You are on page 1of 27

HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document

Confidentiality:
Internal

High Speed Uplink Packet Access


(HSUPA)
VS
Uplink Interference

PRINCIPLE & TEST REPORT


With CASE STUDY

Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.


HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

Dec 2010

Contents

1 PRINCIPLE................................................................................................ 4
1.1 High Speech Uplink Packet Access (HSUPA)............................................................ 4

1.2 Uplink Interference......................................................................................................... 5

1.3 HSUPA VS Uplink Interference.................................................................................... 7

1.4 HSUPA Phase 1(TTI 10ms) and Phase 2(TTI 2ms).................................................... 9

2 TEST REPORT..................................................................................... 10
2.1 Simulation Result from HQ Test Lab............................................................................ 10

2.2 HSUPA Load Test Result from Customer-xxxs Test bed............................................ 11

3 CASE STUDY......................................................................................... 19
3.1 Problem Description.................................................................................................... 19

3.2 Problem Analysis............................................................................................................. 22

3.3 Solutions and Recommendations.................................................................................... 25


HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

HSUPA VS Uplink Interference

Abstract:
This technical paper aims to give the readers the understanding about the relationship

of the HSUPA service and the uplink interference (3GPP terminology is RTWP,

Received Total Wideband Power).

The basic principle, test reports and case study from live network are included here to

give a clear view on how the HSUPA service impact on the uplink performance and how

to optimize the network to gain a maximum benefit of HSUPA.

Since HSPA service is widely used in the market, with a good understanding of this

topic, the engineer will be able to operate and optimize the network well.
HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

1 PRINCIPLE

1.1 High Speech Uplink Packet Access (HSUPA)

HSUPA is introduced within release 6 of the 3GPP specifications. It allows increased individual

connection throughputs, increased total cell throughputs and reduced round trip times.

In Huawei system (RAN10.0), the HSUPA data channel (E-DPDCH) can support either a 2 or 10

ms TTI.

- HSUPA Phase 1, 10ms TTI offers the benefit of improved physical layer performance

over R99, peak rate is 2 Mbps.

- HSUPA (Phase 2), 2ms TTI offers the benefit of reduced system delays and higher

potential throughput, peak rate is 5.76 Mbps.

(HSUPA TTI is configured via RNC MML command,

SET CORRMALGOSWITCH: MapSwitch=MAP_HSUPA_TTI_2MS_SWITCH-1;)

Release 7 of 3GPP specification introduces the possibility of using 4 level Pulse Amplitude

Modulation (4PAM) which equivalent to 16QAM to increase the maximum achievable throughput,

peak rate is 11.5 Mbps. (support in Huawei RAN12.0).


HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

1.2 Uplink Interference

In the WCDMA system, all the cells share the same frequency, which is beneficial to improve the

system capacity. However, co-frequency multiplexing causes interference among the users.

The Received Total Wideband Power (RTWP) on the uplink is the sum of all user signals and the

channel noise.

Uplink Interference Composition is as follow;

RTWP (Received Total Wideband Power)

Noise Floor include of thermal noise and Noise Figure (NF) of the system.

PN K=
10Boltzmann *W ) + 1.38
log( K * Tconstant, NF
10 23 J / K
T Kelvin temperature, normal temperature: 290 K

W Signal bandwidth, WCDMA signal bandwidth 3.84MHz

NF: Hardware (NodeB/UE) dependency, typical value of macro NodeB =3 dB

If no other external factors e.g. external interference (from illegal sources), hardware issue. The

main factor that impact on Uplink interference is Traffic Load which includes traffic load from the

users of the cell and adjacent cells.

The relationship between uplink load and uplink interference (Noise Rise) is as below,

( = Load factor)

ITOT 1 1
NoiseRise = = =
PN N
1 UL
1 ( 1 + i ) Lj
1
HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

UL load is affecting the noise level at the Node B receiver (Noise Rise).

A typical value of cell load for dimensioning ranges from 30% to 70 %

50% is a good compromise between the number of sites and the offered capacity.

Too high uplink noise level cause cell shrink (reduction of coverage), breathing effect.

