Analysis Report On MOS Problems in The XX Project

Analysis Report on MOS Problems in the XX Project
PUBLIC
Analysis Report on MOS Problems in the XX

Project
XX department XX
November 27, 2012
1 Overview
1.1 Background
Describe the background information of the current project, including the project name, project scale,
networking mode (IP transmission or microwave transmission), and major event in earlier stages.
Project background:
Project scale:
Problems:
Describe the current problems and MOS target values.
In xx office, the Qvoice is used to test the MOS value on MS-PSTN before and after swapping. It proves
that the proportion of MOS value greater than 3 before and after swapping is 96.0% and 95.6%,
respectively, which indicates that this proportion after swapping decreases. The acceptance criteria is MOS
must be higher than that before swapping. Therefore, the MOS value after swapping does not meet the
criteria.
1.2 Versions and Transmission Modes

Describe versions of NEs, such as BSC and BTS, on the live network. If multiple versions are involved,
specify all the versions. If version upgrades are involved, specify the versions before and after the upgrade,
and the upgrade time.
CN Manufacturer: Ericsson
RNC version: V900R012ENGC01SPH516
NodeB version: 3900 series.
3900E xxx
Transmission mode:
Iub: ATM
Iu-CS: IP
2 Implementation of Required Actions

Provide the implementation results from required actions, including necessary deliverables, troubleshooting
results, and current difficulties.
2014-12-08
Huawei confidential. No spreading without permission.
Page 1 of
15
PUBLIC
Required Action
Completio
n Status
Required action 1: Providing an MOS

drive test specifications checklist
Completed
Required action 2: Checking equipment

and version for known problems
Ongoing
Required action 3: Checking all

encoding/decoding parameters
Ongoing
Required action 4: Analyzing

characteristics of low MOS
Ongoing
Required action 5: Checking

coding/decoding problems based on
typical characteristics
Ongoing
Required action 6: Checking BLERrelated coverage based on typical

characteristics
Not started
Required action 7: Checking BLERrelated interference based on typical

characteristics
Partially
completed
Required action 8: Checking BLERrelated transmission based on typical

characteristics
Ongoing
Required action 9: Checking BLERrelated algorithm based on typical

characteristics
Ongoing
Required action 10: Checking BLERrelated equipment based on typical

characteristics
Not started
Required action 10: Checking handoverrelated problems based on typical

characteristics
Not started
2014-12-08
Engineer Name
Deliverable and
Check Result
Page 2 of
15
PUBLIC
3 Detailed Analysis of Required

Actions
3.1 Required Action 1: Providing an MOS Drive
Test Specifications Checklist
3.1.1 Analyzing Test Data
MOS is a drive test counter reflecting end-to-end speech quality but can be easily affected. Therefore, to
avoid unexpected changes that lead to data comparison failures, ensure that test routes, test speeds, and
devices are same in two comparison test scenarios.
The following MOS checklist describes the factors affecting MOS test results. When handling the MOS
problems, first collect the following information before identifying and analyzing the causes.
MOS DT data checklist
DT Information
Now
Before
Execute
Remark
Test equipment/Speech
wave sample
Probe narr_ukasts_8.wav
PSTN
Huawei CN
Traffic model
0.02 erl/Sub
Vehicle/Terminal
Ford SUV /Huawei 6110
Test area
14:00-20:00, urban main road
Test speed
30 km/h
Tool setting
An 8-hour automatic test and call

every 90 seconds
Statistic standard
PESQ862.1
Recorded speech wave

check
126K
MOS mean Score
3.65
Mos Max
4.01
MOS 1 rate
2%
MOS 2 rate
3%
MOS 3 rate
6%
MOS 4 rate
71%
MOS > 4 rate
18%
MOS samples
1804.00
HHO numbers
316.00
2014-12-08
Page 3 of
15
PUBLIC

