Distributed Antenna Systems and MIMO Technology

With the explosive growth in wireless usage due in

part to smart phones, tablet computers and a growing
applications developer base, wireless operators are
constantly looking for ways to increase the spectral
efciency of their networks. Multiple input/ multiple
output (MIMO) technology, which made its rst
broad commercial appearance in 802.11nsystems,
is now gaining substantial momentum in Mobile
Wireless Wide Area Network (Mobile WWAN) with
the launch of WiMAX and LTE networks. MIMO is a
key technology in these networks which substantially
improves network throughput, capacity and coverage.
In this paper, Tyco Electronics (TE) provides an
introduction to MIMO technology and reports the
results of tests it performed to characterize the
relative performance of MIMO and single input/single
output (SISO) transmissionschemes.
Distributed Antenna Systems and MIMO Technology
Page 2
About MIMO
MIMO stands for multi-input and multi-output. Input
refers to the number of transmitters and output
refers to the number of receivers. SISO mode (single
input/single output) is the more conventional mode
of communication, where there is one antenna
transmitting and one antenna receiving. There are also
Multiple Input/Single Output systems (MISO), which
is like having multiple base stations transmitting to
the user device at the same time as done in downlink
soft-handof in CDMA systems. There are also the
Single Input/Multi Output systems, which are used
in traditional cellular uplinks, where the device has
one antenna but there is receive diversity on the
basestation.
MIMO uses multiple transmitters and multiple
receivers. Multi-antenna congurations have been
around for years, but with advances in signal
processing and silicon, MIMO is now economically
possible in many small form factor devices such as
handsets and data cards. While initial WiMAX and
LTE networks use 2x2 MIMO (where there are two
transmit antennas and two receive antennas), future
LTE systems will use 4x4 MIMO and even higher
dimensions of antenna congurations. It is projected
that LTE Advanced systems will have the ability to use
up to 8x8 MIMO antennacongurations.
For MIMO to work, a rich scattering environment,
with many diferent paths between transmitter and
receiver, as well as a high signal-to-noise ratio are
needed. Rather than being a detriment to network
performance, multi-path is actually exploited by MIMO
processing to increase the capacity or the coverage
of the network. The key is that each path must
be independent and look diferent to the receiver.
The diferences in the multipath are used to create
orthogonal communication channels analogous to the
orthogonal spreading codes in CDMA-based systems.
In addition to being required for the higher orders
of modulation, such as 16-QAM and 64-QAM, a high
signal-to-noise ratio is also required to properly model
the wireless channels that allow the MIMO systems
to algorithmically separate the multiple paths which
overlap one another in frequency and time.
An in-building DAS system is ideal for MIMO
because it provides very good signal-to-noise
ratio, and in-building environments provide a rich
scatteringenvironment.
MIMO Types
There are two major categories of MIMO spatial
diversity, in which the same data is transmitted over
each of the multiple paths, and spatial multiplexing,
in which each of the paths carries diferent data. In
2x2 MIMO with spatial diversity, for example, each
of the two antennas is essentially transmitting and
receiving the same data although the data is coded
diferently. This mode is primarily used to improve
signal quality, or to increase the coverage area. In 2x2
MIMO with spatial multiplexing, two diferent streams
of data are transmitted over each of the two channels,
which theoretically doubles the system throughput.
Spatial multiplexing is the mode that really takes
advantage of the capacity improvement capabilities
of MIMO. The system throughput can be increased
linearly with the number of transmit antennas without
using any additional spectrum resources. Given the
scarcity and cost of the wireless operators spectrum,
improving the spectral efciency is a critical goal for
improving the overall nancial operating margins for
the wirelessoperator.
It is important to note that commercial MIMO systems
switch dynamically between SISO, MIMO diversity, and
MIMO multiplexing modes, depending on a variety of
factors including the channel environment and signal
quality. For example, if the signal quality is very high
the system uses spatial multiplexing, and if not, it
automatically switches to spatial diversity mode or
even to SISO mode.
Figure 1
Multiple Anntena Usage
Page 3
Distributed Antenna Systems and MIMO Technology
MIMO Testing
A WiMAX MIMO system was used to test MIMO
performance in TEs San Jose, California facility. The
test used a pre-commercial WiMAX base station and
CPE device that could be statically set to remain in
spatial diversity, spatial multiplexing, or SISO mode.
Throughput tests were then conducted at various
points in the building using each of these modes.
Two phases of testing were conducted. The rst
phase focused primarily on gaining comfort and
experience with the system and with MIMO testing.
