Basic Guide for troubleshooting SDH

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

23 views

Basic Guide for troubleshooting SDH

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

- Drive Test
- 03 Alcate 1660SM Sys Des
- 3000S Catalog
- 20141356-OSN-3500-2500-1500-Configuration-Guide
- sonet/SDH
- Huawei OptiX OSN 550
- Relat
- TJ100ME Brochure
- IJWMN 040610
- Tems Parameter
- PDH vs SDH
- Converge IP and DWDM Layers in the Core Network
- Testing Engineer Management system
- U-NodeBBM_issue2.0_OCT2005
- IPWDM
- Sdh
- Assignment 2
- Oss Socis Design 071516
- Tems Parameters
- Tems Parameters1

You are on page 1of 13

th

October 2001 Document Filename: Document1

Meeting: RSSPWG Paper Number: RSSP (04-01)/35

Bob Howell

Mike Pine

Chris Cheeseman

Henry Taylor henry.taylor@bt.com

John Tomlinson john.tomlinson@bt.com

Working Document for the RSSPWG

A Review of Error Performance & Availability

in meeting

International Obligations based upon ITU Recommendations.

Abstract

Following discussions at the 6

th

FLCC Policy meeting on the 10

th

September 2001, concerns were raised that the

Minimum Path Length Study Report (August 2001) and its conclusions, would not enable operators to meet their

international obligations in terminating traffic. At this meeting a presentation was made on UK Link Length Policy

factors and the technical considerations that would affect availability and performance. This working document tries to

review the whole issue of error performance and availabilty issues against the ITU-T Recommendation G.826 and

G.828 Error Performance Objectives (EPO) in conjunction with the latest draft revision of the radio link performance

of ITU-R Recommendation P.530 for Propagation data and prediction methods required for the design of terrestial line-

of-sight systems.

Page 2 of 13

1. Background

The International Telecommunications Union (ITU) specify the performance objectives for long

distance communications links in a series of recommendations produced by the ITU Telecommunication

Standardization Sector (ITU-T). The G series of these recommendations specify the performance

requirements for a 27,500km Hypothetical Reference Path (HRP).

In particular, ITU-T Recommendations G.821 [1], G.826 [2], G.827 [3] and G.828 [4] specify the

performance required from an international digital HRP and G.829 [5] specifies that required from

Synchronous Digital Hierarchy (SDH) multiplex and regenerator sections. ITU-T Recommendations

G.821, G.826, G.827 and G.828 only specify the end-to-end performance of an HRP and apply

irrespective of the physical transport mechanism (e.g. optical fibre, digital radio relay, metallic cable

etc.).

The ITU-T G Recommendations cannot be used directly when designing a digital radio system and

therefore the ITU Radiocommunications Sector (ITU-R) have used the ITU-T G Recommendations to

produce a series of ITU-R Recommendations (the F series) which specify the performance required

from digital radio links if they are to meet the overall HRP performance objectives.

ITU-R F series Recommendations, based on ITU-T Rec. G.821 (Error performance of an

international digital connection forming part of an integrated services digital network), have been

used for many years to specify the error performance objectives for digital radio links and specify the

required error performance in terms of Bit Error Ratios (BER). ITU-T Rec. G.821 has now been

superseded by ITU-T Rec. G.826 (1999) (Error performance parameters and objectives for

international, constant bit rate digital paths at or above the primary rate) and ITU-T Rec. G.828

(2000) (Error performance parameters and objectives for international, constant bit rate

synchronous digital paths) and new ITU-R error performance objectives based on these and applicable

to digital radio links have been produced. These new recommendations specify error performance in

terms of error blocks rather than on BER values.

ITU-T Rec. G.826 applies to both Plesiochronous Digital Hierarchy (PDH) and Synchronous Digital

Hierarchy (SDH) systems. ITU-T Rec. G.828 only applies to Synchronous Digital Hierarchy (SDH)

systems. The performance requirements in ITU-T Rec. G.828 are more stringent than those in ITU-T

Rec. G.826 and compliance with ITU-T Rec. G.828 will, in most cases, also ensure compliance with

ITU-T Rec. G.821 and ITU-T Rec. G.826. It should be noted that ITU-T Rec. G.828 only applies to

equipment designed after 10

th

March 2000 (the date ITU-T Rec. G.828 was adopted by the ITU).

Performance objectives for paths using equipment designed prior to this date are given in ITU-T

Rec. G.826.