DT Information
Now
Before
Execute
Remark
HHO/ MOS sample rate
17.52%
Average BLER
0.01
BLER (1) rate (0%0.78%)
82%
BLER (2) rate (0.78%1.56%)
12%
BLER (3) rate (1.56%3.12%)
2%
BLER (4) rate (3.12%6.24%)
1%
BLER (5) rate (6.24%12.48%)
1%
BLER (6) rate (12.48%100%)
2%
AverageRSCP
65.00
Average Ec/Io
-10.00
Ec/Io -14 dB
3.33%
-14 dB < Ec/Io -10 dB
46.30%
-10 dB < Ec/Io -6 dB
45.58%
Ec/Io > -6 dB
4.78%
AMR version and rate
AMR12.2 (100%),
WBAMR 0%
AMRC rate
AMR12.2 100%
Drop times
5.00
DT devices and method
Probe, MS-MS
DT time and road
14:00-20:00, urban main road
Iub, Iu-CS transmission
Iub: ATM
Iu-CS: ATM
RNC version
BSC6900V9R012C01SPC500
DBS3900V200R011C00SPC120
delay, jitter, FER/BLER
2014-12-08
120 ms
Page 4 of
15
PUBLIC
3.1.2 Conclusion
Provide change results of factors affecting MOSs according to changes of factors in the two tests.
According to comparison results, confirm changes of factors affecting MOS before and after swapping, for
example, changes of AMR codes, changes of air interface transmission quality, and changes of handover
rates. In addition, confirm whether test areas, time, and speeds are same as those in the comparison test.
3.2 Required Action 2: Checking Equipment

and Version for Known Problems
3.2.1 Analyzing Difference between RNC and NodeB
Versions
Confirm whether there are any influences from the version differences or the known problems of the
current version according to the released precautions, announcements, and release notes. Take the released
preventive measures to avoid factors such as known differences.
NodeB
Low MOS problems and speech quality problems on WBBPd boards can be solved in
the following versions:
R12 V200R012C00SPC440
R13 V200R013C00SPC310
3.2.2 Conclusion
Draw conclusions based on the version differences of the RNC and NodeB.
3.3 Required Action 3: Checking All

Parameters
3.3.1 Providing Checking Results of All Parameters
Provide the check results for all parameters and core voice parameters. Confirm and check the parameters
based on the parameter check theme. Provide the reason for parameter settings. If no proper reasons are
available, change the values of these parameters to the recommended values. In IP transmission mode,
parameters must be set based on the baseline value.
Live networks and original networks are different. Therefore, checking results show that many parameters
are not consistent with the baseline after swapping. The following table describes the parameter checking
results:
MML
comman
d
Paramete
r ID
Bitmap
Paramet
er Name
Baselin
e Value
Impact
SET
UCorrmalgo
switch
CsSwitch
CS_IUUP_V
2_SUPPORT
_SWITCH
TFO/TrFO
Enabling this switch will increase

MOS by 0.2 without negative
impact
CS_AMRC_
SWITCH
AMRC
Enabling this switch will lead to

silence or call drop as a result of
2014-12-08
Page 5 of
15
MML
comman
d
Paramete
r ID
Bitmap
Paramet
er Name
PUBLIC
Baselin
e Value
Impact
the UE compatibility issue.
CmpSwitch
CMP_UU_A
MR_DRD_H
HO_COMPA
T_SWITCH
DRD HHO
CMP Switch
After this switch is enabled, both

HHO and DRD are supported to
avoid the garble noise caused by
UE compatibility issue.
SET
UDPUCFG
DATA
AmrNoiseCor
rectSwitch
Automatic
Noise
Correction
Switch
(R13)
off
The garble noise is automatically

corrected.
SET
URRCTRL
SWITCH
RsvdPara1=
RSVDBIT1_
BIT24
CS Link
Reestablish
ment Switch
Enabling this switch helps

decrease the call drop rate, but
will lead to a 6-second silence,
compromising user experience.
SET
UFRCCHL
TYPEPARA
SrbChlType
SRB OVER
H Switch
None
The SRB OVER H switch will

lead to the water running sound.
SET
URRCTRL
SWITCH
RsvdPara1
RSVDBIT1_
BIT15
Silence
Detect
Silence is detected.
PERFENH_
OLPC_BLE
R_COEF_A
DJUST
Dynamic
Power
Control
If this switch is enabled, a low