Throughput tests were conducted in variety of
environments throughout the facility to get a avor
for the type of MIMO performance that could be
achieved. The second phase of the testing focused on
a more uniform and homogenous environment which
provided a more consistent basis on which to analyze
theperformance.
The testing was conducted in the 2.6 GHz WiMAX
TDD band. While the testing was conducted on a
WiMAX system, the results are extendable to LTE
MIMO performance since the air interfaces of WiMAX
and LTE are very similar in that they both use OFDM
as the basic modulation scheme, and they both
incorporate MIMO. The principal diference is that
the current commercial deployments of LTE operate
in frequency division duplex mode (FDD), while
the majority of commercial WiMAX deployments
operate in time division duplex mode (TDD). In
certain implementations of MIMO, TDD operation
provides better performance as the channel models
in the downlink and uplink should be nearly identical.
However, with closed loop MIMO that is specied for
WiMAX and LTE, there should be minimal diferences
inperformance.
In addition to statically setting the MIMO mode, the
modulation and coding scheme was also statically set
in the system. This allowed for the comparison of the
throughput performance between each MIMO mode at
specic modulation and coding schemes. Modulation
schemes ranging from QPSK up to 64QAM at diferent
coding rates were tested. Only downlink testing
wasperformed.
The test environment was a 2-story structure about
300 feet long. The oor plan of the rst oor of the
facility is shown in Figure 2. In the rst phase of the
testing, the base station was used to drive a single
MIMO-capable remote antenna unit, while in the
second phase two MIMO-capable remote antenna
units were used. The antennas were spatially separated
by 6 wavelengths, which is approximately 27 inches
at2.6 GHz.
Figure 2
Location A 70 ft
Location B 100 ft
Location C 115 ft
Location D 187 ft
Location E 55 ft
Location F 47 ft
SISO 64QAM 2/3
does not work
Approx. 200 ft
First Floor
Test Locations
Location G 236 ft
Location H 270 ft
Location I 42 ft
Location J 6 ft
Location K 40 ft
Location L 210 ft
1 MIMO RAU
was Deployed
Initial attempt at measuring SISO/MIMO throughput
Data taken in a variety of environments and distances
RAU and Antenna (Antenna spacing: 6 wavelength)
Base Station and MH, EH
Distributed Antenna Systems and MIMO Technology
Page 4
Antenna Separation
Antenna separation is critical with MIMO systems as
MIMO performance requires that the multiple paths
between each of the transmit and receive antennas
are highly de-correlated. The decorrelation of the
antenna paths in turn has a heavy dependence on the
angular separation of the paths when viewed from
the perspective of the receiving antenna. Angular
separation improves as the distance increases between
the antennas in the system. The minimum spacing
between antennas specied in industry literature
ranges widely, from 3 to 7 wavelengths. In theory, one
wavelength of separation should be sufcient, but
it depends on the environment and the amount of
signalscattering.
Current LTE operator guidelines for spatial separation
are on the order of 2 to 3 wavelengths, or 27 to 311
at 750MHz. TE recommends 4 to 6 wavelengths of
separation where possible (roughly 5 to 8 spacing),
and an absolute minimum of 2 to 3 wavelengths when
tight spaces dictate.
As an alternative to spatially separated antennas,
dual-pole antennas are increasingly being used in
MIMO deployments, as the measured performance
diferences between the two antenna congurations
are negligible in real world applications. Dual-pole
antennas are a great solution in situations where only
a single antenna housing can beinstalled.
Test Results Phase I
For the rst phase of testing, the RAU was installed
on the rst oor of the western side of the building
as indicated in Figure 2. Because throughput
measurements were taken with the CPE device at
various locations throughout the building, the transmit
power was set to +15dBm per antenna. A variety of
test environments were selected, such as a cubicle
area, a warehouse, a private ofce, small and large
conference rooms as well as a large training room.
Measurements were also taken on the second oor of
the building. The colored squares in Figure 2 indicate
the test locations. The primary goal of this rst phase
was to quantitatively measure the performance
improvements that could be achieved with MIMO in
these various environments.