The relationship between Noise Rise and RTWP (Received Total Wideband Power),

From previous page,

RTWP (Received Total Wideband Power) dB = Noise Floor (Pn) + Noise Rise (Iown + Iother)

Example, (Noise Floor is often called as Background Noise")


HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

Equivalent Noise Figure

- Without TMA : Noise Floor (dBm) = Thermal Noise(KTB,room temperature = -108dBm) +


Equivalent Noise Figure (Feeder Loss + NF_B; NF_BS- depends on Node B type, Huawei
typical value around 2.0 dB)
Noise Floor (dBm) = -108 + (0.5+ 2.0) = -105.3 dBm
With 75% Uplink Load (Noise Rise=6 dB), RTWP (dBm) = -105.3 + 6 = 99.3

- With TMA: Equivalent Noise Figure will be reduced due to TMA.


Example: NF Without TMA: (0.5+2.0) dB = 2.5dB , NFWith TMA 1.2 dB
(calculated from the formula above)
Noise Floor (dBm) = -108 + (1.2) = -106.7 dBm ,
With 50% Uplink Load (Noise Rise =3 dB) - RTWP(dBm) = -106.7+3=-103.7
dBm

1.3 HSUPA VS Uplink Interference

HSUPA service allows the users to achieve higher throughput on uplink but in the same time also

increase significant interference which causing the reduction of cell user access number and

impact on the overall performance.

It is great important to balance between the achievable throughput and system performance on

the uplink. Therefore, Huawei systems apply the Load Control mechanisms to control the level of

uplink interference in each service phase.


HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

(More detail about Load Control Algorithms, please refer to Load Control Feature Document)

Load Control algorithms are different between HSUPA and R99 UL as follows:
1. Call Admission Control (CAC):

For HSUPA, PBR-based decision is used to check whether the QoS requirement of

existing users is fulfilled. The QoS is measured on the basis of the Provided Bit Rate

(PBR) of the users. If the QoS requirement is fulfilled, new users are allowed to access

the network.

2. Load Control (LDR) :

-UL R99 is controlled by UL LDR trigger threshold if UL UU LDR algorithm is switch on.

-HSUPA, its scheduling is controlled by Maximum Target Uplink Load Factor and the

real uplink load contributed by none scheduled EDCH users.


HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

ADD CELLHSUPA: CellId=[Cellid], MaxTargetUlLoadFactor=75;

1.4 HSUPA Phase 1(TTI 10ms) and Phase 2(TTI 2ms)

To ensure that the HSUPA user can access the cell, the minimum GBR (Guarantee Bit

Rate) is recommended. When set the GBR need to consider the trade-off between user

throughput and cell user number.

High GBR High user throughputHigh Uplink Interference Lower cell user number

Low GBR Low user throughput Low Uplink Interference Higher cell user number

If GBR set in RNC =64kbps

(1)

2ms HSUPA

Minimum Throughput=MAX one RLC pdu -bit rate GBR =

MAX 320bit/2ms 64kpbs =160kbps

(2)

10ms HSUPA

Minimum Throughput=MAX one RLC pdu-bit rate GBR

=MAX 320bit/10ms 64kpbs =64kbps


HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

If GBR not set in RNC

(1)

2ms HSUPA

Minimum Throughput =MAX one RLC pdu-bit rate GBR

=MAX 320bit/2ms 0kpbs =160kbps

(2)

10ms HSUPA

Minimum Throughput =MAX one RLC pdu-bit rate GBR

=MAX 320bit/10ms 0kpbs =32kbps

To sum up, with different HSUPA TTI, 2ms and 10ms , the minimum guaranteed throughput of
user is vary 160kbps vs 64kpbs / 160kbps vs 32kbps. So, when the uplink load is limited, the
number of user that can access the cell is different (HSUPA TTI=2ms serve less number of user
per cell due to higher guaranteed throughput which generating higher uplink interference).

2 TEST REPORT

2.1 Simulation Result from HQ Test Lab

HSUPA 2ms TTI- single antenna simulation (GBR=64kbps, MaxTargetUlLoadFactor


=75%)
FTP user number (simultaneously upload) is limited at 8 due to the limited capacity of air
interface (uplink interference).