BLER value will be set for voice
users when cell load is quite low.
This will improve speech quality
at the cost of cell load increase,
coverage shrinkage and call drop
increase on the cell border. When
cell load is high, restoring the
BLER value will not affect cell
uplink capacity.
SET
UCORRMP
ARA
SET UUEA
EncryptionAl
go
RNC
Supported
Encryption
Algorithm
UEA01&UEA11
This algorithm must be consistent

with that used on the CN.
Otherwise, call drop may occur.
SET
USTATETI
MER
HoPhychRecf
gTmr
HHO
Physical
Channel
Reconfigurat
ion Timer
5000
If this time is set to more than

10000, the water running problem
may occur.
2014-12-08
Page 6 of
15
PUBLIC
MML
comman
d
Paramete
r ID
Bitmap
Paramet
er Name
Baselin
e Value
Impact
MOD
UCELLRLP
WR
RlMaxDlPwr
Maximum
downlink
transmit
power of
12.2 kbit/s
CS services
Increasing the value of

RlMaxDlPwr helps to decrease
the downlink BLER and optimize
MOSs. However, congestion in
some cells deteriorates and Ec/No
values increase.
RlMinDlPwr
Minimum
downlink
transmit
power of
12.2 kbit/s
CS services
-150
Increasing the value of

RlMinDlPwr helps to decrease the
downlink BLER and optimize
MOSs. However, congestion in
some cells deteriorates and Ec/No
values increase.
MOD
UTYPRAB
OLPC
MINSIRTAR
GET
Minimum
SIR target
value
82
Adjusting this parameter helps to

decrease the BLER and this
adjustment does not affect related
counters.
BLERQUALI
TY
BLER target
value
-20
Adjusting the BLERQUALITY

helps to decrease the BLER and
increase MOS values. The value
of SIRADJUSTSTEP should be
adjusted. However, uplink and
downlink transmit power increase.
SIRADJUST
STEP
SIR
Adjustment
Step
Steps are adjusted based on

BLER.
Provide the check results for all parameters and core voice parameters. Confirm and check the parameters
based on the parameter check theme. For the parameters that affect the call drop rates, provide the reason
for parameter settings. If no proper reasons are available, change the values of these parameters to the
recommended values.
3.3.2 Conclusion
Modify incorrect parameters based on parameter check results and draw conclusions.
2014-12-08
Page 7 of
15
PUBLIC
3.4 Required Action 4: Analyzing

Characteristics of Low MOS
3.4.1 Checking Distribution of Low MOS
Check low MOS according to the MOS list and associate low MOSs with events in the corresponding
period of rating MOS. Verify whether top cell problems or continuous low MOS exist based on the low
MOS distribution.
If low MOS occurs continuously or massively on one side during a drive test, the problem usually lies with
the MOS tester, audio cable connection or test method.
For example, in an office, drive test data comes with continuous low MOS on one side and record voice in
the audio files sounds out of order. After check and analysis, it proves that one of the .dll files of the testing
software is not updated.
3.4.2 Analyzing Low MOS

Analyze the drive test UE log to check MOSs. Use a tool to check and filter out low MOSs and check radio
signals.
If the RSCP of the cells with a low MOS is less than 105 dBm or their Ec/Io is smaller than -14 dB, the
low MOS is caused by poor quality of radio signals and weak coverage. Therefore, wireless network
optimization is required.
If the RTWP of the cells with a low MOS is larger than -90 dBm, the low MOS is caused by interference.
Therefore, interference checking and locating are required.
If the signal quality of the cells with a low MOS is good and their RSCP is not smaller than -95 dBm or
their Ec/Io is not smaller than -12 dB, the problem may lie with products. Therefore, an in-depth problem
locating is required.
2014-12-08
Page 8 of
15
PUBLIC
3.4.3 Conclusion
Draw conclusions according to the analysis of influences brought by unexpected factors.
3.5 Required Action 5: Checking

