4 8 12 16 20
Figure 5.16: Improvement of downlink coverage
5.4.2 User throughput

From Figure 5.9 and Figure 5.10, it can be seen that both indoor and
outdoor users’ uplink throughput is improved when more pico cells are
added to the network.
With the same target of 3.1 GB/month/subscriber uplink capacity, the

uplink user throughput maps for the networks with different pico cell
densities are shown in Figure 5.17. As can be seen, there is some notice-
able improvement from the original case to the 4 and 8 picos/macro
cases; after that, the throughput improvement is not very clear accord-
ing to the throughput maps.
38
Uplink Capacity=3.1GB/month/subscriber, 0 picos/macro Uplink Capacity=3.1GB/month/subscriber, 4 picos/macro

(Mbps)
>10
5-10
1-5
0.5-1
0.25-0.5
0-0.25
0-0

(Mbps)
>10
5-10
1-5
0.5-1
0.25-0.5
0-0.25
0-0

(Mbps)
>10
5-10
1-5
0.5-1
0.25-0.5
0-0.25
0-0
Figure 5.17: Uplink user throughput maps
Figure 5.18 illustrates the average uplink user throughput within the
analyzed area. It can be seen that, the gain for indoor users in general is
larger than for outdoor users.
39
Uplink indoor, Capacity=3.1GB/month/subscriber, RSRP+4dB offset Uplink outdoor, Capacity=3.1GB/month/subscriber, RSRP+4dB offset
30 50
45
25
40

35
20
30
15 25
20
10
15
10
5
5
0 0
0 4 8 12 16 20 0 4 8 12 16 20
Uplink all area, Capacity=3.1GB/month/subscriber, RSRP+4dB offset

35
30
25
20
15
10
0
0 4 8 12 16 20
Figure 5.18: Improvement of uplink mean user throughput
From Figure 5.13 and Figure 5.14, it can be seen that both indoor and
outdoor users’ downlink throughput is improved when more pico cells
are added to the network.
Figure 5.19 shows the downlink user throughput maps with the same
target of 7.8 GB/month/subscriber downlink capacity. It is obvious that
the improvement is significant from the reference case to the 4 pi-
cos/macro case. This dramatic increase of mean user throughput can
also be noticed in Figure 5.20. After 4 picos/macro, the enhancement is
not so noticeable. As illustrated in Figure 5.21, the downlink geometry
keeps being strengthened with the increase of pico cell density, but the
increase slows down with higher density.
40
Downlink Capacity=7.8GB/month/subscriber, 0 picos/macro Downlink Capacity=7.8GB/month/subscriber, 4 picos/macro

(Mbps)
>30
20-30
10-20
5-10
1-5
0-1
0-0

(Mbps)
>30
20-30
10-20
5-10
1-5
0-1
0-0

(Mbps)
>30
20-30
10-20
5-10
1-5
0-1
0-0
Figure 5.19: Downlink user throughput maps
41
Downlink indoor, Capacity=7.8GB/month/subscriber, RSRP+4dB offset Downlink outdoor, Capacity=7.8GB/month/subscriber, RSRP+4dB offset
80 120
70
100

60
80
50
40 60
30
40
20
20
10
0 0
0 4 8 12 16 20 0 4 8 12 16 20
Downlink all area, Capacity=7.8GB/month/subscriber, RSRP+4dB offset

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 4 8 12 16 20
Figure 5.20: Improvement of downlink mean user throughput
Geometry distribution,Downlink Capacity=7.8GB/month/subscriber, RSRP+4dB)

1
Macro only
0.9 4 picos/macro
8 picos/macro
0.8
12 picos/macro
16 picos/macro
0.7
20 picos/macro
0.6
CDF
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Geometry [dB]
Figure 5.21: Downlink geometry distribution
42
5.4.3 An extreme case

In order to answer the question in chapter 1.4: Is there any upper limit
on how many pico cells can be added to a dense urban macro network
and still improves the network performance? An extreme network
model with 40 picos/macro has been investigated, both the pathloss
based pico sites densification algorithm and the randomly distributed
algorithm have been studied; the results are shown in Figure 5.22 and
Figure 5.23.
As can been seen from the figures, for both the two algorithms, the
network keeps performing better with higher pico cell density up to 40
picos/macro. Figure 5.22 also confirms the result in chapter 5.2 which is
for the uplink the pathloss based algorithm performs better than the
random one for higher pico cell densities. The difference between the
algorithms increases with pico cell density.