A key ITU-R Recommendation in this context is ITU-R F.1491 (Error performance objectives for

real digital radio links used in the national portion of a 27,500km hypothetical reference path at

or above the primary rate) [6]. This recommendation gives the error performance objectives for the

national portion of digital radio links of various types (Long haul, Short haul and Access) for systems

conforming to ITU-T Rec. G.826 and ITU-T Rec. G.828.

2. Error performance and availability

2.1 Error performance

The digital bit stream in modern digital radio systems is divided into blocks. For example an SDH

STM-1 system might have 801 bits per block and carry 192,000 blocks per second. Each block is

monitored by means of an inherent Error Detection Code (EDC), e.g. Bit Interleaved Parity or Cyclic

Redundancy Check. ITU-T Rec. G.826 and ITU-T Rec. G.828 (and the ITU-R Recommendations based

on them) specify error performance objectives in terms of the rate at which blocks containing errors

occur using the following parameters:-

Errored Block (EB): A block in which one or more bits are in error.

Errored Second (ES): A one-second period with one or more errored blocks or at least one

defect (e.g. loss of pointer LOP).

Severely Errored Second (SES): A one-second period, which contains >30% errored blocks

or at least one defect. SES is a subset of ES.

Background Block Error (BBE): An errored block not occurring as part of a SES.

The error performance of a digital radio link can then be described in terms of:-

Errored Second Ratio (ESR): The ratio of ES to total seconds in available time during a

fixed measurement interval.

Severely Errored Second Ratio (SESR): The ratio of SES to total seconds in available time

during a fixed measurement interval.

Background Block Error Ratio (BBER): The ratio of Background Block Errors (BBE) to

total blocks in available time during a fixed measurement interval. The count of total blocks

excludes all blocks during SESs.

2.2 Availability

Each direction of a path can be in one of two states, available time, or unavailable time. The criteria

determining the transition between the two states are as follows.

A period of unavailable time begins at the onset of 10 consecutive Severely Errored Second (SES)

events. These 10 seconds are considered to be part of unavailable time. A new period of available time

begins at the onset of 10 consecutive non-SES events. These 10 seconds are considered to be part of

available time. Figure 1 illustrates the transitions between the availability states.

T1306350-95

Detection of unavailable state Detection of available state

< 10 sec 10 sec < 10 sec 10 sec

Available state Unavailable state

Available state

SES

Non-SES

Error-free second

Figure 1

A path is available if, and only if, both directions are available. For a path to enter the unavailable state,

either direction can be unavailable. But if the two directions are subject to overlapping SES events such

that neither direction becomes unavailable, and the combined period is greater than 10 seconds, then the

path still remains in the available state.

ITU-T Rec. G.827 specifies the availability objectives for path elements of international digital paths.

It should be noted that error performance should only be evaluated whilst the path is in the available

state.

It is generally accepted that for a well planned link clear air fading is largely produced by multipath

propagation which tends to produce fades lasting less than 10 seconds, whereas, rain tends to produce

fades lasting longer than 10 seconds.

3 ITU-T Recommendation G.826/G.828 error performance objectives

The following error performance objectives are based on those given in Draft Revision of ITU-R F.1491

(October 2000) [6] which in turn are based on ITU-T Recommendations G.826 (1999) and G.828

(2000).

For the purposes of defining the error performance objectives of real digital radio links used in the

national portion of the 27,500km HRP the later can be subdivided into the three sections shown in

Figure 2.

Access Short haul

Long haul

Switching

Centre

Local

exchange

Path

end-point

L (km)

International

Gateway

Figure 2

The error performance objectives for Access and Short haul sections are independent of radio link

length. The error performance objectives for a Long haul section are a function of link length (L km)

for links having lengths greater than 50 km and are fixed at the objectives for a 50 km link length for

links shorter than 50 km.

The following tables give the error performance objectives, based on ITU-T Recommendations G.826

(1999) and G.828 (2000), for each direction of the Long haul, Short haul and Access sections a digital

radio link in the national portion of the HRP.

3.1 Long haul

Table 1a

Error performance objectives for PDH and SDH radio links belonging to the

Long haul inter-exchange section of the national portion of the HRP according to

ITU-T G.826

Rate (Mbit/s) 1.5 to 5 > 5 to 15 > 15 to 55 > 55 to 160 > 160 to 3,500

ESR 0.04A 0.05A 0.075A 0.16A For further study

SESR 0.002A

BBER 0.0002A (*) 0.0002A 0.0001A

* For systems designed prior to 1996 the BBER objective is 0.0003.