Figure 3 shows the throughput results for SISO,
MIMO spatial diversity, and MIMO spatial multiplexing
for each of the tested locations. The table in Figure
3 is organized into three major sections, each
corresponding to one of the antenna conguration
modes. The top section contains the results for SISO
mode, the middle section, labeled MIMO-A, contains
the results for spatial diversity mode, while the
bottom section, labeled MIMO-B, contains the results
for spatial diversity mode. Each section is further
sub-divided into rows which represent the diferent
modulation and coding schemes. Each column
represents a diferent CPE location in the building,
DL Type Modulation Mbps Mbps Mbps Mbps Mbps Mbps Mbps Mbps Mbps Mbps Mbps Mbps Mbps Mbps Avg
SISO

Location J-6ft K-40ft I-42ft F-47ft E-55ft A-70ft B-100ft C-115ft D-187ft N-205ft M-206ft L-210ft G-236ft H-270ft DL(Mbps)
QPSK 1/2 1.35 1.35 1.36 1.35 1.36 1.36 1.35 1.36 1.35 1.34 1.33 1.36 1.36 1.35 1.35
QPSK 3/4 2.04 2.04 2.04 2.05 2.05 2.04 2.04 2.04 2.05 2.05 1.81 2.05 2.05 2.05 2.03
16QAM 1/2 2.71 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.46 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.71
16QAM 3/4 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.09 4.09 0.00 2.15 4.11 4.10 0.00 3.37
64QAM 2/3 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.44 5.47 5.46 5.47 5.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.46 0.00 3.90
MIMO-A

Location J-6ft K-40ft I-42ft F-47ft E-55ft A-70ft B-100ft C-115ft D-187ft N-205ft M-206ft L-210ft G-236ft H-270ft DL(Mbps)
QPSK 1/2 1.35 1.36 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.36 1.36 1.36 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.34 1.36 1.35 1.35
QPSK 3/4 2.05 2.04 2.04 2.04 2.04 2.05 2.05 2.04 2.05 2.05 1.90 2.05 2.05 2.05 2.04
16QAM 1/2 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.70 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73
16QAM 3/4 4.10 4.10 4.09 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.09 4.09 3.92 4.11 4.10 4.11 4.09
64QAM 2/3 5.48 5.47 5.46 5.47 5.46 5.47 5.46 5.46 5.47 0.00 0.00 5.47 5.48 0.00 4.30
MIMO-B

Location J-6ft K-40ft I-42ft F-47ft E-55ft A-70ft B-100ft C-115ft D-187ft N-205ft M-206ft L-210ft G-236ft H-270ft DL(Mbps)
QPSK 1/2 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.71 2.74 2.72 2.73 2.73
QPSK 3/4 4.11 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.11 4.11 4.10 4.11 4.10 4.04 3.93 4.10 4.11 4.11 4.09
16QAM 1/2 5.48 5.47 5.46 5.46 5.48 5.47 5.47 5.47 5.47 0.00 0.00 5.47 5.47 4.42 4.61
16QAM 3/4 8.20 8.20 8.19 8.21 8.20 8.20 8.20 8.19 8.20 0.00 0.00 8.18 8.11 0.00 6.43
64QAM 2/3 10.90 10.90 10.90 10.90 10.80 10.90 10.70 10.80 10.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.70 0.00 7.74
Figure 3
MIMO-A: 64QAM 2/3 and 16QAM 3/4 works at more locations and has higher data rates than SISO.
MIMO-B: Typically doubles data throughput.
2nd Floor
Page 5
Distributed Antenna Systems and MIMO Technology
with increasing distance from the RAU, moving
from left to right. For example, the left-most column
results were obtained with the CPE about 6 feet from
the RAU while the right-most column results were
obtained at about 270 feet from the RAU. The results
are presented in megabits persecond.
The maximum downlink throughput of the system
was limited to 11 Mbps by the rmware release of the
base station and the CPE device. As expected, for
those locations that were close to the RAU or where
there was good signal quality, the SISO results and the
MIMO diversity results were similar because the same
data was transmitted over both antenna paths (no
additional data is being transmitted in MIMO diversity
versus SISO). When the signal quality was sufciently
high such that SISO was able to achieve the maximum
data rate, MIMO diversity was not able to improve
the signal quality any further and as a result no
improvement in throughput was observed as is evident
in the rst 9 columns of Figure 3.
However, in areas farther from the RAU where the
signal quality is not as good, MIMO diversity provided
the maximum throughput where in some cases the
system could not maintain a link in SISO mode. For
example, with 16 QAM 3/4 rate coding, the system
could not sustain a link at test location N (column
10) while in SISO mode. However, in MIMO diversity
mode the system achieved a throughput of 4.09 Mbps.