1RX_Antenna
UENum
ber Upl oadofAnt Throughput
enna% kbps
CAT5 8 74. 43 1215. 63
CAT6 8 86. 07 1163. 18

HSUPA 10ms TTI- single antenna simulation (GBR=64kbps, MaxTargetUlLoadFactor


=75%)
HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

FTP user number (simultaneously upload) is limited at 20 due to the limited capacity of air
interface (uplink interference).
1RX_Antenna
UENum
ber Upl oadofAnt Throughput
enna% kbps
CAT5 20 76. 50 1100. 00

2.2 HSUPA Load Test Result from Customer-xxxs Test bed

Cell throughput and cell user number are significantly improved especially on HSUPA

Phase2 (TTI 2ms.) when implemented new features in RAN 12.0-Interference

Cancellation(IC) and Adaptive Retransmission.

Interference Cancellation Feature(IC) aims to reduce the UL interference among users

and increase the UL system capacity.

Adaptive Retransmission Feature((Dynamic NHR) enables the system to dynamically


HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

change the retransmission rate upon the Cell Load and UE Tx Power.

When cell load and UE Transmit Power are limited, the retransmission rate will be

increased. Increasing the retransmission time requires less UE Tx power thus

lower uplink interference.

When cell load and UE Transmit Power are less, the retransmission rate will be

decreased to completely utilize the resources and increase the effective rate of

UE.
Retransmission UE Transmit Eb/N0 * Coverage * UL UE peak Cell Throughput Max User
Power * Interference* throughput (Multi-users) Number
Large low low large low peak
low high more
Small high high small high high low less

*At the same effective rate of UE

(Please refer to the comparisons charts of Large and Small Retransmission performance in

next pages).

Summary HSUPA Load Test Result


TTI=10ms TTI=10ms + IC TTI=10ms + IC+Adaptive
(RAN11) (RAN12) Retransmission (RAN12)
Test Case Antenna UserNumber Cell Load(%) Cell Tput(Mbps) Cell Load(%) Cell Tput(Mbps) Cell Load(%) Cell Tput(Mbps)
1 60% 1.90 50% 1.90 50% 1.98
2 75% 1.25 75% 2.00 75% 2.30
3 75% 0.92 75% 1.80 75% 2.20
4 77% 0.90 75% 1.40 75% 2.00
5 77% 1.28 75% 1.40 75% 1.90
6 77% 1.26 75% 1.40 75% 1.90
7 75% 1.09 75% 1.40 75% 1.70
1RX
8 77% 1.05 75% 1.40 75% 1.70
1 (Indoor
9 75% 1.30 75% 1.70
Case)
10 75% 1.20 75% 1.60
11 75% 1.10 75% 1.50
12 75% 1.00 75% 1.40
13 75% 0.99 75% 1.40
14 80% 0.95 75% 1.30
15 90% 1.10 75% 1.30
16 92% 1.00 78% 1.20
HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

TTI=2ms TTI=2ms + IC TTI=2ms + IC+Adaptive


(RAN11) (RAN12) Retransmission (RAN12)
Test Case Antenna UserNumber Cell Load(%) Cell Tput(Mbps) Cell Load(%) Cell Tput(Mbps) Cell Load(%) Cell Tput(Mbps)
1 70% 2.20 75% 3.50 75% 3.90
2 75% 1.50 75% 2.20 75% 3.00
3 75% 1.09 75% 2.00 75% 2.40
4 75% 1.10 75% 1.50 75% 1.90
5 75% 0.91 75% 1.20 75% 1.90
6 75% 0.98 75% 1.20 75% 1.80
7 96% 1.16 75% 1.10 75% 1.60
1RX
8 100% 1.20 92% 1.20 75% 1.50
2 (Indoor
9 100% 1.10 75% 1.30
Case)
10 75% 1.20
11 75% 1.10
12 75% 1.10
13 90% 1.00
14 100% 0.95
15
16

TTI=10ms TTI=10ms + IC TTI=10ms + IC+Adaptive


(RAN11) (RAN12) Retransmission (RAN12)
Test Case Antenna UserNumber Cell Load(%) Cell Tput(Mbps) Cell Load(%) Cell Tput(Mbps) Cell Load(%) Cell Tput(Mbps)
1 50% 1.80 40% 1.98 40% 1.98
2 75% 2.70 60% 3.90 60% 3.90
3 75% 2.25 75% 3.00 75% 3.90
4 75% 2.55 75% 3.00 75% 3.20
5 75% 2.15 75% 3.00 75% 3.00
6 75% 1.95 75% 2.40 75% 3.00
7 75% 1.95 75% 2.00 75% 2.80
2Rxs
8 75% 1.88 75% 2.40 75% 2.40
3 (Outdoor
9 75% 1.95 75% 2.50 75% 2.50
Case)
10 75% 1.76 75% 2.20 75% 2.50
11 75% 2.00 75% 2.50
12 75% 2.00 75% 2.30
13 75% 2.20 75% 2.30
14 75% 1.50 75% 2.10
15 75% 1.70 75% 1.90
16