Table 1b

Error performance objectives for SDH radio links belonging to the

Long haul inter-exchange section of the national portion of the HRP

according to ITU-T G.828

Rate (Mbit/s) 1,664

(VC-11,

TC-11)

2,240

(VC-12,

TC-12)

6,848

(VC-2,

TC-2)

48,960

(VC-3,

TC-3)

150,336

(VC-4,

TC-4)

ESR 0.01A 0.02A 0.04A

SESR 0.002A

BBER 0.00005A 0.0001A

Where: If L < 50 km then L = 50 km (1)

A = (A

1

+ 0.002) x L/100 for 50 km s L s 100 km (2)

A = A

1

+ 0.00002 x L for L > 100 km (3)

A

1

is in the range 0.01 to 0.02. The actual value used for A

1

is constrained by the sum of the terms A

1

,

B (applicable to the Short haul section) and C (applicable to the Access section) (see Tables 2a/2b,

3a/3b).

3.2 Short haul

Table 2a

Error performance objectives for PDH and SDH radio links

belonging to the Short haul inter-exchange section of the national

portion of the HRP according to ITU-T G.826

Rate (Mbit/s) 1.5 to 5 > 5 to 15 > 15 to 55 > 55 to 160 > 160 to 3,500

ESR 0.04B 0.05B 0.075B 0.16B For further study

SESR 0.002B

BBER 0.0002B (*) 0.0002B 0.0001B

* For systems designed prior to 1996 the BBER objective is 0.0003.

Table 2b

Error performance objectives for SDH radio links belonging to the

Short haul inter-exchange section of the national portion of the HRP

according to ITU-T G.828

Rate (Mbit/s) 1,664

(VC-11,

TC-11)

2,240

(VC-12,

TC-12)

6,848

(VC-2,

TC-2)

48,960

(VC-3,

TC-3)

150,336

(VC-4,

TC-4)

ESR 0.01B 0.02B 0.04B

SESR 0.002B

BBER 0.00005B 0.0001B

Where B is in the range 0.075 to 0.085.

3.3 Access

Table 3a

Error performance objectives for PDH and SDH radio links

belonging to the Access network section of the national portion of the

HRP according to ITU-T G.826

Rate (Mbit/s) 1.5 to 5 > 5 to 15 > 15 to 55 > 55 to 160 > 160 to 3,500

ESR 0.04C 0.05C 0.075C 0.16C For further study

SESR 0.002C

BBER 0.0002C (*) 0.0002C 0.0001C

* For systems designed prior to 1996 the BBER objective is 0.0003.

Table 3b

Error performance objectives for SDH radio links belonging to the

Access network section of the national portion of the HRP according

to ITU-T G.828

Rate (Mbit/s) 1,664

(VC-11,

TC-11)

2,240

(VC-12,

TC-12)

6,848

(VC-2,

TC-2)

48,960

(VC-3,

TC-3)

150,336

(VC-4,

TC-4)

ESR 0.01C 0.02C 0.04C

SESR 0.002C

BBER 0.00005C 0.0001C

Where C is in the range 0.075 to 0.085. When considering the performance objectives given in the

above tables it should be noted that:

- The performance objectives apply only when the system is in the available state.

- In ITU-T G.826 the period of time over which the performance of a link is to be evaluated (i.e.

averaged) is any period of 28 to 31 days, however, in ITU-T G.828 this has been revised for

radio-relay or satellite systems and in these cases a period of up to one year may be used i.e.

the worst month concept has been abandoned in ITU-T G.828.

- The sum A

1

+ B + C shall not exceed 0.175 (i.e. 17.5%) in accordance with the allocations to

the national portion of an international Constant Bit Rate (CBR) path given in ITU-T

Recommendations G.826 and G.828.

- The sum B + C shall be in the range 0.155 to 0.165.

- Depending on the national network configuration administrations may reallocate the A, B and

C allowances among the sections of the national portion of a radio path.

- The objectives given in the above tables apply to the overall links. In the case of multi-hop

links the allocation of objectives to each hop is the responsibility of the network operators.

- The effect of interference and all other sources of performance degradation are included in the

objectives given in the tables.

- Synchronous digital paths operating at bit rates covered by ITU-T Recommendations G.826

and G.828 are carried by transmission systems (digital sections) operating at higher bit rates.

Such systems must meet their allocations of the end-to-end objectives for the highest bit rate

paths, which are expected to be carried. Meeting the allocated objectives for this highest bit

rate path should be sufficient to ensure that all paths through the system are achieving their

objective. For example, in SDH, an STM-1 section may carry a VC-4 path and therefore the

STM-1 section should be designed such that it will ensure that the objectives as specified in the

above tables for the bit rate corresponding to a VC-4 path are met.