Likewise, with 64 QAM 2/3 rate coding, the system
could not sustain a link at test location L (column
12) in SISO mode but achieved a throughput of 5.47
Mbps while in MIMO diversity mode. This shows how
MIMO diversity mode can improve signal quality. The
yellow-shaded cells show areas where the throughput
was lower than expected; here again, MIMO diversity
mode shows an improvement in throughput over SISO
because of the improved signal quality.
The key point is that MIMO diversity mode can
improve signal quality in poor environments and ofer
better throughput than SISO in those cases.
While the improvements achieved by MIMO diversity
are great, what really excites the wireless community
about MIMO is the throughput improvements
achievable with MIMO spatial multiplexing. It is with
spatial multiplexing that the throughput can be
increased linearly with the number of the transmit
antennas. Thus, with 2x2 MIMO the throughput
can be doubled over SISO without any additional
spectrumresources.
The MIMO spatial multiplexing results in Figure 3
show a near doubling of throughput relative to
MIMO diversity and SISO. In this mode, a unique
stream of data was transmitted from each of the
two MIMO antennas, which efectively doubled the
overall throughput of the system. For example, in
the rst nine columns of Figure 3, SISO and MIMO
diversity delivered throughput of roughly 5.46 Mbps
for 64QAM modulation with 2/3 rate coding, while
MIMO spatial multiplexing delivered roughly 10.80
Mbps of throughput with the same modulation and
coding scheme. In these locations the signal quality
was sufciently high that MIMO was able to provide
the maximum throughput expected. Even in other
locations where the signal quality may not have been
high enough to provide 64 QAM performance, spatial
multiplexing doubled the achievable throughput for
the lower modulation and coding schemes which
still provides a substantial improvement in overall
network throughput. Averaging the throughput
over all test locations resulted in an 85% increase in
systemthroughput.
MIMO spatial multiplexing means that mobile
operators can now use spectrum resources much
more efciently. The increased overall network
throughput can be used to increase system capacity
by servicing users more efciently and getting users
on and of the network more quickly, which allows the
operator to service more users. Notice that there were
areas where the signal quality was sufciently poor
(the orange cells) that a link could not be sustained
with spatial multiplexing at the higher modulation and
coding schemes. This underscores the requirement
that high signal quality is essential for proper spatial
multiplexing operation, especially for higher orders of
modulation.
Test Results Phase II
The primary purpose of the second phase of testing
was to observe the variability in MIMO performance
over a more uniform and homogeneous environment.
The testing was conducted over a 6000 square foot
area consisting mainly of half height cubicles, roughly
53 inches in height. Two RAUs were deployed, as
shown in Figure 4, in order to obtain more data with
the same test setup. Due to the relatively small test
area, the output power of each RAU was reduced
to roughly +2dBm per antenna such that each RAU
would barely cover the entire test area. The RAUs
were not transmitting simultaneously but were
testedseparately.
Distributed Antenna Systems and MIMO Technology
Page 6
A uniform grid of 20 measurement points, arranged in
a 5 x 4 grid, was selected in order to uniformly map
the performance across the test area. As with the rst
phase of testing, 6-wavelength spacing was used for
the MIMO antennas at the RAUs. The CPE was placed
on a cart 30inches of the ground, which is roughly
the height of the desks. The BTS rmware and the
CPE device used in the second phase of testing limited
the maximum throughput to roughly 5 Mbps.
The results for the second phase of testing, as
shown in Figure 5, are arranged into a 5 x 4 grid to
graphically correlate with the 20 test locations. Figure
5 contains two grids, one for each RAU tested. The
top grid lists the throughput results for the testing
conducted with the rst RAU while the bottom
grid lists the results for the testing conducted with
the second RAU. In the top grid, the RAU can be
envisioned to be located to the left of the grid and the
results for the rst column of data are associated with
locations that are closer to the RAU. The test locations
for the results in the second through fourth columns
are increasingly farther from the rst RAU with the
test locations associated with the results in the fourth
column being roughly 66 feet from the rst RAU. In
the bottom grid, the RAU can be envisioned to be
located on the right side of the grid and the results for
rst column of data are associated with locations that
are furthest from the second RAU. The test locations
for the results in the second through fourth columns
are decreasingly closer to the second RAU. As a point
of reference, the test locations corresponding to the
results in the rst column are roughly 88 ft. from the
second RAU.
