Propagation models

What are they for?

Regulatory vs. scientific issues.
Modes of propagation.
The models.

ITU Recommendations on Radiowave Propagation
Modes of propagation &
propagation loss
Free space
Ground wave. Diffraction around a smooth earth.
Ground reflections. Effect of terrain.
Ionospheric, including sporadic E
Tropospheric: refraction, super-refraction and
ducting, forward scattering
Diffraction over knife edge & rounded edge
Atmospheric attenuation
Variability & Statistics


Free space propagation
EIRP (watts) to pfd (w/m^2) = P/(4.pi.D^2)
equivalent to (dBW 11 -20.log(D))
EIRP (watts) to E (V/m) = sqrt(30.P)/D
EIRP (kW) to E (V/m) = 173*sqrt(P)/Dkm
Also: pfd (W/m^2)=E^2/Z0=E^2/(120.pi)
Free space loss
Note that EIRP(W) to pfd(W/m^2) is
frequency independent
EIRP(W) to Prx(W) in isotropic antenna is:
Prx={Peirp/(4.pi.D^2)}*{lambda^2/(4.pi)}
I.e. isotropic to isotropic antenna free-space
loss increases as frequency squared.
Ground wave propagation
Most relevant for low frequencies (<30
MHz)
Depends on ground constants (conductivity,
permittivity)
Various ITU recommendations: ITU-R
P.368 etc. Program GRWAVE available
from ITU web pages

Ionospheric propagation
Most relevant up to about 30 MHz
Many modes of propagation: a complicated
topic.
Sporadic E can be important up to about 70
MHz. (ITU-R P.534)
Highly variable
Tropospheric
Variations of radio refractive index
Normal change with height causes greater than
line-of-sight range. Often taken into account by
assuming increased radius for the earth e.g. (4/3)
Temperature inversions can cause ducting, with
relatively low attenuation over large distances
beyond the horizon
Small scale irregularities are responsible for
forward scatter propagation.
Rain scatter can sometimes be a dominant mode.
Obstacles
Terrain features, and buildings, usually
attenuate signals. (NB in some
circumstances knife edge diffraction can
enhance propagation beyond the horizon)
The OKUMURA-HATA model calculates
attenuation taking account of the percentage
of buildings in the path, as well as natural
terrain features.
Is an Obstruction Obstructing?
Fresnel ellipsoids and Fresnel zones
In studying radiowave propagation between two points A and B, the
intervening space can be subdivided by a family of ellipsoids, known
as Fresnel ellipsoids, all having their focal points at A and B such that
any point M on one ellipsoid satisfies the relation:

2
AB MB AM

+ = + n
(1)
where n is a whole number characterizing the ellipsoid and n = 1 corresponds
to the first Fresnel ellipsoid, etc., and is the wavelength.
As a practical rule, propagation is assumed to occur in line-of-sight, i.e. with
negligible diffraction phenomena if there is no obstacle within the first Fresnel ellipsoid.

The radius of an ellipsoid at a point between the transmitter and the receiver is
given by the following formula:

2 / 1
2 1
2 1
(

=
d d
d d n
R
n
(2)
or, in practical units:

2 / 1
2 1
2 1
) (
550
(

+
=
f d d
d d n
R
n (3)
where f is the frequency (MHz) and d
1
and d
2
are the distances (km) between transmitter
and receiver at the point where the ellipsoid radius (m) is calculated.

An approximation to the 0.6 Fresnel clearance path length
The path length which just achieves a clearance of 0.6 of the first Fresnel zone
over a smooth curved earth, for a given frequency and antenna heights h
1
and h
2
,
is given approximately by:
D
06
=
h f
h f
D D
D D
+

km (30)
where:
D
f
: frequency-dependent term
= 2 1
0000389 . 0 h h f
km (30a)
D
h
: asymptotic term defined by horizon distances
=
) ( 1 . 4
2 1
h h +
km (30b)
f : frequency (MHz)
h
1
, h
2
: antenna heights above smooth earth (m).

(Radio Horizon)


0526-06
h > 0
u > 0
o
2
d
2
a)
o
1
d
1
d
2
d
1
h
R
o
1
o
2
d
c)
o
1
d
1
h < 0
u < 0
o
2
b)
d
2
FIGURE 6
Geometrical elements
1 2 1 2
(For definitions of u, o , o , d , d , d and R, see 4.1 and 4.3)

0526-06
h > 0
u > 0
o
2
d
2
a)
o
1
d
1
d
2
d
1
h
R
o
1
o
2
d
c)
o
1
d
1
h < 0
u < 0
o
2
b)
d
2
FIGURE 6
Geometrical elements
1 2 1 2
(For definitions of u, o , o , d , d , d and R, see 4.1 and 4.3)
Knife Edge diffraction
0526- 07
3 2 1 0 1 2 3
2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
J
(
v
)