TTI=2ms TTI=2ms + IC TTI=2ms + IC+Adaptive


(RAN11) (RAN12) Retransmission (RAN12)
Test Case Antenna UserNumber Cell Load(%) Cell Tput(Mbps) Cell Load(%) Cell Tput(Mbps) Cell Load(%) Cell Tput(Mbps)
1 75% 3.70 70% 4.40 70% 4.40
2 75% 2.20 75% 5.00 75% 5.40
3 75% 1.85 75% 4.00 75% 4.20
4 75% 1.90 75% 3.20 75% 4.00
5 75% 1.96 75% 2.50 75% 3.50
6 75% 1.98 75% 2.20 75% 2.60
7 75% 1.68 75% 1.90 75% 2.30
2Rxs
8 75% 1.71 75% 1.80 75% 2.30
4 (Outdoor
9 75% 1.70 75% 2.20
Case)
10 75% 1.90 75% 2.20
11 80% 1.80 75% 1.90
12 85% 2.00 75% 2.00
13 100% 1.80 75% 1.80
14 75% 1.70
15 75% 1.70
16

Test Case 1: HSUPA TTI=10ms 1Rx Antenna without Rx-Diversity (Indoor Case)
HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

Test Case 2: HSUPA TTI=2ms 1Rx Antenna without Rx-Diversity (Indoor Case)
HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

Test Case 3: HSUPA TTI=10ms 2 RXs Antenna with Rx-Diversity (Outdoor Case)
HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

Test Case 4: HSUPA TTI=2ms 2 RXs Antenna with Rx-Diversity (Outdoor Case)

Reference Charts from HQ (Simulation Result)


HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

Large Retransmission compared with Small Retransmission


(10ms TTI)

4000 120

3500
100
3000
Cell throughput

80
2500

Cell Load
2000 60

1500
40
1000
20
500

0 0
1 2 3 4 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 51 52 53
User Nmuber

Cel l Throughput Sm al l Retransm i ssi on Cel l Throughput Large Retransm i ssi on


Cel l Load Smal l Retransm i ssi on Cel l Load Large Retransmi ssi on

Large Retransmission Compared with Small


Retransmission (2ms TTI)

4500 120
4000
100
3500
Cell Throughput

3000 80
Cell Load

2500
60
2000
1500 40
1000
20
500
0 0
1 2 3 4 5 10 15 16 17 20 25 29
User Number

Cel l Thr oughput Lar ge Ret r ansmi ssi on Cel l Thr oughput Smal l Ret r ansmi ssi on
Cel Load Smal l Ret r ansmi ssi on Cel l Load Lar ge Ret r ansmi ssi on
HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

-In light cell load, small retransmission can give users higher throughput than large
retransmission.
-In medium and heavy cell load, large retransmission can achieve much more user
numbers and cell throughput than small retransmission; the gain can be 20% ~30%. (Based
on user numbers)

To achieve a maximum balance between cell capacity and peak rate of single user in uplink
(2ms TTI bring the higher peak rate of single user, while 10ms TTI can bring the
higher cell capacity). The operator can deploy another new feature (RAN12.0), HSUPA
TTI Auto Reconfiguration together with Adaptive Retransmission.

If the following condition has been fulfilled, this UEs TTI switch from 2ms to
10ms:
The Uu Load on Congestion Status & the UEs bit rate < Rate threshold for
2ms to 10ms
If both of the following conditions are fulfilled, this UEs TTI switch from 10ms to
2ms:
the UEs bit rate > Rate threshold for 10ms to 2ms.
UE Power is not limited. (If the 6A1 have been reported, the 6B2 shall be
reported after that.)
HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

3 CASE STUDY

3.1 Problem Description

Based on the customers feedback in 3G Network (RAN10.0) of Operator XXX, the customers

had the difficulties to access the network ,sometime can access network but the data throughput

is very low and the connections frequently dropped. This problem is appeared at operators office

and nearby areas.

Symptoms:

-Based on the Statistic, we observed same pattern of high RTWP and PS drop in all cells that

circled in red.