1 6
2
7
3 8
4 9
5 10
11 16
12 17
13 18
14 19
15 20
88 feet
68 feet
RAU #2
6 ant.spacing
RAU #1
6 ant.spacing
Figure 4
Page 7
Distributed Antenna Systems and MIMO Technology
Throughput performance RAU #1
SISO MIMOA MIMOB RSSI SISO MIMOA MIMOB RSSI SISO MIMOA MIMOB RSSI SISO MIMOA MIMOB RSSI
Loc #1 2. 43 2. 44 4.85 -49dBm Loc #6 2. 43 2. 43 4.85 -51dBm Loc #11 2. 44 2. 43 4.82 -55dBm Loc #16 2. 43 2. 43 3. 26 -63dBm
Loc #2 2. 44 2. 43 4.86 -39dBm Loc #7 2. 43 2. 44 4.84 -46dBm Loc #12 2. 43 2. 43 3.66 -58dBm Loc #17 2. 43 2. 43 2.15 -62dBm
Loc #3 2. 43 2. 43 4.81 -44dBm Loc #8 2. 43 2. 43 4.71 -47dBm Loc #13 2. 44 2. 43 4.56 -65dBm Loc #18 2. 43 2. 43 4. 36 -66dBm
Loc #4 2. 44 2. 43 4.86 -56dBm Loc #9 2. 44 2. 43 4.76 -54dBm Loc #14 2. 44 2. 43 4.83 -62dBm Loc #19 2. 43 2. 43 3.62 -62dBm
Loc #5 2. 43 2. 43 4.83 -55dBm Loc #10 2. 43 2. 43 4.80 -60dBm Loc #15 2. 43 2. 43 4.85 -62dBm Loc #20 2. 43 2. 43 3.12 -68dBm
Throughput performance for RAU #2
SISO MIMOA MIMOB RSSI SISO MIMOA MIMOB RSSI SISO MIMOA MIMOB RSSI SISO MIMOA MIMOB RSSI
Loc #1 2. 42 2. 44 3. 22 -65dBm Loc #6 2.19 2. 43 4.83 -64dBm Loc #11 2. 43 2. 43 4.87 -62dBm Loc #16 2. 44 2. 43 4.86 -59dBm
Loc #2 2. 43 2. 43 3. 23 -68dBm Loc #7 2.15 2. 43 2.15 -68dBm Loc #12 2. 43 2. 43 4.85 -59dBm Loc #17 2. 44 2. 43 4.86 -51dBm
Loc #3 2.16 2. 42 3. 24 -73dBm Loc #8 2. 43 2. 44 4.86 -60dBm Loc #13 2. 43 2. 43 4.85 -64dBm Loc #18 2. 43 2. 43 4.86 -48dBm
Loc #4 2. 43 2. 43 2.16 -69dBm Loc #9 2. 44 2. 43 4.08 -67dBm Loc #14 2. 44 2. 43 4.84 -62dBm Loc #19 2. 43 2. 44 4.86 -53dBm
Loc #5 2. 32 2. 43 3. 25 -75dBm Loc #10 2. 35 2. 43 2.15 -71dBm Loc #15 2. 43 2. 43 3. 35 -69dBm Loc #20 2. 44 2. 43 4. 20 -56dBm
Throughput numbers in blue indicate operation at a lower modulation-coding level than 64-QAM 3/4.
Varies from 16-QAM 1/2 to 64-QAM 1/2
Averaged the throughput over the entire area for each antenna configuration
SISO: 2.41 Mbps
MIMO-A: 2.43 Mbps
MIMO-B: 4.17 Mbps (173% of SISO)
~66 ft. distance from RAU #1
3. 26
2.15
4. 36
3.62
3.12
~66 ft. distance from RAU #2
4.83
2.15
4.86
4.08
2.15
~88 ft. distance from RAU #2
3. 22
3. 23
3. 24
2.16
3. 25
Figure 5
Once again, throughput performance was measured
for SISO, MIMO spatial diversity, and MIMO spatial
multiplexing modes. As in the rst phase of testing, the
results for MIMO diversity are in the columns labeled
MIMO-A while the results for spatial multiplexing are
listed in the columns labeled MIMO-B. The results
again show that throughput nearly doubles with
MIMO spatial multiplexing as opposed to MIMO
diversity and SISO. Note, however, that at the
farthest distances from the RAU, the MIMO spatial
multiplexing throughput was slightly reduced, but it is
still substantially higher than the throughput for SISO
or MIMO diversity. In some of these instances, a lower
degree of modulation and coding was required to
maintain the link, as indicated by the results in red, but
the overall throughput is still much higher with spatial
multiplexing. It was estimated that the received signal
level at these extreme locations was on the order of
-71 dBm which is approximately the receive sensitivity
level for 64-QAM operation.