35 50
30
40
35
30
20
25
15
20
10 15
10
5
5
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

9 45
8 20 picos/macro(Pathloss based) 40 20 picos/macro(Pathloss based)
7 20 picos/macro(Random) 35 20 picos/macro(Random)
6 30
5 25
4 20
3 15
2 10
1 5
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Figure 5.22: Uplink throughput vs capacity
43

80 120
60

80
50
40 60
30
40
20
20
10
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

45 100
40 20 picos/macro(Pathloss based) 90 20 picos/macro(Pathloss based)
80

70
30
60
25
50
20
40
15
30
10
20
5 10
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Figure 5.23: Downlink throughput vs capacity
Figure 5.24 illustrates the average uplink utilization of pico and macro
cells separately with the same target of 1 Mbps uplink cell edge user
throughput; while Figure 5.25 illustrates the average downlink utiliza-
tion of pico and macro cells separately with the same target of 10 Mbps
downlink cell edge user throughput.
From these two figures, it can be seen that with the target of 1 Mbps
uplink and 10 Mbps downlink cell edge user throughput, even for the
densest network model with 40 picos/macro, the average utilization of
pico and macro cells is below 50%. The probability of interference will
hence be rather low. Also, pico cells have much lower utilization than
macro cell since each pico cell covers smaller area. In the figures, the
capacity is not the same for each case since the pico cell densities are
different and the cell edge user throughput is kept the same.
44
Uplink cell edge throughput=1Mbps, RSRP+4dB offset Uplink cell edge throughput=1Mbps, RSRP+4dB offset
0.18 0.45
0.16 0.4
Average uplink utilization of macro cells

Average uplink utilization of pico cells
0.14 0.35
0.12 0.3
0.1 0.25
0.08 0.2
0.06 0.15
0.04 0.1
0.02 0.05
0 0
0 4 8 12 16 20 40 0 4 8 12 16 20 40
Figure 5.24: Average uplink utilization of pico and macro cells with the target of 1
Mbps uplink cell edge user throughput
Downlink cell edge throughput=10Mbps, RSRP+4dB offset Downlink cell edge throughput=10Mbps, RSRP+4dB offset
0.2 0.4
0.18
Average downlink utilization of macro cells
0.35
Average downlink utilization of pico cells
0.16
0.3
0.14
0.25
0.12
0.1 0.2
0.08
0.15
0.06
0.1
0.04
0.05
0.02
0 0
0 4 8 12 16 20 40 0 4 8 12 16 20 40
Figure 5.25: Average downlink utilization of pico and macro cells with the target of
10 Mbps downlink cell edge user throughput
5.5 Comparison of pico and macro cells served area

In order to see the level of pico cell densification in this project, Figure
5.26 shows the pico cells served area (green area) and the macro cells
served area (red area) separately; Figure 5.27 compares these two areas.
As can be seen from Figure 5.26 ad Figure 5.27, with an extensive num-
ber of pico cells, the macro cells will cover diminishing area. And for the
40 picos/macro case, the macro cells will run mostly idle since they
cover really small fraction of the area. This is definitely not realistic in
real networks, but this indicates that the study has reached an extreme
level with very high pico cell density but the network performance still
seems to keep being improved.
45
Pico cells Macro cells
Figure 5.26: Pico and Macro cells served area
46
5
x 10 Pico cells served area [m2], RSRP+4dB offset 5
x 10 Macro cells served area [m2], RSRP+4dB offset
14 14
12 12
Macro cells served area [km2]