(
d
B
)
FI GURE 7
Kni f e- edge di f f ract i on l oss
v
Atmospheric attenuation
Starts becoming relevant above about 5 GHz
Depends primarily, but not exclusively on water
vapour content of the atmosphere
Varies according to location, altitude, path
elevation angle etc.
Can add to system noise as well as attenuating
desired signal
Precipatation has a significant effect

0676-05
H O
2
H O
2
10
2
10
10
1
10
2
1
10
3
2
5
5
2
5
2
5
2
5
2
FIGURE 5
Specific attenuation due to atmospheric gases
S
p
e
c
i
f
i
c

a
t
t
e
n
u
a
t
i
o
n

(
d
B
/
k
m
)
3.5 5 2 5 2 2
10
2
10 1
Dry air Dry air
Total
Frequency, f (GHz)
Pressure: 1 013 hPa
Temperature: 15 C
Water vapour: 7.5 g/m
3

Propagation models
The ITU recommendations give many
approved methods and models
Two popular methods are are the
Okumura-Hata
and the
Longley Rice
1546-18
1 200 m
600 m
300 m
150 m
75 m
20 m
10 m
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
10 100 1 000
h
1
= 1 200 m
h
1
= 10 m
1
Distance (km)
F
i
e
l
d

s
t
r
e
n
g
t
h

(
d
B
(

V
/
m
)
)

f
o
r

1

k
W

e
.
r
.
p
.
50% of locations
h
2
: representative clutter height
FIGURE 18
2 000 MHz, land path, 10% time
Maximum (free space)
Transmitting/base
antenna heights, h
1
37.5 m


Okumura-Hata method
E = 69.82 6.16 log f + 13.82 log H
1
+ a(H
2
) (44.9 6.55 log( H
1
)(log d)
b


where:
E : field strength (dB(V/m)) for 1 kW e.r.p.
f : frequency (MHz)
H
1
: base station effective antenna height above ground (m) in the range 30 to 200 m
H
2
: mobile station antenna height above ground (m) in the range 1 to 10 m
d : distance (km)
a(H
2
) = (1.1 log f 0.7) H
2
(1.56 log f 0.8)
b = 1 for d s 20 km
b = 1 + (0.14 + 0.000187 f + 0.00107
'
1
H
) (log [0.05d])
0.8

for d > 20 km
where:
'
1
H
= H
1
/
2
1
0,000007 1 H +


Longley-Rice model
TRANSMISSION LOSS PREDICTIONS FOR
TROPOSPHERIC COMMUNICATION
CIRCUITS

Longley Rice has been adopted as a standard by the FCC
Many software implementations are available
commercially
Includes most of the relevant propagation modes [multiple
knife & rounded edge diffraction, atmospheric attenuation,
tropospheric propagation modes (forward scatter etc.),
precipitation, diffraction over irregular terrain,
polarization, specific terrain data, atmospheric
stratification, different climatic regions, etc. etc. ]
NRAO: TAP model
(SoftWright implementation with the Terrain Analysis
Package

Notes on The Prediction of Tropospheric Radio Transmission Loss Over Irregular Terrain
(the Longley-Rice Model) propagation in the Terrain Analysis Package (TAP).
The Longley-Rice model predicts long-term median transmission loss over irregular
terrain relative to free-space transmission loss. The model was designed for frequencies
between 20 MHz and 40 GHz and for path lengths between 1 km and 2000 km.
...
This implementation is based on Version 1.2.2 of the model, dated September 1984. Note
also that the version 1.2.2 implemented by SoftWright does not utilize several other
corrections to the model proposed since the method was first published (see A. G. Longley,
"Radio propagation in urban areas," OT Rep. 78-144, Apr. 1978; and A. G. Longley,
"Local variability of transmission loss- land mobile and broadcast systems," OT Rep., May
1976).

Technical Foundation
...
Problems with models
All models have limitations: e.g. Longley Rice doesnt
include ionosphere, so limited applicability at lower
frequencies. Some skill is needed in choosing the right
model for the right circumstances.
Accuracy is limited. Different models can give different
answers.
May need a statistical interpretation
Need good input data (e.g. terrain models)
Any model needs fairly universal acceptance, to avoid
legal arguments. Acceptance may be more important than
accuracy.
What is the height of a radio telescope?

Where does this leave us?
In spite of the difficulties, propagation models
have come a long way.
We cant live without them.
The best guide we have to whether a given
terrestrial transmission will cause interference to a
radio telescope.
The best guide we have as to whether a given size
of coordination zone will be adequate.