Hence, using the appropriate table the error performance objectives for a digital radio link can be

obtained. It should be noted that ITU-T G.828 states that the error performance objectives given in the

above tables are understood to be long-term objectives. In the case of systems conforming to ITU-T

G.826 these could be expressed in the form of the SESR, BBER and ESR averaged over any month and

in the case of ITU-T G.828 the SESR, BBER and ESR averaged over a year.

Although ITU-T G.826 clearly states that the evaluation (i.e. averaging) period shall be any month, and

this therefore implies that the worst month during the whole lifetime of the system must be the month to

consider, it is generally accepted in ITU-R Recommendations that an average worst month should be

used when designing radio links. With the relaxation of this to a year in ITU-T G.828 it is probably safe

to assume that this means an average year, however, clarification on this point in adopted ITU

documentation is required.

4 Recommendation ITU-R P.530 in the context of G.826 and G.828

4.1 General

The task now is to match the error performance objectives derived above to radio link performance as

predicted using the implementation of Recommendation ITU-R P.530 [7].The interface between the two

consists of two system parameters:

- The flat fade margin (or thermal fade margin).

- The equipment signature.

These parameters determine the rate at which the three types of errors, i.e. ES, SES and BBE, occur

under two different fading conditions. The flat fade margin applies when no frequency selective fading

is present and the equipment signature applies when only frequency selective fading is present. It

should be noted that the equipment signature referred to throughout this document is that measured with

no flat fading i.e. at frequencies within the receiver band well away from the selective fade notch the

signal level is at the nominal fine weather receive level (the un-stressed signature).

The methods in Annex 1 of ITU-R P.530-9 (the revised version of ITU-R P.530-8 expected to be

adopted in the near future) estimate the outage probability for flat and frequency selective fading

separately and then combine the two (together with other outages if applicable) to get the total outage.

The term outage in this context refers to the ITU-T G.821 error performance objectives and in particular

a BER of 10

-3

. Annex 2 of ITU-R P.530-9 extends the prediction methods to cover the block-based

error performance objectives given in ITU-T G.826 and G.828. In particular it allows the radio link

SESR, BBER and ESR to be calculated using the system flat fade margin, the equipment signature and

the Annex 1 to ITU-R P.530-9 propagation models.

The method is based on statistical relationships between the block-based parameters (SESR, BBER and

ESR) and BER. The methods in Annex 2 of ITU-R P.530-9 allow the SESR, BBER and ESR to be

determined using equipment characteristics (e.g. Residual Bit Error Ratio (RBER) and equipment

signature) that are BER based and do not require the direct measurement of the block-based parameters.

4.2 Prediction of SESR

The procedure in Annex 2 of ITU-R P.530-9 for predicting SESR is based on the statistical relationship

between SES and BER. The SESR is evaluated in two steps, one to determine the number of SES due to

EB, and a second one to obtain the number due to Loss of Pointer (LOP). The contribution from LOP

has been found to be small, and can therefore be ignored. From measurements on digital systems, it is

found that for BER values below a threshold, none of the seconds are severely errored, but above this

threshold, all the seconds are severely errored i.e. the curve of SES due to EB versus BER can be

approximated by a step function. The BER value where the SES probability changes from 0 to 1 is

denoted BER

SES

. Table 4 gives the BER

SES

value for a number of path types.

Table 4

BER

SES

FOR VARIOUS PATH TYPES

Path

type

Bit rate

supported

(Mbit/s)

BER

SES

(Notes 1 and 2)

Blocks/s, n

(Note 2)

Bits/block, N

B

(Note 2)

VC-11 1.5 5.4 x 10

4

o 2 000 832

VC-12 2 4.0 x 10

4

o 2 000 1 120

VC-2 6 1.3 x 10

4

o 2 000 3 424

VC-3 34 6.5 x 10

5

o 8 000 6 120

VC-4 140 2.1 x 10

5

o 8 000 18 792

STM-1 155 2.3 x 10

5

o

1.3 x 10

5

o x 2.2 x

10

4

8 000

192 000

19 940

801

NOTE 1 o

NOTE 2 The blocks/s are defined in ITU-T Recommendation G.826 for SDH path, in ITU-T Recommendation G.829 for SDH

sections. Some STM-1 equipment might be designed with 8 000 blocks/s (19 940 bits/block), but ITU-T Recommendation G.829

defines the block rate and size to be 192 000 blocks/s and 801 bits/block, respectively.