Coding/Decoding Problems based on Typical
Characteristics
3.5.1 Analyzing MOS Characteristics in Drive Tests
Typical characteristics of encoding/decoding problems: The average MOS is smaller than 3.6, and the
maximum MOS is smaller than 4.0. TRFO and AMRC functions are closely related to encoding/decoding
problems.
MOS mean Score
3.460
Mos Max
3.80
MOS 1 rate
0%
MOS 2 rate
0.5%
MOS 3 rate
6.5%
MOS 4 rate
93.0%
MOS > 4 rate
0%
MOS samples
2135
2014-12-08
Page 9 of
15
1.
PUBLIC
TRFO
TRFO affects speech encoding/decoding. Enabling TRFO will increase MOS by 0.2. After TRFO is
disabled, the MOS baseline value decreases to 3.4.
SET UCORRMALGOSWITCH: CsSwitch:CS_IUUP_V2_SUPPORT_SWITCH=1;
2.
AMRC
Enabling AMRC will affect the encoding rate and has a negative gain on the MOS.
SET UCORRMALGOSWITCH: CS_AMRC_SWITCH=0;
It is recommended that AMRC be disabled and TRFO be enabled.
3.6 Required Action 6: Checking BLER-related

Coverage based on Typical Characteristics
3.6.1 Comparing BLER Changes in Drive Tests
Compare the BLER changes in two drive tests, particularly the BLER rate rank ranging from 6 to 7. Check
whether quality deterioration occurs and affects MOS values. In addition, verify whether continuous low
MOSs occur in areas and sites with speech quality deterioration.
DT Information
Now
Before
Execute
Remark
Average BLER
0.01
BLER (1) rate (0%-0.78%)
82%
BLER (2) rate (0.78%-1.56%)
12%
BLER (3) rate (1.56%-3.12%)
2%
BLER (4) rate (3.12%-6.24%)
1%
BLER (5) rate (6.24%-12.48%)
1%
BLER (6) rate (12.48%-100%)
2%
3.6.2 Comparing BLER Changes in Traffic Statistics

Compare the BLER changes in two traffic statistics. If speech quality decreases, check whether top cells
exist and verify whether MOS problems occur in these top cells by analyzing drive test data.
Type
Counter
Counter Description
BLER
VS.ULBlerAMR
This measurement item takes statistics of the UL BLER on the dedicated

transport channel carrying AMR speech services in the best cell.
VS.UL.BLer.Out.CSAMR This measurement item takes statistics of the ratio of the time taken by the
maximum UL BLER on the DCH carrying the AMR speech service in the
best cell.
VS.ULBler.AMR.ErrTB This counter provides the number of TBs with UL CRCI error for AMR
services on the DCH in the best cell.
2014-12-08
Page 10 of
15
PUBLIC
3.6.3 Comparing RSCP Changes in Drive Tests

Compare the average value and distribution of RSCP to verify whether speech quality deterioration occurs
and affects MOS values. In addition, verify whether continuous low MOSs occur in areas and sites with
speech quality deterioration.
DT Information
Now
Before
Execute
Remark
Average RSCP
65.00
Average Ec/Io
-10.00
Ec/Io -14 dB
3.33%
-14 dB < Ec/Io -10 dB
46.30%
-10 dB < Ec/Io -6 dB
45.58%
Ec/Io > -6 dB
4.78%
3.6.4 Conclusion
Confirm whether speech quality affects MOSs according to BLER and RSCP changes before and after
swapping.