Pico cells served area [km2]
10 10
8 8
6 6
4 4
2 2
0 0
0 4 8 12 16 20 40 0 4 8 12 16 20 40
Pico to macro served area ratio, RSRP+4dB offset

25
22.9016
20
Pico to macro served area ratio
15
10
6.5064
4.5243
5
3.0512
1.8487
0.91307
0
0
0 4 8 12 16 20 40
Figure 5.27: Comparison of Pico and Macro cells served area
47
LTE Heterogeneous Networks 6 Conclusions
6 Conclusions
This thesis analyzes the impact of pico cell densification on the network
performance in LTE HetNets. Pico cell densification up to around 600
cell/km2 has been investigated. The pico sites densification algorithm
based on pathloss has been proved to perform better than the randomly
distributed algorithm especially for the downlink, while for the uplink
the pathloss based algorithm performs better with higher pico cell
density. The main simulation results indicate that:
• Both the network capacity and coverage have been continuously

enhanced by introducing more pico cells to the network. From
coverage point of view, with the same capacity target, the uplink
cell edge user throughput increases dramatically especially for
the indoor users which presents an exponential growth manner.
• With the same capacity target, the average user throughput in the
analyzed area keeps being improved with pico cell densification,
but the improvement slows down with higher pico cell density.
• Generally speaking, the pico sites densification benefits the up-

link performance more than the downlink performance and bene-
fits the indoor users more than the outdoor users.
• After reaching an unrealistic case with extremely high pico cell

density, the network performance still keeps increasing. However,
except for the uplink capacity and coverage, the results indicate a
trend that the performance enhancement slows down with more
and more pico cells added.
The study has been taken based on a real radio network in a limited
urban area in a dense European city. The results might vary for different
area and cities due to different terrain features and macro sites deploy-
ment, so the results might be valid only for this study.
Due to the constraints of TCP, the pico sites in this project have all been
deployed outdoor. The indoor deployment is also of interest since the
interference between macro and pico layers will be reduced.
48
LTE Heterogeneous Networks References
References
[1] Cisco, “Cisco Visual Networking Index: Forecast and Methodolo-
gy, 2010–2015”, June 1, 2011.
[2] Mogensen, P.; Wei Na; Kovacs, I.Z.; Frederiksen, F.; Pokhariyal,
A.; Pedersen, K.I.; Kolding, T.; Hugl, K.; Kuusela, M.; , "LTE Ca-
pacity Compared to the Shannon Bound," Vehicular Technology
Conference, 2007. VTC2007-Spring. IEEE 65th , vol., no., pp.1234-
1238, 22-25 April 2007.
[3] Landström, S.; Furuskär, A.; Johansson, K.; Falconetti, L.;

Kronestedt, F.; , ” Heterogeneous networks (hetnets) – an ap-
proach to increasing cellular capacity and coverage”, Ericsson
Review, No 1, February 11, 2011.
[4] 3GPP, “Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA);

Physical layer; Measurements (Release 10)”, TS 36.214 v10.1.0,
March 2011.
[5] Landstrom, S.; Murai, H.; Simonsson, A.; , "Deployment Aspects

of LTE Pico Nodes," Communications Workshops (ICC), 2011
IEEE International Conference on , vol., no., pp.1-5, 5-9 June 2011.
[6] Parkvall, S.; Dahlman E.; Jöngren G.; Landström, S.; Lindbom, L.; ,
“Heterogeneous network deployments in LTE – the soft-cell ap-
proach”, Ericsson Review, No 2, December 28, 2011.
[7] 3GPP, “Summary of the description of candidate eICIC solu-

tions”, R1-105081, August 2010.
[8] Wikipedia, “ITU Model for Indoor Attenuation”,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITU_Model_for_Indoor_Attenuation
Retrieved 2012-05-31.
[9] Ericsson Internal User’s Guide, “Elin 3.4, a MATLAB Interface to