The SESR is equal to the outage probability (P

tSES

) determined using a BER equal to BER

SES

as the

criterion for outage in the methods given in Annex 1 of ITU-R P.530-9 i.e. the flat fade margin to be

used is the flat fade depth relative to the fine weather receive level which produces a BER of BER

SES

and the equipment signature to be used is the non-faded (non-stressed) signature for a BER of BER

SES

.

Hence, for an SDH STM-1 path having a block structure of 192,000 blocks/s and 801 bits/block and

assuming a Poisson distribution of errors BER

SES

= 2.33 x 10

-4

(compared to the G.821 value of 10

-3

).

4.3 Prediction of BBER

The BBER can be calculated using the SSER calculated above together with the outage probability

(P

tR

) determined using a BER equal to the residual BER (RBER) (typically in the range from 10

10

to

10

13

for the bit rates of 2 to 155 Mbit/s, respectively), as the criterion for outage in the methods given in

Annex 1 of ITU-R P.530-9 and RBER as follows:

P

tR

= P

t

(RBER) (4)

( ) ( )

( ) ( )

tSES tR

SES

P P

BER RBER

m

10 10

10 10

log log

log log

=

(5)

Where m is the slope of the BER distribution curve on a log-log scale for BER values in the range from

BER

SES

to RBER.

Then:

( )

3 2

1

1 8 . 2 o

+

o

o

=

RBER N

m

SESR BBER

B

(6)

where:

o

1

= 10 to 30, average number of errors per burst for the BER in the range from 1 x 10

3

to

BER

SES

o

2

= 1 to 10, average number of errors per burst for the BER in the range from BER

SES

to

RBER

o

3

= 1, number of errors per burst for the BER lower than RBER

N

B

: number of bits/block (see Table 4)

4.4 Prediction of ESR

Finally, the ESR can be calculated using the outage probability, P

tR

, for a BER equal to the RBER (as

determined above), SESR, RBER, m and N

B

as follows:

3

o

+ =

RBER N n

n SESR ESR

B m

(7)

where:

o

3

= 1, number of errors per burst for BER lower than RBER

n = number of blocks/s (see Table 4)

The prediction methods for SDH paths given above can also be used for the Plesiosynchronous Digital

Hierarchy (PDH) with the following choices:

use the BER

SES

closest to the transmission rate (Mbit/s), e.g. a VC-12 for a 2 Mbit/s PDH

radio;

use the BER

SES

as given in Table 4 (the BER

SES

is under study for PDH, but only minor

differences are expected).

4.5 Equipment characteristics

The equipment characteristics required to design a radio link to conform to the error performance

objectives of ITU-T G.826 or G.828 are:

- Flat fade margins for BER values of:

BER

SES

RBER

- Signatures (non-faded i.e. unstressed) for BER values of:

BER

SES

RBER

- RBER

- o

1

= Average number of errors per burst for the BER in the range from

1 x 10

3

to BER

SES

(10 to 30).

- o

2

= Average number of errors per burst for the BER in the range from

BER

SES

to RBER (1 to 10).

5 References

1. ITU-T Recommendation G.821, 1996, Error performance of an international digital connection

forming part of an integrated services digital network.

2. ITU-T Recommendation G.826, 1999, Error performance parameters and objectives for

international, constant bit rate digital paths at or above the primary rate.

3. ITU-T Recommendation G.827, 2000, Availability parameters and objectives for path elements

of international constant bit rate digital paths at or above the primary rate.

4. ITU-T Rec. G.828, 2000, Error performance parameters and objectives for international, constant

bit rate synchronous digital paths.

5. ITU-T Recommendation G.829, 2000, Error performance events for SDH multiplex and

regenerator sections.

6. ITU-R F.1491, Error performance objectives for real digital radio links used in the national

portion of a 27,500km hypothetical reference path at or above the primary rate.

7. Draft revision of ITU-R P.530-8, 2000, Propagation data and prediction methods required for the

design of terrestrial line-of-sight systems.