Averaging the throughput results over all 40 test
points, MIMO spatial multiplexing mode delivered a
73% increase in throughput over MIMO spatial diversity
and SISO modes.
These tests demonstrate that MIMO spatial
multiplexing is capable of delivering nearly double
the throughput of MIMO spatial diversity and SISO,
making MIMO an important transmission mode for
mobile operators seeking to maximize throughput and
capacity in their networks without requiring additional
spectrum.
TE DAS Built for MIMO
TEs InterReach Fusion and InterReach Spectrum
indoor DAS systems are uniquely suited for MIMO
operation. TE DAS systems convert Radio Frequency
(RF) signals to Intermediate Frequencies (IF) for
distribution, while competitors keep the signal at
RF for distribution. This means that in a TE system,
both MIMO bands can be transported over a single
cabling infrastructure (i.e. the same optical or CATV
cable), and because the RF frequencies are mapped to
diferent IF frequencies, they can be transported and
then transmitted from independent MIMO antennas at
the RAU. Competitors use the native RF frequencies to
transport signals over coax or optical cable and cannot
separate the MIMO signals, so they cannot use just one
cabling infrastructure to transport the MIMO signals
they need two cables to transmit each of the two
MIMO signals.
WHITE PAPER
Contact us:
Tyco Electronics Corporation
P.O. Box 1101
Minneapolis, Minnesota
USA 55440-1101
Tel: 1-800-366-3891
Tel: 1-952-938-8080
Fax: 1-952-917-3237
www.te.com/adc
www.tycoelectronics.com
www.adc.com/wireless 2011 Tyco Electronics Corporation, a TE Connectivity Ltd. Company. All Rights Reserved.
109936AE4/11Revision 2011
TE Connectivity, TE connectivity (logo), Tyco Electronics, and TE (logo) are trademarks of the TE Connectivity Ltd. family of companies
and its licensors.

While TE Connectivity has made every reasonable effort to ensure the accuracy of the information in this document, TEConnectivity does
not guarantee that it is error-free, nor does TE Connectivity make any other representation, warranty or guarantee that the information is
accurate, correct, reliable or current. TE Connectivity reserves the right to make any adjustments to the information contained herein at
any time without notice. TE Connectivity expressly disclaims all implied warranties regarding the information contained herein, including,
but not limited to, any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. The dimensions in this document are
for reference purposes only and are subject to change without notice. Specifications are subject to change without notice. Consult
TEConnectivity for the latest dimensions and design specifications.
TEs MIMO Experience
TE has several years of experience in working with
MIMO. It began with development of the Fusion
WiMAX system, in 2008, which is the only MIMO DAS
approved for use by Sprint and Clearwire.
The rst Fusion WiMAX systems were deployed at
Dulles and Reagan National Airports, and have been
on the air since early 2009. The systems operate in the
2.6 GHz WiMAX band using 10 MHz RF channels.
TE has shipped well over 200 LTE systems to date,
which includes over 3000 RAUs. The majority of these
are MIMO-based systems (80%). Some of the more
noteworthy installations include:
The headquarters of a major wireless carrier (delivering 38
Mbps on the downlink and
12 Mbps on the uplink)
A very large corporate campus in Silicon Valley (>20 Mbps
downlink and >15 Mbps on theuplink)
A mid-sized southwestern airport (this is a SISO mode
deployment that delivers about 20 Mbps
on thedownlink)
A Las Vegas casino and convention center (this was
installed to support the 2011 Consumer Electronics Show,
and delivers over 20 Mbps
on the downlink and 6 Mbps on the uplink).
Conclusion
TEs internal testing demonstrates the practical
benets of MIMO, which improves signal quality with
MIMO spatial diversity, or throughput with MIMO
spatial multiplexing. However, it is the MIMO spatial
multiplexing mode that has created the latest buzz
in the Wireless Wide Area Network industry as it
delivers signicantly higher throughput for mobile
networks without the need for additional spectrum.
At a time when 4G network bandwidth will be a key
advantage in a service ofering, MIMO makes sense for
all mobileoperators.
2x2 MIMO signals overlap
at the same RF frequencies
Intermediate Frequency (IF)
multiplexing separates MIMO
signals to diferent IF frequencies
IF multiplexing transports 2x2 MIMO signals over
a single low bandwidth medium (CATV cabling)
MIMO signals interfere with
each other for RF distribution
over coaxial cable.
RF
1
RF
1
RF
1
IF
1
IF
2
Figure 6