Interference based on Typical Characteristics
3.7.1 Checking RTWP Difference
Provide RTWP check result deliverables, related data, check results of cells with RTWP problems, and
troubleshooting results. Analyze the relationship between RTWP and top cells. Preferentially solve RTWP
problems in top cells.
VS.MeanRTWP > -90 dBm
VS.MaxRTWP > --75d Bm
VS.MinRTWP < -106 dBm
The check results show that many cells have high RTWP. These cells are identified as top cells and need
key checking in precedence.
3.7.2 Checking Intermodulation

Determine whether obvious uplink interference exists according to the interference band data. If uplink
interference exists, provide the intermodulation check result. Determine whether the intermodulation exists.
If the intermodulation exists, provide the check result.
For details, see UMTS RF Channel Fault Detection and Rectification:
Factors of Impact + Troubleshooting Methods and Tools + Deliverables.
2014-12-08
Page 11 of
15
PUBLIC
3.7.3 Checking Reverse Cell Connection

Check reverse cell connection, and troubleshoot the cells with the access problem based on the check
results of related tools. Provide the check result of cells with the problem, and analyze the relationship
between the reversely connected cells and the top cells. Resolve problems of the top cells in precedence.
3.7.4 Checking Uplink and Downlink Balance

Provide the check result of uplink/downlink balance and the result of handling the cells with such a
problem. In addition, analyze the relationship between the cells with the uplink/downlink balance problem
and the top cells. Resolve the uplink/downlink unbalance problem of the top cells in precedence.
3.7.5 Conclusion
Draw conclusions according to the related data analysis of required action 7.
RTWP from the traffic statistics differs from that in deliverables. Therefore, it is necessary to confirm the
difference. If RTWP is high on the live network, locate the problem. If no deliverable is generated from the
preceding required action, reconfirm whether the preceding problems occur. Troubleshoot the top cells with
these problems in precedence.
Requirement: Provide related check deliverables and conclusions. Provide related explanation if the
preceding problems do not occur.

Transmission based on Typical Characteristics
3.8.1 Checking Traffic Measurement Counters
Check Iub/Iu-CS transmission performance counters:
1.
If the transmission mode over the Iub/Iu-CS interface is ATM transmission, then provide
the following counters:
VS.AAL2PATH.PVCLAYER.DROPFORHEADCELLS,
VS.AAL2PATH.PVCLAYER.DROPFORRXOVERFLOWCELLS,
VS.AAL2PATH.PVCLAYER.DROPFORTXOVERFLOWCELLS
Judgment criteria: If more than 60 packets are lost due to ATM packet header error or insufficient
space in ATM buffer area, low MOS problems are related to ATM link faults.
2.
If the transmission mode is IP transmission and IPPM is activated, provide the following
information: VS.IPPM.Forword.Peak.DropRates
Judgment criteria: If the IPPATH peak packet loss rate is over 1%, low MOS problems are related to
transmission link faults.
3.
If the transmission mode is IP transmission and IPPM is not activated, provide the
following counters: VS.IPPATH.IPLAYER.TXDROPPACKETS,
VS.IPPATH.IPLAYER.RXDROPPACKETS
2014-12-08
Page 12 of
15
PUBLIC
Judgment criteria: If more than 60 packets are lost when transmitted on the IP layer, low MOS
problems are related to IP link faults.
3.8.2 Conclusion
Verify whether transmission problems occur by analyzing transmission counters in traffic statistics.

Algorithm based on Typical Characteristics
3.9.1 Checking Algorithm and Parameters
CS link reestablishment switch and hard handover affect MOSs. Check the following parameters:
Type
MML
Command
Parameter ID
Bitmap
Baseline
Value
CS link
reestablishment
switch
SET
URRCTRLSWITCH
RsvdPara1=RSVDBIT1_BIT24
Hard Handover
Physical
Channel
Reconfiguration
Timer
SET
USTATETIMER
HoPhychRecfgTmr
5000
3.10 Required Action 10: Checking BLERrelated Equipment based on Typical