- Drive TestUploaded byanthony_obiora
- 03 Alcate 1660SM Sys DesUploaded byarranguezjr5991
- 3000S CatalogUploaded byms_alethea
- 20141356-OSN-3500-2500-1500-Configuration-GuideUploaded byrngwena
- sonet/SDHUploaded byDima
- Huawei OptiX OSN 550Uploaded byfarhanwali
- RelatUploaded byrahul
- TJ100ME BrochureUploaded byGoutam Saha
- IJWMN 040610Uploaded byJohn Berg
- Tems ParameterUploaded bychlaxminarayana
- PDH vs SDHUploaded byAllen de Chavez
- Converge IP and DWDM Layers in the Core NetworkUploaded byMotasim_m
- Testing Engineer Management systemUploaded byhari423
- U-NodeBBM_issue2.0_OCT2005Uploaded byAmicus94
- IPWDMUploaded byfrancjagadeesh
- SdhUploaded byEric Herrera
- Assignment 2Uploaded bySyed Faizan Ali
- Oss Socis Design 071516Uploaded byAnonymous X9U8DmHKpR
- Tems ParametersUploaded bySteven Poh
- Tems Parameters1Uploaded byCharles Weber
- CD Ma 2Uploaded byKunal Harsh
- DC Chapter4dUploaded byTetehRestu
- Mar_2011_ISA_ES1_and_ES4_Enhanced_Series_Datasheet.pdfUploaded byNguyễn Công Cường
- 25951-630-FDD-BSS.pdfUploaded byABHILASH
- T-REC-F.720-199208-I!!PDF-EUploaded byLina Mubarokah
- SRAN10 - Typical BSC6900 Hardware Components ReplacementUploaded bysettar
- T-REC-G.8112-201508.pdfUploaded bymrad
- 22-EncodingFramingx6Uploaded bymeazaw
- 01-Ota000003 Sdh Overview Issue1.00Uploaded bySarah Elbagory
- 11 SDH TechnologyUploaded byMithun Selva Sekar

- Investment Books must readUploaded byMuthukumar Rajajeyapandian
- Cropnames_IndianlanguagesUploaded bySai Sachin
- Where Lies This FaultUploaded byMuthukumar Rajajeyapandian
- ncfm_1Uploaded byVidyasagar Gaikwad
- The Complete Pension Plan GuideUploaded byMuthukumar Rajajeyapandian
- Sncp CiscoUploaded byMuthukumar Rajajeyapandian

- Week 3 Knowledge Check Study GuideUploaded byJessica
- Finite Element Discretization Of Laplace and Poisson EquationsUploaded byВладимир Смирнов
- Sets and RelationUploaded byNeeraj Misra
- Data Mining - Classification: Alternative TechniquesUploaded byTran Duy Quang
- Thermal Design of Shell and Tube Heat ExchangersUploaded bymohamed
- Juega Dios a Los Dados - Stephen HawkingUploaded byjfredyramirez
- 10.1.1.32.165Uploaded byAbdelhamid Oughanem
- Chemical Engineering Thermodynamics i Jntu Btech 2008 Jntu Model comUploaded bysapabaplive
- 8 solving linear equationsUploaded byapi-349184429
- CPP ArraysUploaded byjosefalarka
- Consecutive, Reversed, Mirror, and Symmetric Smarandache Sequences of Triangular NumberUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- KL PartitioningUploaded byjakk234
- Pearson Gate 2015 Set 2 Me SpUploaded bysunil481
- Ian Dewan-Graph Homology and Cohomology (2016)Uploaded byNill Berrocal Redolfo
- 2(1)Uploaded bydent in dentist
- Layout 2Uploaded byNitin Patel
- SPice Simulation for Signal IntegrityUploaded byharritom
- Understandig Nonlinear Kalman Filters, Part II-An Implementation Guide - CopyUploaded bysmmj2010
- AI Human ComputingUploaded byc_mc2
- Multiple-Fault Detection Methodology Based on Vibration and Current Analysis Applied to Bearings in Induction Motors and Gearboxes on the Kinematic ChainUploaded byhugopimentel_
- Center of GravityUploaded byRichmond Roldan Velchez
- Computer Simulation of Human Thinking.pdfUploaded byEsteban Bedoya Microcaos
- Science 2011 Spiegelhalter Visualizing UncertaintyUploaded byswift_dwi
- KCA FM Bladder Tank FlyerUploaded byM Kumar Marimuthu
- University physics exam example p214SampleMT1Uploaded bycarlos51952
- Modelling and Simulation of Ball WearUploaded bysuresh_501
- Magoosh GRE Math Formula eBookUploaded bySunny Manchanda
- Mech-HT 120 WS03 Thermal ContactUploaded byLUISALBERTO06011985
- Conceptual Frameworks Without Validatory Metaphysics - Jason RheinsUploaded byFelipe
- 1. Feasibility Study Conclusions and Summary Report - 15 OctUploaded bydedi sanatra