-These cells are located in the same areas, nearby operators office.

-The highest RTWP appeared in Indoor cell, CHAMCHURI_C35-1 and the level of the uplink

interference of other outdoor cells reduce upon the distant from this indoor cell.

- Uplink interference (RTWP) increase very high reached the maximum value at -55 dBm during

working hour (10:00 17:30 hrs) on working day.

-We also conducted the FTP download and upload at the Indoor cell, both give a very low
HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

throughput.

Operators Office
HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

Mean RTWP vs HSDPA Drop Rate (CHAMCHURIC35-1)

Mean RTWP vs Mean number of HSPA user


HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

3.2 Problem Analysis

Initially, we suspect that the uplink interference causing from the external source which may

illegally use in the operators building. This assumption was based on the interference pattern

that occurred in many cells in the same time.

In the first place, we did not expected that the issue related to traffic load due to based on

statistic, found that at the same number of HSUPA users, the RTWP didnt always high.

(Maximum =20 HSUPA users per cell, the HSUPA user number is limited by Maximum HSUPA

user number setting at RNC)

Troubleshooting Steps, we had proposed 2 troubleshooting steps as below

(1)

Use Spectrum Analyzer to search for External Interference source in operators building

(2)

Conduct Field Test (FTP upload) and open RNC LMT online trace measurement in the

Indoor Cell

Results

(1)

There was no external interference detected by Spectrum Analyzer

(2)

Based on the field test (FTP upload) and RNC LMT online measurement of indoor cell, we
HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

detected huge increment of RTWP when R99 test user doing the FTP upload (the test

user only can get R99 service due to HSUPA user number already hit maximum 20

based on the setting).

Test Steps

(1) Condition before start FTP upload test, based on RNC LMT online measurement of

indoor cell, the HSUPA user was always at 20 (HSDPA user number was more

than 20) with the RTWP above -95 dBm.

(2) We started FTP Upload on R99 (from Genex Probe, observed the average

throughput was around 300kbps) and the sudden increment of RTWP upto -55

dBm was observed via online measurement. (We randomly checked the RTWP of

nearby outdoor cells, their RTWP also increased accordingly).

(3) Next, we started FTP Upload on HSUPA (from Genex Probe, observed the very

low throughput, most of the time was 0 kbps) during that time observed no

increment of RTWP via online measurement.

(4) We checked the Load Control parameters setting of this indoor cell; found that the

LDR (Load Reshuffling) didnt turn-on. This is the reason why RNC still

scheduled bit rate to R99 users although current uplink load was high (above -95

dBm).

(5) For HSUPA user, the scheduling is based on Maximum Target Uplink Load

Factor which set to 75%, thus the bit rate was not scheduled to HSUPA user

consequently no increment of RTWP.


HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

Genex Probe

Online Measurement (LMT)

(6) We recommended to turned-on LDR (UL: BE RATE REDUCTION) for Indoor Cell

and monitor. Based on statistic after turn-on LDR, there was some improvement on

RTWP and PS drop but not on data throughput. However, high RTWP still

observed during peak hour but at shorter period than before.


HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal

(7) We suspect there might be some issue with HSUPA service as well (We

implemented the HSUPA Phase2 (TTI 2ms) in this network) .Thus, we conducted

the HSUPA Load Test, to check how many HSUPA user (simultaneous FTP

upload) that the cell can support.

From the test result, shown that for indoor case (with 1 Rx antenna), only

maximum 7 simultaneous upload users can supported. If the HSUPA user number

is exceed 7, will cause over-high RTWP. (Please refer to test result in previous

session)

We got confirmation from HQ that this is product limitation, the performance

of HSUPA Phase 2 with 1Rx antenna is limited and only can be improved

with new features (refer to previous sessions) in RAN12.0.

3.3 Solutions and Recommendations

We provided the following recommendations to operators upon this issue as follows,

(1)

To turn-off the HSUPA phase 2 in current network and implement it later when upgraded

from RAN10.0 to RAN12.0 with Interference Cancellation and Dynamic NHR features

enabled.

(2)

To upgraded capacity of indoor site by adding 2nd carrier. This is to improve user experience

especially on data throughput.

(3)

To turn-on Load Control (LDR) to control the interference level which generated from R99

users.
HSUPA VS Uplink Interference Document
Confidentiality:
Internal