Characteristics
3.10.1 Checking Alarms
Provide alarm information about faulty RNCs and related handling results. Confirm whether any alarms
obviously affect the call drop rate. Associate alarms with the cells having call drop problems, clear alarms
in these cells.
Required Action
Completi
on Status
Date
Check RF channels for

main and diversity
channels, cross pairs,
and interference.
Ongoing
per two week
Engineer
Name
Deliverable and
Check Result
No alarms
According to the deliverables provided by field engineers, no alarms are generated. Provide explanation if
the preceding problems do not occur.
2014-12-08
Page 13 of
15
PUBLIC
3.10.2 Checking Device Faults

Provide the information about RNC faults (service interruption and out-of-service) and the related fault
handling results. In addition, analyze the relationship between the device faults and cells with call drops.
Handle device faults of cells with high call drop rates in precedence.
ALM-22501
DSP CPU overload alarm
ALM-20275
Interface board forwarding overload alarm
ALM-21352
IPPATH excessive packet loss alarm
ALM-21221
IMA link out-of-frame alarm
ALM-21202
E1/T1 out-of-frame alarm
ALM-21208
E1/T1 excessive slip frame alarm
ALM-21223
IMA link remote receiving fault alarm
ALM-20205
System clock source unavailable alarm
ALM-20211
DSP time synchronization exception alarm
ALM-20209
Clock phase-lock loop fault alarm
ALM-21351
Excessive IP transport layer errored frame alarm
ALM-21207
E1/T1 excessive BER alarm
3.10.3 Conclusion
Draw conclusions based on the alarms and check results of device faults.
3.11 Required Action 11: Checking Handoverrelated Problems based on Typical

Characteristics
3.11.1 Comparing Drive Test Data
Compare drive test data before and after swapping to analyze changes in the number of handovers, MOSs,
and the proportion of the number of hard handovers to the number of MOS calls. The proportion indicates
the impact of handover on MOSs. A smaller proportion reflects a more serious MOS deterioration. In
addition, verify whether the handover proportion changes and impacts the MOSs.
Some drive test tools can measure MOSs that are affected and not affected by handover. Generally, MOSs
affected by handover are 0.6 lower than those not affected. Analyze whether impacts of handover on MOSs
are within the normal range. The following figure shows the statistics exported by the Qvoice.
2014-12-08
Page 14 of
15
PUBLIC
3.11.2 Comparing Traffic Statistics

Compare and analyze changes in the number of handovers per call according to traffic statistics data before
and after swapping. Confirm whether the change trend in drive tests and traffic statistics are same.
For example, if the number of handovers per call and per Erlang increases after swapping, impacts of
handover on speech quality increase.
Cluster41
Number of Handovers per Call
Before swapping
0.71
After swapping
0.77
3.11.3 Conclusion
Confirm whether the number of handovers changes and impacts MOSs according to handover data analysis
in drive tests and traffic statistics.
4 Conclusion
Draw conclusions according to the analysis and summary of the required actions. Provide conclusive
opinions such as the current possible problems, the measures that can be taken, other required
troubleshooting methods, and the required data support.
According to the preceding analysis, the following conclusions are drawn:
1.
Test roads/areas and speeds are basically same in comparison tests.
2.
Changes in handover, speech quality, and speech versions have been identified. Impacts
of changes on MOSs are also clear.
3.
Required actions such as checking channels and checking parameters are partially
performed. No problems are found.
4.
Continuous low MOSs with values of 1 exist in the uplink, which is related to call drops
and release failures on the PTSN side. Impacts have been excluded in comparison data.
Requirements for feedback:
1.
Provide drive test data of the swapping week in a PDF file.

2.
Provide the deliverables on channel troubleshooting and the troubleshooting results of
located problems, and provide conclusive descriptions on required actions that fail to locate any
problems.
3.
Provide parameter configuration files.
5 Monitoring Optimization Measures

Monitor the application time, application scope, and application effect of every optimization measure. In
addition, provide a comparison report on the application of a measure, including analysis of indicator
changes before and after application of the measure, gain analysis, and analysis of other influences.
2014-12-08
Page 15 of
15

Analysis Report On MOS Problems in The XX Project

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Analysis Report On MOS Problems in The XX Project

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Analysis Report on MOS Problems in the XX Project