TEMS Cellplanner”, August 17, 2009.
[10] Ericsson, “TEMS CellPlanner Common Features User’s Guide”,

EN/LZT 108 9832 R1B, June 2008.
49
LTE Heterogeneous Networks References
[11] Ericsson, “TEMS CellPlanner Common Features Technical Refer-

ence Manual”, EN/LZT 108 9833 R1B, June 2008.
[12] Ericsson, “TEMS CellPlanner WCDMA User’s Guide”, EN/LZT

108 9837 R1A, April 2008.
[13] Wikipedia, “Monte Carlo method”,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monte_Carlo_method
Retrieved 2012-05-08.
[14] Ericsson Internal Report, “Astrid 1.0: A Static Wireless Network

Simulator”, February 8, 2005.
[15] Ericsson Internal Information, “Ericsson WCDMA Radio access

network – Radio wave propagation guideline”, January 23, 2007.
50

Fulltext01 PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Fulltext01 PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

M.Sc.

Pico Cell Densification Study in LTE

Fredric Kronestedt Ming Xiao

Systems & Technology Communication Theory Lab

Development Unit Radio School of Electrical Engineering

Keywords: HetNet, LTE, pico cell, densification, capacity, coverage,

Acknowledgements ....................................................................................... iii

List of Figures ................................................................................................. vi

List of Tables .................................................................................................viii

Figure 5.23: Downlink throughput vs capacity .......................................... 44

LPN Low Power Node

HetNet Heterogeneous Network

3GPP 3rd Generation Partnership Project

CSG Closed Subscriber Group

RRU Remote Radio Unit

RSRP Reference Signal Received Power

RSRQ Reference Signal Received Quality

eICIC Enhanced Inter-cell Interference Coordination

TCP TEMS CellPlanner

GSM Global System for Mobile Communications

CDMA Code Division Multiple Access

WCDMA Wideband Code Division Multiple Access

CPLM Composite Pathloss Matrix

ACP Automatic Cell Planning

SINR Signal to Interference plus Noise Ratio

ABR Achievable Bitrate

MRC Maximal Ratio Combining

IRC Interference Rejection Combining

ISD Inter Site Distance

A key method to fulfill the future needs is network densification

With the knowledge that HetNet deployment has a large potential to

1.2 Overall aim

1.4 Problem statement

To achieve this objective, it is also desired to design a strategy of pico

• How should the pico sites be deployed to achieve better network

In chapter 3, the network model and simulation parameters of this

In chapter 5, the simulation result of this work will be presented.

The conclusions and possible future work will be presented in chapter 6.

Figure 2.1: Heterogeneous Network

2.1.1 Low power nodes deployment

• Demand: traffic volumes, traffic location, target data rates

• Supply: macro cell coverage, site availability, backhaul transmis-

• Commercial: technology competition, business models

In [3], some guidelines for LPNs deployment are provided:

• Open or closed access

Closed access refers that LPNs belong to a Closed Subscriber

• Indoor or outdoor deployment

Deploying indoor LPNs is suitable in cases when traffic is con-

Outdoor LPNs deployment that also covers indoor areas is pref-

There are several types of LPNs: Remote Radio Units (RRUs),

The HetNets can be seen as composed of two layers: macro cell

Table 2.1 summarizes the rules addressed above.

Open access Operator-deployed

Concentrated large indoor

Relay nodes No wire backhaul

Table 2.1: Guidelines for LPNs deployment [3]

2.1.2 Cell selection

“Reference signal received power (RSRP), is defined as the linear av-

RSRQ is calculated based on RSRP which provides additional infor-

In homogeneous networks, RSRP based cell selection guarantees good

Downlink RSRP cell boundary

Uplink minimum pathloss cell boundary

Figure 2.2: Cell selection in 3GPP LTE HetNets